"Hopefully the voters will appreciate what is at stake in this race. The firefighters' union already controls two of the five seats on the Fire Board and is endorsing two of the candidates in the upcoming election. If the union is able to control 3 seats on the Fire Board then they will effectively be able to control their pay, benefits and pensions. If this happens the District's long record of fiscal responsibility will be jeopardized.
I firmly believe that elected officials should represent the taxpayers and not the employees who work for their respective government agencies. These public employees have unions to protect their interests and they should not need to buy the support of elected officials. And candidates for public office should not accept support or endorsements from the public employee unions over which they are expected to provide stewardship and oversight."
Let's change the first paragraph just a bit:
Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of the Atherton: Lindenwood neighborhood, 1 hour ago
Peter Carpenter is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
"Hopefully the voters will appreciate what is at stake in this race. The police officers' union (APOA) already controls two of the five seats on the town council and may endorse a candidate in the upcoming election. If the union is able to control 3 seats on the town council then they will effectively be able to control their pay, benefits and pensions. If this happens Atherton's long record of fiscal irresponsibility will be perpetuated."
I would agree with that revised paragraph, as well as Mr. Carpenter's original posting about the fire board. It does beg the question of why Mr. Carpenter endorsed the two union candidates, Lewis and Wiest, in the last election.
