Dear Southwest Ranches Friends and Neighbors:
Good Morning, Good Afternoon, Good Evening and if I do not see you later … well then … Good Night!
Voting for Jeff Dillard is a vote for ignorance. During the Town debate on October 13, Dillard open with the statement that he has no affiliations and has not been on any committees. He that went on for the next hour and a half showing the voters in the audience how little he knew and how poorly he was coached.
When asked what Southwest Ranches number one problem is Dillard said that drainage is the biggest problem. It's sure in the top five depending on where you live. Then he went on to state that drainage was never a problem until the town council made it a problem by raising the water level. And since then the west side of town has been flooding. If Dillard had any experience with our town, he would know that South Broward Drainage District (SBDD) policy decisions and their implementation are responsible for the flooding in the far western portions of our town. Even at meetings Dillard has attended over the last eight weeks since he filed for candidacy, the topic was brought up and if here were listening it would be clear to him that our town and council are working very diligently to reverse SBDD's decision. Do you want a council member who is ignorant of the issue he feels is our town's greatest problem.
Dillard also claimed that taxes in our town are a big problem. Later he goes on later to claim and contradict himself that taxes are our biggest problem. Of course all would like lower taxes but after two years of very minor ad valorem tax increases, the Council instructed the town administrator to come back with a balanced budget that did not require a tax increase and the administrator acheived their goal by cutting salaries and programs. Southwest Ranches is one of the a very few number cities in Broward that did not raise taxes or use its reserves to plug holes in the budget. Dillard did not even recognize that the town is now a smaller government than it was last year. He said that the Council will be raising your taxes in January or February. Dillard's ignorance and lack of citizen awareness showed on this question. According to statute, Florida governments (counties, cities, town and special taxing districts like SBDD) may only adjust their millage and special assessments annually and the timing is dictated by the county and municipal fiscal year beginning in October each year. If the Town attempted to raise you taxes off-cycle and it were legal, it would probably cost more to go through the process than the value of the increase. Someone else must read his trim and tax notices otherwise he would know they are adjusted annually. Again Dillard was just showing how little he knew and how poorly he was coached.
Next an interesting dynamic presented that would continue throughout the debate. When the moderator asked Gary Jablonski a question first, he answered, and Dillard would generally agree and parrot Jablonski's answer with his own down-home spin. When Dillard was asked first, he would fumble or bumble or not answer the question at all. When Dillard was asked first, why he was running for office, he gave all the reasons why he moved to Ft Lauderdale and SWR but never answered the question. Naturally you would not expect for him to disclose Mee's grudge but he could have told the audience what he is telling his immediate neighbors. Those on 170th say that he and his wife are doing this for the fun of it. They thought it would be a "hoot". Do we really want a council member who is serving just for the fun of it?
Maybe it was the lighting but Dillard's deportment at the debate was threaten toward the audience, his behavior was arrogant, and his manner was hostile toward the town's administration and current council. Dillard the bridge-builder, the fence-mender was postured as an intimidator. He want to make his case as the outsider, not connected, with no affiliations. Politics are an arena where you can force your way in as an outside but you cant alienate your constituency along the way. Dillard has pit one side of town against the other, has tried unsuccessfully to discredit the Presidents Council debate, has attached the newsletter editor from Rolling Oaks. These action have cost him very dearly. Is seems that his only support has come from the landscape nursery owners on Griffin Rd and his street. What promises did he make to the Nurseries? What did he tell his neighbors on his street?
Peeking out from under a table in back of the auditorium your Wanch was at times rolling in laughter and at others miserable hearing Dillard's answers.
This missive could be three times as long as last week's communiqué if you were provided the detail just presented above for the first two question. Instead the following is a summary of the Wanch's notes written just after the debate:
Dillard's positions or supports -
- Commercial development throughout town
- Sees no problem with the companies that use our neighborhoods as the base of operations
- Considers himself a volunteer since he is running for office
- Considers himself an ethical person
- Thinks Rt. 27 should become commercial before anything else (Has Ronnie given to his campaign?)
- Thinks all of the cities around us dictate our drainage policy
- Doesn't think we are rural, "we're a city"
- Thinks Davie is more rural
- Has not heard of the Farm Act
- Supports proactive code enforcement
- Doesn't under the fill ordinance
- Claims to have the most successful business in his field but is scraping.
- Believes we need rules to separate our neighbors.
- Does not believe the town has a sound financial base
- Doesn't understand the towns financial situation.
- Claims that the town lost $2.5 million and cant account for it.
- Thinks the town throws money at everything that comes it way.
- Thinks the town is going to have to raise taxes
- Does not support having parks in town
- Thinks Rubin got commissions for writing grants (that's illegal and Rubin would already be in jail if true)
- Made many illusions to being a tea-bagger (could be a plus or negative)
- Doesn't understand the town's capital investment structure
- Thinks all grants have a dollar for dollar match
- Is against the town applying for grants
- Doesn't think there is a cut-through or traffic problem
- Is in favor of opening Mather Blvd. and other roads to Stirling and Sheridan traffic
- Opposed to road closures
- Seems to think there is a crime wave in SWR, (probably to sell more guns.)
- Wants to see the towns parks sold to regain the tax base.
- Wants to further tax the businesses in town.
- Thinks the Nurseries are responsible for flooding problems in our town.
There are many more position that Dillard takes that would be harmful to our Town's future but I promised brevity.
In Dillard's closing comments, probably after realizing he was poorly prepared and ineptly coached for the debate, Dillard took a parting shot at the residents of our town. He felt he is up against a political machine. With the Don Maine's defeat two years ago, the machine was thrown out of town. His comment was in line with his character. His opposition, you know the guy who has been involved for many years, volunteered lots of his time, who has made friends with many people through his good deeds and has never asked for anything in return, in Dillard's words has a machine behind him. No, the folks who know Jablonski and agree with him will vote for him, additionally, the people Dillard alienated along will way will vote for Jablonski, and the people who really know Dillard will probably vote for Jablonski even though they might have an unapproved sign in their front yard.
Once final comment from the debate. Dillard made the strong point during the debate that he has his cell phone on all of his campaign signs. Your Wanch was impressed, the thought occurred, "well that takes courage". The next time a sign was seen it was checked. It didn't have a cell number or any phone number. Next, the benefit of the doubt was given that the lawn signs were just too small, so a large sign was checked. No number. Was Dillard confused by the bright lights and glamor of the debate or was this a bald-face lie to the public at a point that it means to most to be honest? You decide before you color in the dot when you vote at the polls. We got rid of this type of individual last election, do we need another?
Finally, both candidates' financial records are available on the town website (click here) for public review. Dillard has been heard to say that he has raised over $10 thousand dollars, to others he said the has raised over $30 thousand. As last check his records do not indicate those figures. Again he is either lying or not. If he is boasting, do we need that, if not he is breaking the law. In any case his filings are misrepresenting his campaign since they are filled out wrong. Any citizen can file a complaint of they think there is any wrong doing intentional or mistakenly. Someone in our community should look into Dillard's filings and if compelled, file a complaint (click here). Political campaigns are a serious think and cannot be done just for the fun of it. There are serious penalties for misfiling financial information.
Dillard stated he is all for accountability, lets see if he holds himself accountable, the Florida Election Commission will if a complaint is made.
Both of our candidates will bring change to our Council and Town. Do you want your vote to count towards positive change for our town or do you want to vote for ignorance. At the county, state, and federal levels there are new-comers in most elections. Most of the new-comers have had prior governmental experience as volunteers, employees, lawyers or elected officials. In most cases, the uninformed, unknown, unpopular candidate is passed over for the more qualified. The ignorant are ignored.
Can the Town afford a council member who shoots from the hip? Does the Town need another council member that embarks on malicious attacks on the residents and lies? Do the residents really want a representative who doesn't understand the governmental process that makes the Town work and insists on doing things his way? Do you want someone who attacks people with differing opinions? Would you vote for someone who is running for office to settle a grudge? If so, in my humble opinion, vote for Jeff Dillard.
That’s All Folks!!!
Wanch Waggler
To leave comments go to http://wanchwaggler.blogspot.
