Sign Language
As I write this missive, the candidates in Ward 1 are still arguing about cell towers that weren’t built in 2002, gambling boats that didn’t dock here in 1995, and various other things that didn’t happen.
The two campaigns and their various “supporters” are still arguing over yard signs, shooting out e-mails to one another and still faxing each other direct mail pieces used in the campaign. At least they have taken it indoors.
The two campaigns do not play nice with one another and they frequently make embarrassing scenes in public. The downtown campaign parties on Tuesday after the polls had closed is a prime example. One by one, the campaign volunteers began driving into the downtown from the polls at the Presbyterian church. Mr. Hutsler’s campaign holed up at The Power Plant and sipped suds with one another (actually, the Republicans in attendance were seen drinking wine), while Stone Canyon offered an impressive array of pizzas and crudites for Mrs. Butcher’s supporters.
It was the Broadway billboard come to life. In the left corner you had pizza, on the right you had beer. But unlike the harmonious convergence promised on the joint-marketed billboard between the two restaurants, when the two were combined on election night, finger food quickly led to finger pointing (particularly in the case of Alderman Dave Rittman and Butcher campaign treasurer Jim Sfetko).
It was to be expected. The two campaigns had been lobbing bombs at one another through the mail for the past week, there was bound to be some red glare should they meet in public.
Case in point: early April 5, at 6:00 a.m. to be exact, Parkville police were summoned to a disturbance at the poll site. They arrived at the scene two minutes later, and investigated an allegation from Mr. Hutsler that he had been harassed by incumbent Alderman Jack Friedman and the outgoing Charlie Poole. No other details were provided by police, but according to Messrs. Hutsler and Friedman, the fracas was about a yard sign placed in their front yard! It seems that some prankster put a Hutsler campaign sign there, in the early morning hours. Mr. Friedman said he didn’t think it was funny, and he, along with Charlie “Raging” Poole, told him so in a “very loud discussion.”
For fun, let’s pretend that you’re not reading The Luminary, and instead you’re reading Highlights for Children. For added enjoyment, let’s say for argument’s sake that Mr. Hutsler acted like a teenager on mischief night and placed a sign in Mr. Friedman’s yard and just south of Mr. Poole’s Mason-Dixon line. Doright would have just thrown the sign away and moved on, content in knowing that very few people noticed the sign in the hours just before dusk or maybe even lodged a complaint with the ethics commission; Doofus would have been the elected official causing a public disturbance by yelling at a candidate trying to run a campaign at a very public polling site. Who needs a timeout?
As reported on page one of this newspaper, Mrs. Butcher defeated Mr. Hutsler by 16 votes. Page 6 reports Mr. Hutsler had some pretty fierce competition - namely “members of the Parkville Planning Commission.”
As described in the article, a letter which probably violated Missouri campaign law ethics was drafted by former mayor Bill Quitmeier (who currently sits on the board) and seven other past and present members of the board.
I spoke with Mr. Quitmeier about the letter at length the other evening in a very enjoyable interview. Mr. Quitmeier believes that the letter was not a campaign ethics violation, that it was merely a friendly letter trying to set the record straight. He feels very strongly about this. I learned that we share many of the same libertarian views on government, as he vigorously defended the action and the letter. It was about truth in campaigning, he said. It was about the exercising of liberty.
With all due respect to Patrick Henry, the letter written by the commissioners may not have violated Sunshine laws or municipal law, but it was clearly over the line. Nobody should deny the commissioners the right to participate in the electoral process, but to write such a blatant campaign piece unmasked a clear bias by some at City Hall towards a citizen who, in two months time, will be in front of that board for business related issues. One wonders if the 16 votes the letter may have swayed are worth it for the city in the long run.
One of Mrs. Butcher’s supporters told me that they were suspicious of Hutsler. that he was attempting to “control everything in town.” That person may be right, who knows? Still, it seems to me that when people who have decades of experience in local politics use their influence in such a manner, maybe what they’re really afraid of is just losing their own control.
Mrs. Butcher has expressed genuine concerns that the campaign became too dirty on both sides. She told me she feared that candidates may not want to run for fear of this. She openly wondered if that would affect the decisions of future would-be candidates to run. I agree, and clearly neither candidate wanted to see the election get so far out of hand - but it did.
Luckily, The Parkville Luminary is here. If you are a citizen who is concerned, who wants to run for public office, has strength of conviction, and you find yourself running against not only another candidate but a board of public servants bent on abusing the power of their volunteer position, The Parkville Luminary will stand with you. We may not support your campaign (we don’t endorse), we may not agree with your positions, but we will defend your right to run for office and we will certainly question authority in ways that no other corporate newspaper would.