Setting the Record Straight on Law Enforcement and County Spending
While campaigning, more than several people have asked me why the Sheriff and DA are supporting my opponent and inferring I am anti-law enforcement. It is becoming the number one inquiry when knocking on doors, on the phone, at the store with constituents. Since I have received so many comments, I feel compelled to briefly address it here:
Two county departments receive the lion’s share of the budget pie, the Sheriff’s and the District Attorney’s. Keeping that in mind, I have worked for many years to bring attention to the department’s budgets. I wholeheartedly support and respect law enforcement, but repairing roads is clearly a priority in our county. I have been the single “No” vote over the years on many spending issues with-regard-to both departments. The bottom line is I support maintaining staffing levels at the Sherriff’s and DA’s Department but prefer road improvements over fancy new stuff (a 3rd swat vehicle, gym equipment and inflated salaries) for the two departments.
Over the years I have continuously made many hard “No” votes without consideration of the political fallout it could cause me. That fallout is now here.
I stand on my values and my fiduciary duty to watch your dollars and to protect the county’s ability to deliver services my constituent’s desire.
I do not care about the Sheriff’s activity on social media or statements he is making personally against me across this county. I took the right and responsible action to reduce dollars, and I stand by it.
My opponent received the Sheriff’s and District Attorney’s endorsements – her very first ones. I wonder if my opponent will hold them to the line?
I am glad to be the candidate that places constituent preferences over securing endorsements. These are the types of tough decisions you have to make when you have an almost $4 million budget deficit.
