Friday, July 25, 2008

Anti-Romero letter copied from a blog

Letter to the editor in the Olympian this morning:


Romero has cost taxpayers dearly

Sandra Romero is a board member of a powerful special-interest group called Futurewise. Her group filed a growth management appeal in 2005 challenging Thurston County's comprehensive plan and cost the county an estimated $1.5 million defending against this frivolous claim.

The county commissioners have a duty to administer the state laws and provide for public safety, heath and roads. The commission doesn't need to be sidetracked by having to deal with lawsuits generated by special-interest groups.

In Romero's own words, "(The) budget is the biggest problem right now, it is the driver of all of our woes ... with almost a $4.5 million shortfall it's going to be very difficult to get out of it."

Romero's special-interest group is responsible for over 25 percent of the current budget crisis, and I'm not willing to send her in to try and fix it. This would be like sending the fox to the hen house.

Please join me in voting for any one of the other three candidates.

Cathy Franzmann, Lacey




Thurston Pundits (written by R. Scott) 10 days ago:

Sandra Romero is a board member of a powerful special-interest group called ‘Futurewise’. Her group filed a growth management appeal in 2005 challenging Thurston County’s comprehensive plan and cost the County an estimated 1.5 million dollars defending against this frivolous claim.

The County Commissioners have a duty to administrate the State laws and provide for public safety, heath and roads. The Commission doesn’t need to be sidetracked by having to deal with lawsuits generated by special-interest groups.


In Romero’s own words, “[the] budget is the biggest problem right now, it is the driver of all of our woes ... with almost a 4.5 million dollar shortfall it's going to be very difficult to get out of it.”


Romero’s special-interest group is responsible for over 25% of the current budget crisis, and I’m not willing to send her in to try and fix it. This would be like sending the fox to the hen house.
Please join me in voting for any one of the other three candidates.

Wow. Nothing more I can really say about that.

1 comment:

Rolandovich said...

Classic sloppy reporting. There are few words I despise together more the frivolous lawsuit.

If it were frivolous why did it cost 1.5 million to defend it? A frivolous lawsuit can be dispatched rather quickly and costs can be sought back as well costing taxpayers nothing. That sounds like there was 1.5 million worth of merit to me.

I suppose I should post this on the Olympian.