I can understand why some Salem residents may be confused with the recall of 5 board members and the recall language. There have been five sets of recalls filed, but only two sets had language approved for recalls in Salem Township.
On April 16, 2010 language was submitted (and subsequently approved) to the county to recall Heyl, Uherek and Wallazy by Bonnie Cook. Then on May 25, 2010 language was submitted (and subsequently approved) to the county to recall David Trent and Brien Witkowski by Jane Griffith. Believe it or not, the language to recall David and Brien was identical to the language to recall Heyl, Uherek and Wallazy except the words “no” and “yes” were interchanged Confused yet? Of course, it was intended that way by the Heyl camp! So when the voter wants to mark the ballot on the recalls, it will all look the same, and the Heyl people hope you will make mistakes or not vote at all on the recall. You have to admit it’s a very clever stategy. But all you need to remember is a "YES" vote RECALLS Heyl, Uherek, and Wallazy; and a "NO" vote RETAINS David Trent and Brien Witkowski.
More campaign strategy. Who and what can you believe during this campaign? Should your vote be influenced by unflattering color photos that they send out of former board members? Or maybe the fact that they call us “cockroaches?” Some people have been put off by these low class antics that shows desperation to hold onto their power and will do anything to survive the recall. And what does it say about the kind of people they are? Doesn’t that reflect on their character and self-respect? Do they care?
Now you might ask why are they attacking former board members (me) who are not running for office? Well, there’s a simple answer. They don’t want you to think about or consider their record in office the last two years. Or worse yet, what they may plan for next two years if they survive the recall. I guess you could say they would have “carte blanche” to do whatever they want.
In the posts to follow, it’s my intent to present the facts and the truth as to what they have accomplished so far in two years in office. Then compare their “accomplishments” with some key accomplishments of recent administrations. The question will be: What have they done these past two years for which they can proud?
Then, I also think it’s worthwhile to best-guess what we may expect from the Heyl people if they remain in office. That is, what’s in the future for the Post Office and the Fire Department? What will be done about threats to citizens when they ask questions in public or in writing? Will citizen’s questions be answered in public? What will be done about exorbitant Attorney fees? What’s in the future for the USD regarding the type of development that will be allowed and new plans for water and sewer? Let’s move on and talk about accomplishments.
Comments