vote guide from Phatt

PDF

other formats

the thread where this came from

I worked with Phatt, I know his leanings, and really trust him.

SCS voting guide via Phatt

FOR AUDITOR OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mike Foley REPUBLICAN
Kate Witek DEMOCRAT By most accounts (aside from Heinemen’s) Witek’s been a good auditor. I like that she’s been pushing for comprehensive performance audits. Heinemen threw a chair in her office once. The fact that she’s really quite conservative doesn’t actually bother me. Unless she becomes governor in 4 or 8 years. And never, in a million year’s would I have expected this.
Kelly Renee Rosberg NEBRASKA
Steve Larrick GREEN I like voting for Greens, but not this time.

FOR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER
DISTRICT ONE
Vote for ONE
Frank Landis REPUBLICAN I like Frank. I’ve had drinks with him and he’s Dave’s brother. I suspect that he doesn’t want to regulate cell phones much
Charlie Matulka DEMOCRAT I really like Charlie. He’s a decent guy who is way smarter than he let’s on. Charlie, I suspect would regulate cell phones more and lobby for lighting up LES’s dark fiber (he would have some say in this.
Frank will likely win this pretty big.

FOR COUNTY CLERK
Vote for ONE

Patricia A. Owen REPUBLICAN
Dan Nolte DEMOCRAT X marks the spot.

FOR COUNTY ASSESSOR -REGISTER OF DEEDS
Vote for ONE

Norman H. Agena REPUBLICAN I don’t own a house, but I’m not convinced that this office has been run too well. I don’t like the formula used. it’s a tough call.
Patrick Faden BY PETITION I don’t know this guy.
They’re both Republicans and really, it won’t likely matter. Agena will win.

FOR PUBLIC DEFENDER
Vote for ONE
Dennis R. Keefe DEMOCRAT X marks the spot.

County Commisioner

I can’t vote for any of them. There are no Democrats running and the Republicans running are all awful. I was going to say “especially Workman” but Deb Shorr is pretty bad, too. They’re all pretty bad in some manner.

FOR MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE
DISTRICT TWENTY-SIX

I can’t say anything about legislative races, as both my jobs make anything I say publically problematic. If any of you have any questions I can explain in private. PM me.

FOR MEMBER OF THE STATE BOARD
OF EDUCATION
DISTRICT FIVE
Vote for ONE

Patricia H. Timm
Alan Jacobsen X marks the spot. He’s a Democrat.

FOR DIRECTOR
LOWER PLATTE SOUTH
NATURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT
Subdistrict Five
Vote for ONE
Steve Larrick If he had an opponent (D or R), I’d still for for Steve. He’s a green.

FOR DIRECTOR
LOWER PLATTE SOUTH
NATURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT
Subdistrict Nine
Vote for ONE
Robert C. Andersen
Micah R. Kohles X Marks the spot.

FOR DIRECTOR
LOWER PLATTE SOUTH
NATURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT
Subdistrict Ten
Vote for ONE
Brennen Miller X marks the spot.
Jason Hayes

FOR DIRECTOR
LOWER PLATTE SOUTH
NATURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT
At Large
Vote for ONE
Terry Kubicek
David M. Landis X marks the spot (Duh!).

Amendment 1: Help for nonprofit groups

The amendment would allow local government to use tax-exempt bonds to finance buildings that would then be leased or purchased by a nonprofit organization. This would allow local nonprofit agencies to take advantage of the lower interest rate of government tax-exempt bonds.

Proposed by Dave Landis. That’s all the endorsement I need.

Amendment 2: Help for Lincoln’s Community Health Endowment Fund

This amendment would allow greater diversity in investing city public endowment funds and is intended to help Lincoln’s Community Health Endowment Fund.
Proposed by Chris Beutler. That’s all the endorsement I need.

Amendment 3: Compulsive gambling programs

This amendment would increase lottery funding to the Compulsive Gambler’s Assistance Fund from $500,000 to $1 million.

Sure.

Amendment 4: Probation and Parole

The amendment would make it easier for two agencies to work together. Now, probation employees, who work with people sentenced to specific probation requirements rather than being sent to prison or jail fall under the state court system and the judicial branch of government.

This was proposed by Kermit Brashear. I haven’t agreed with Brashear much. I think, though, this looks like a good idea. And when it comes to nuts and bolts governmental procedures, Brashear is no slouch.

Amendment 5: Early childhood education

This amendment would allow the state to use the interest from $40 million in state funds for grants to early childhood education programs. The state money would be combined with at least $20 million in private donations to create an early childhood education endowment fund.

The $40 million in state money is part of the perpetual fund for schools and the interest is divided among all public schools, based on student population.

Susan and Peter Buffett will provide at least $5 million to jumpstart the private donations for this public-private partnership.

This just seems like a great idea pretty much automatically. The fact The Western Nebraska Taxpayers Association opposes this amendment, pretty much seals the deal. Those people are nuts.

Amendment 6: Changing TIF requirements

This amendment would remove the requirement that property be substandard and blighted to qualify for special property tax financing. It would also expand the definition of what would qualify for TIF to include development, in addition to rehabilitating and redeveloping.

Again, this just makes sense on its face. Matt Connealy supports it, too. I’ve had issues with him. But when it comes to rural redevelopment in Nebraska, there are few people I trust more.

This link explains this Amendments well.

http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2006/10/08/local/doc4528236cbbe78108869260.txt

Initiative Measure 421
A vote “FOR” will amend the Nebraska
County and City Lottery Act to authorize
the use of video keno gaming devices.

If you like the idea of machines like those stupid video games on bars showing up more and then mix that with pickle cards, in more bars…

I hate those stupid video games on bars. My libertarian side says yes. My aesthete side says no.

Referendum ordered by Petition of the
People
Referendum Measure 422
A vote to “Retain” will retain Legislative
Bill 126 enacted in 2005 by the First
Session of the Ninety-Ninth Nebraska
Legislature, and that bill will (1) dissolve all
Class I school districts and repeal the
statutes dealing with their formation; (2)
attach Class I school districts to Class
II,III, IV and VI school districts; (3)
distribute Class I territory, assets and
liabilities (except for bonded
indebtedness); (4) prevent elementary
attendance centers for all school districts
including former Class I districts from
being closed under certain circumstances;
(5) provide for certain student
transportation requirements; and (6)
provide for aid to schools for transition
and elementary improvement.

Pretty complicated looking huh? Well, it is pretty complicated. Class 1 schools and their elimination causes a lot of people to get very upset. I don’t quite understand all of this. But if Ron Raikes and Kate Witek are on the same page of this, well… Really, it comes down to money. consolidating Class 1 school districts into larger districts will likely save a lot of money that the state spends on education. The one room schoolhouse seems nice, but it’s 2006. Vote to retain.

Proposed by Initiative Petition
Initiative Measure 423
A vote “FOR” will amend the Nebraska
Constitution to impose a state spending
limit based upon a calculation involving
previous appropriations, the inflation rate
and population change in Nebraska.
A vote “AGAINST” will not amend the
Nebraska Constitution to impose such a
state spending limit.

This is easily one of the worst pieces of legislation ever proposed in Nebraska history. I tried to post a long description as to why I think this and something ate it. Suffice to say, if you want publically funded school programs you should vote against this. This could really mess up the states budget. It’s awful and is not even inspired by a popular Nebraskan movement. It’s inspired by a guy who doesn’t live in Nebraska and could spend money to hire people to get signatures. It’s truly awful.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *