Friday, July 28, 2006

Campaign Finance Reports Due Today

Today is campaign finance day for those in the primary election. All ballot question committees and candidate committees are due in today. (Outside of those who spent under $1000)

I took a look at Theresa Brennan’s filing. It’s an interesting combination. Mostly democrats like Joe Carney and Steve Manor which is no surprise. The ones that aren’t democrats are big developers. That’s not a good combination for rural republicans here who would like to keep the rural character of Livingston County. I don’t want to see us turn into another Oakland County or Washtenaw County. I also wonder what will happen if a mobile home park case comes to her desk......

It’s just another reason why we should support Jay Drick for Judge.

14 comments:

Mike MacTavish said...

I took a look at the donation list. While this was a spin job, there certainly are a few high level developers backing Theresa Brennan for good reason. She's the one who beat Green Oak Township in court over development.

Communications guru said...

I know you are a master of disinformation, but you outdid yourself this time dan.
I only found two people that could possibly be called developers among Judge Brennan’s contributors. One is Fowlerville businessman Ken Curtis, and he’s known more for owning the former IGA in Fowlerville, and only recently developed a one-time housing development. The other is Earl Lafave, and he contributes heavily to Republican candidates and causes. Just ask Chris Ward.

Among her contributors I found attorneys, a legal secretary, a purchasing manger, the director St. Joseph Mercy Hospital Livingston, The director pf Unites Way, Judge Del Vero and the county’s director of the Public Health Department, to name just a few. A healthy cross section of the community, and many community leaders.

Communications guru said...

You’re referring to Earl Lafave's Hidden Lake development. Anyone knew Green Oak Township was going to lose. You cannot zone by referendum. Also, that was really Paul Burns case, but the two were partners.
But it’s also interesting is among Judge Brennan’s contributors is a Green Oak Township Board Member who was a board member through all of the Hidden Lake fiasco. It says a lot about her that people on both sides of that issue contributed to her. Incidentally, both are strong Republicans.

Keith Richards said...

I support Jay Drick for judge, but it is important to try and keep facts straight.

I don't agree with kevins very often (this may be the first time) but he is right about Hidden Lake. In that case the developer had full approval to go ahead and had already spent a lot of money on the development when it was stopped by the referendum. At that stage a project can only be legitimately stopped for previously unknown important reasons, such as the discovery of a major environmental problem. It was clear to everyone that there was no legal basis to stop that development and the outcome should have been a no brainer to everyone.

(I've always wondered why people worked so hard to keep an ugly gravel pit from being redeveloped into a beautiful neighborhood which now contributes substantial taxes to township and school district coffers)

I'm a bit doubtful about the election having much impact on mobile home developments either. Mobile home parks are totally regulated by the state. Local governments have very little to say about them other than zoning. The laws regulating mobile home developments are pretty clear - townships can't engage in exclusionary zoning practices to keep them out. This means that a developer can get land rezoned properly for a park if a township does not have sufficient suitable land zoned properly in advance. These court cases are being lost by townships all over Michigan, not just in Livingston County. The law is clear which leaves judges with little discretion in the matter.

People who want to limit mobile home parks need to lobby the legislature to change applicable laws, not pick on judges who are just doing their jobs.

Count Me Red said...

"Good Republicans" don't support activist judges and known Democrats. I'm Very disappointed in Earl LaFave as I thought he was a good Republican. I'm shaking my head.

Communications guru said...

Wow. Thanks Keith. I must admit I really enjoy spirited debate – or more accurately persuasive writing, but once in a while it’s nice to have someone agree with you. I agree with you 100 percent about Hidden Lake, and I never understood what the fuss was about. If it was an open, beautiful wetlands, wooded area or meadow that’s one thing, but a gravel pit?

I don’t think mobile homes are going to be much of a problem because the market for them is shrinking. You may remember Handy Township lost a court battle in early 2000 that forced them to allow a 412-unit mobile home park on Van Buren Road, near the Fowlerville I-96 interchange, but interest rates were so low and demand for mobile homes was so low the developer ended up building single family, stick-built homes.

I also agree with you when you say, we must “…lobby the legislature to change applicable laws, not pick on judges who are just doing their jobs.” To do that we need to change leadership and control of the House in Lansing because the mobile home park lobby is too strong.

However, Kevins does not exist. I know it’s a bit of a nit-pick, but I felt I was upfront about using the same name when I posted like you do, and because an anonymous person posted something that dan didn’t like I had to become a blogger.

As for Mr. Communist, I disagree; I don’t think it’s a case of Earl being a bad Republicans, but more of a case of Judge Brennan being a good judge. Earl knows her and sees that - like many people on both sides of the aisle and on both sides of the legal profession – she is fair and professional. No one can point to one example of her being an “activitist Judge” or where political affiliation comes into play, and I challenge you, like she challenged Drick during the debate last week, to come up with an example.

Just because you put an R or D after a person’s name does not change a jerk into a saint. I just wish people would also consider the person among party affiliation. I have voted for Republicans in the past, and I will continue do so in the future if the Democratic candidate is not up to par or is not doing the job. However, in all honesty, in 9 out of 10 cases I will vote for a Democrat because they are the party that reflects my values.

Communications guru said...

Good for the Daily Press & Argus for endorsing Judge Brennan in Sunday’s editorial page. It proves one thing that I have been saying all along and dan has ignored repeatedly, if you’re going to go negative, make sure the charges you are making are true. The LCP said it best:

“Unfortunately, Drick has chosen to mar this race with politics and smear tactics. His campaign literature implied that Brennan didn't share county values because she was appointed by a Democratic governor. That accusation was all the stranger when it was revealed that Drick donated money to the same governor in a failed attempt to gain the same appointment.
Drick followed that up with a campaign mailing that accused Brennan of not supporting our troops in Iraq. It was a shameful, unjustified attack.” (That’s what I said weeks ago, and dan completely ignored the challenge to explain the lie.)

bluzie said...

Jay Drick has shown he does not have a good judicial temperment. It's a very simple fact this is a non partisan race and he cannot be non partisan.

Count Me Red said...

Bluzie, you continue to hang from the tree upside down. Theresa Brennan has shown herself not to have good judicial temperment. She is the one holding anti-war protests on the courthouse lawn. Name one other lawyer or judge in our County who has been so passioniate about a political view that they organized, and participated in, a protest on the courthouse lawn?? NONE. She stands alone as the Jane Fonda of Livingston County. She even has the audacity to show her face inside the Legion Halls and VFW's to ask for the vote of the bravest of our community, the ones she protested against just a couple of years ago as our nation responded to terrorist attacks on our citizens. I'm positive that our community will not elect someone who has shamed us in that way. She should stand proud of her actions and tell the community how a non-partisan makes the leap to protesting. Speak up Theresa, explain your partisan donations, your partisan actions, your partisan race for judge. Don't try to hide now. We didn't leave the paper trail, she did, and we will hold her accountable for her actions in the ballot box.

Communications guru said...

Hey, Communist, take a deep breath and maybe a sedative and come back when you have some facts to back up your ridiculous claims.

Judge Brennan has shown judicial temperament, and if you don’t believe that ask the many prosecutors and defense lawyers and republicans and Democrats who have endorsed her. You could also check to see that her court has no docket backlog.

I’m sure I can name another lawyer who attended the protest in 2003, but because it was more than three years ago and I was only there for maybe a half hour I’m going to have to search my memory. But since when was it unpatriotic to hold your government accountable?

There is no way you can compare Judge Brennan to Jane Fonda, and there are absolutely no similarities. Also, there were quite a few people there too. By your logic, the many hundreds of people who attended a candlelight vigil on the courthouse lawn on Sept. 12, 2001 were anti-police, anti-firefighter and anti-troop.

Judge Brennan has every right to “to show her face inside the Legion Halls and VFW's to ask for the vote of the bravest of our community.” The fiasco in Iraq was not in response to terrorist attacks on our citizens; despite numerous attempts by the bush administration to tie Iraq to 9/11.

The partisan race for judge was put forth by Drick, and at the debate in Howell all six district court judge candidates were asked if political parties or partisan politics should pay a part in this election or in any judicial election. Only Drick said yes, I think. The answer was so convoluted it was hard to tell.

You vote for Drick next week. There was no doubt you will, and I have learned that you can’t change a closed mind. However, I’m not going to let you get away with the lies and misinformation. There are a lot more reasonable people in the county than narrow-minded people like you.

Count Me Red said...

Kevins, you really are biased yourself. You authored an article about Theresa Brennan and her politics (democrat). Remember??? It was very informative. I will look up the date of the article so I can refer the folks to it. Nice interview, although it won't help her in this race at all. And, you helped her off the deep end by printing it. I'll get that article for you.

Communications guru said...

Mr. Communist I’m calling you on this lie. You don’t have to bother to print the article because I looked it up myself, and it proves you are a liar.

The article by the reporter I assume you are referring to and the article I have been talking about ran on the front page above the fold of the Sunday March 16, 2003 edition of the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus under the headline “Vocal Crowd Protests War.”

There were a lot of people quoted in the article, but not Judge Brennan. In fact, her name wasn’t even mentioned. Bob Alexander was quoted, so was Rev. David Swink, a retired Colonel, two protestors, a high school sophomore, two pro-war anti-troop protestors and a veteran against the war. No Brennan.
The second paragraph really sums it all up.

“Almost 200 people gathered in front of the courthouse to protest the POSSIBLE war with Iraq.”

NewRedOne said...

http://www.livingstonrepublicans.com/54.html

Go under Theresa Brennan's donations and look at the documentation regarding that protest.
SHE calls it a war protest. SHE was the spokesperson in the LCP under the news articles (NOT done by Kevin).
This is HER deal. Face it. Go back to excusing it, or justifying it, or whatever, but for Pete;s sake stop saying she DIDN'T do it, and stop saying it wasn't a war protest. That was HER term.
Look for yourself.

Communications guru said...

I looked at the documentation, and it conforms everything I have been saying. It was to protest the war, I have never, ever denied that. But like I have said about 500 times, the war had not started. It turned out the protesters were 100 percent correct, and bush was lying when he said war was a last resort. The only thing you can fault the protestors for is believing bush.