Opinion: Stacie on the issues (what issues); Desperately seeking reasons (why anyone would vote for Stacie)

Quoted directly from Stacie’s website. (These are also the themes and contents of news articles about her speeches and interviews.)

As your supervisor, I will be committed to doing what’s best for the city as a whole, doing the right thing, making the tough decisions.

Yes, this is the usual (Democrat ) pablum, the usual bromide, the seductive words that mean nothing. The only thing more laughable is a Harris-Biden yard sign adorned with a tiny American flag.

What is best for Carson City as a whole? You mean, as opposed to best for special interests? The various expensive downtown projects and “complete streets” projects that cut down on the number of heavily used traffic lanes, are they best for the city as a whole?

What is the right thing to do? Needless cosmetic projects (complete streets) and others pushed by special interests, are they the right thing to do? Neglecting street repair and utility infrastructure, are they the right thing to do?

What tough decisions need to be made? Approving one high density housing project after another, replacing Carson City’s single family, small town character with sardine-can, rabbit-warren apartments, are those the tough decisions to be made?

How about this, instead?
Resisting AFFH. Resisting UN Agenda 2030. Resisting the misinterpretation of the Master Plan as requiring dense infill in the middle, and open space only on the periphery.
No; how about reserving open space within the city for parks and recreation, within walking distance by children and grandparents, instead of infill, infill, infill; THOSE would be examples of tough decisions!

What in Stacie’s experience on the school board would qualify her to know what’s best for Carson City, what’s the right thing to do, what tough decisions might have to be made? The answer is, NOTHING. The two political entities, while operating in the same geographic area, face different problems, have totally different needs and responsibilities, have different tools, and have different solutions available to them. Don’t believe me; read the agenda items for any School Board or Board of Supervisors meeting — if you can get past the incomprehensible educratic bureaucratese of a School Board agenda item, that is. I submit, that experience in one does not help with the learning curve in the other.

Did the school board make the tough decision to do the right thing for the good of the people and children of Carson City, and stand bravely against Common Core? NO. Not when it could have made a difference; not ever.

Why would we believe that Stacie would act any different on the Board of Supervisors? She’s proud of her career as a bureaucrat; that’s not the same as being an advocate FOR THE PEOPLE.

While priorities often need to change, I will pay particular attention to these issues:

Economic Recovery:

The COVID-19 pandemic has hit our community and surrounding counties hard.

According to the rules of Socratic debate, we should stop right here. You can’t have an intelligent, enlightening discussion if you start with a falsehood as your premise. It is NOT the VIRUS that has hit us hard. While a single needless death is a tragedy — and most deaths attributed to the virus have been needless — the fact is that per capita this area has been very lucky. We are not a hot spot.

Business closures and restrictions have created financial hardships for everyone, and many businesses may never be able to reopen.

The real pain has been economic, and the real pain has been inflicted as a direct consequence, the directly immediately intended consequence, of the deliberate fear-, panic- and hysteria-mongering by the deep state “experts” and media, and by the fascist edicts of Democrat governors who had the audacity to classify businesses as essential or nonessential, and thereby throw tens of millions of productive, tax paying people out of work.

YES, the long term, if not the permanent, damage consists of all those small businesses who were so deliberately driven out of existence — as if by design, permanently.

We must partner with our small businesses to help them survive, and not impede their recovery.

What do you mean “PARTNER”? Where in the Nevada Constitution, the City Charter, the NRS, the Municipal Code does it say that “partnering” is a proper function of government? This is a very disturbing philosophical and political point, because the very definition, the very essence, of fascism is a “partnership” between government and business. How does it make sense, proposing more fascism to fight fascism?

Regardless of philosophy and political science, what can local government do practically, except to officially DEFY the fascist governor and refuse to enforce his fascist orders? Even then, how would our local businesses survive if the rest of the state, the rest of the country, is being killed by the governors of this and other states? Local businesses rely on local shoppers AND out-of-county visitors. Enhanced unemployment checks help, for a while, but the inevitably consequent hyperinflation will kill off everything eventually.

Officially, lockdowns are ordered by the governor. Local officials have little or no say. We The People could hope that our local officials would have the guts to defy a governor who so obviously is enjoying his fascist misuse of power, but that’s not going to happen because (1) our local officials are too genteel and (2) Nevada is a Dillon State.

There is one thing that definitely is within the powers of local government. If you want local businesses to survive the crisis, and to thrive, after the fascist lockdowns have ended, then KEEP TAXES LOW, BASIC SERVICES RELIABLE, REGULATORY INTERFERENCE AT A MINIMUM.

Board members must work together to create an environment that fosters innovations, efficiency, and productivity.

Whoa, slow down there. Your power-mad slip is showing. It is the function of private free enterprise to innovate, to operate efficiently, to find ways to maximize productivity.
Are supervisors better at free enterprise than entrepreneurs?
Are school trustees better at free enterprise than entrepreneurs?

The only thing that any government can do to help the economy is to stay out of the free market, run the government as efficiently as possible, at the least possible cost, and therefore keep taxes and regulations low.

These are difficult and unprecedented times

Yes, indeed — courtesy of the fascist edicts of Democrat governors, drunk with power and micromanaging everything in their states, not to protect public health but to destroy the economy for political gain in an election year.

Yea, in their sick minds that makes sense: People always vote for politicians who inflict the most harm on the innocent victims, especially those who voted “the wrong way” the last time.

Who in their right mind would vote for candidates like that?

and we need strong, solution-oriented leadership.

Is this an indictment of past Boards of Supervisors, even the last mayor (RIP)?
Have past Boards provided, or failed to provide, such leadership?
Can we have some examples, please?
What actions of the school trustees qualify as examples or counter examples of such strong, solution-oriented leadership?

At the present time it is precisely the “strong, solution-oriented leadership” of the Democrat governors that is causing all the damage. How? By pursuing the wrong goals with wrongheaded, utterly fascist solutions. The only way government can provide leadership, with the goal of aiding economic recovery, is to stay the hell out of the way.

The board must work together to get us back on the road to recovery without overburdening our citizens, weakening our welfare and safety, or eliminating critical services.

Pinch me, we might agree on something, If only we could have some specific action items to consider.

But wait, what’s this? A covert plea to defy the governor and chart an independent path to local recovery? Another indictment of Boards in the recent past? Have past Board members failed to work together? So let’s clarify:

What would amount to overburdening our citizens?
What would weaken our welfare and safety?
What would threaten to eliminate critical services?
Why would anyone even contemplate doing that? By what standard would anything like that even rise to a level to arouse the consciousness of Board members?
Can you provide specific examples in each case? Are you or anyone else thinking of raising taxes, defunding the sheriff, closing firehouses, stopping maintenance on city utilities? What?

Efficient Government:

Prioritizing services is a must. First, we must address the mandated services we are required to provide.

Haven’t past Boards already done this? Have they not been doing the job we elected them to do?
What needs to be done, more or different, better or differently, that past Boards haven’t done?
Where’s the list of mandated services as YOU understand it?
Where’s the list as past Boards have understood it, are there differences and how/why are they significant?
Where’s the list as the school board has understood it, is it relevant to the problems that the city faces, are there any differences, and how/why are they significant?

We must then make responsible, informed, and smart decisions on how and where to allocate our remaining resources.

Oh, stop with the empty-headed buzz words. Are voters that stupid!?
No. There’s only one responsible decision to be made:
(1) Provide all mandated services.
After government has done its job and provided all mandated services, and if there is still money left over, then
(2) Save the money in the rainy day fund
Or
Reduce taxes!

Our city government made wise investments in the last several years. We must protect those investments

More empty-headed buzz words. Someone’s been in the bureaucracy too long.
What “investments” has the city made? List some examples.
(What “investments” has the school board made? List some examples.)
No. There are NONE.
Government does not INVEST. Government SPENDS.
Government does not have investments. It only has expenditures.
Does the government invest in stocks and bonds? No. It issues bonds.
Does government invest to generate income? No. It pays interest on bonds.

while also ensuring we can maintain city services for our citizens.

Oh, come on. The most fundamental legal requirement is a campaign platform?
How original.

Workforce Development:

We must partner with our local businesses and educational institutions like Western Nevada College to ensure our workforce has the needed job skills for a changing and challenging economy.

Is Stacie running for the school board or the Board of Supervisors?
I can see the school board coordinating with the college. But the city? On education issues?
Where in the Nevada Constitution, the City Charter, the NRS, the Municipal Code does it say anything like that?
Didn’t the school board feel obligated to do this?
WHO in government — or even the school board — is wise and prophetic enough to infallibly see into the future and know what jobs, what jobs skills, will be needed and available, 2, 4, 10, 20 years from now? NOBODY.
The only thing that schools and colleges can do is identify, teach and reinforce universal timeless basic skills that are adaptable to many or most jobs, jobs and skills that have endured over decades: literacy, critical thinking, math, science, civics. Yea, throw in shop, art, music, home ec, too. You know, the same old classical education that has stood the test of time through revolutionary changes in the culture and the economy.
But that has nothing to do with the functions and responsibilities of city/county government.

Protecting Public Safety:

We need to ensure that our first responders have the equipment and training they need to protect us, our schools, and our community. The safety and wellbeing of our residents is my top priority. In the last several years we have purchased new fire equipment and vehicles, added traffic enforcement officers, and increased school officers to make our community safer.

Is this an indictment of the Sheriff, the Fire Chief, the School Board?
Haven’t they been meeting their responsibilities?
How is it the city’s business to increase the number of school safety officers? Hasn’t the school board been doing it’s job? (Under whose direction....?)

We need to continue to do what is best for our most vulnerable populations.

Who are Carson City’s most vulnerable populations?
What is “best for them”?
How would supervisors know what is best for “them”?
How would school trustees know?

As a geezer now, who in previous decades took care of four elderly parents (my wife’s and mine), I have serious doubts about anybody not being of the same age having any idea who the vulnerable population is, what their vulnerabilities are, and what’s best for them. First hand experience is different from second hand or official experience, if any.

Sustainable Infrastructure and Asset Management:

This is one of the most important issues facing Carson City, as well as every other city and county across the country. Carson City has spent the last six years creating and implementing an asset management plan to ensure we no longer defer the maintenance of our assets.

Now Stacie is proposing (claiming credit for?) an on-going effort in city government. Isn’t this a bit of “cultural appropriation,” or maybe another covert indictment of past and present Boards of Supervisors?
The single worst example of official malfeasance is no maintenance.
But Boards recent past have already started on the asset management plan, and for that the credit goes to the other candidate for pushing this and other actions of the Board.

This plan must continue as we move forward so we do not slip into the past practice of “kicking the can down the road” on maintaining critical assets.

Gee, it’s nice to see the admission that someone else has already been doing this. So why is this a campaign plank?
What’s next, a strong statement in favor of (grand)Motherhood and Apple Pie?

But actually, this is as close as anyone can get. Her most unimpressive joint interview with her opponent on the local streaming channel recently is a perfect illustration of the fact that Stacie brings NOTHING to the job. In that interview she proposed or endorsed everything that the current and recent boards have already been doing. Then why bother running for the job, except to get the salary and the perks? While she’s most likely to be a rubber stamp, going along with whatever her betters on the Board and city staff have decided for her, in stark contrast and of great promise and benefit to us who live and pay taxes here in Carson City, her opponent brings an array of qualifications and a broad spectrum of directly relevant PRACTICAL experiences that will actually and most substantively add to the current capabilities of the Board.

Quality of Life

It’s important that we continue to protect and enhance those things that make our community great. Our vibrant arts community and abundant open space and recreational opportunities are tremendous assets and important to our residents.

More empty-headed buzz words?
More “cultural appropriation,” of ongoing programs and activities?
Or is this more disapproval and indictment of the Board’s recent programs and activities?
I can’t tell.
Is this Stacie, the quintessential establishment candidate, the darling of the local insider power structure, trying to remake herself as a rebel?

Supervisors in the recent past have been doing their utmost to fill up all open space within the city with sardine-can, rabbit-warren apartments and close-packed townhomes.
Is Stacie for or against that interpretation of the Master Plan?

Supervisors in the recent past have been doing their utmost to destroy Carson City’s livable, family- child- and geezer-friendly, traditional small town character.
Is Stacie for or against that interpretation of the Master Plan?

Supervisors in the recent past have been doing their utmost to turn Carson City into a clone of California’s sprawling amorphous shapeless soulless homogeneous suburbs.
Is Stacie for or against that interpretation of the Master Plan?

Supervisors in the recent past have been doing their utmost to interpret the Master Plan as REQUIRING infill.
Is Stacie for or against that interpretation of the Master Plan?

Is this campaign statement by Stacie a call for open space that’s accessible to our “most vulnerable populations” WITHIN the city, NOT on the PERIPHERY that you have to DRIVE to?
Is Stacie for THAT change in the interpretation of the Master Plan?

Holy crackpots, Batman! We might have a reason to vote for Stacie yet!
No, I don’t think so. Not based on her platform or her interviews.