Supervisor Qualifications

The next election for our two at-large supervisors (Mr. McCoy and Mr. Baker) will be held in November, 2009. Please consider the following qualifications prior to casting your vote:

The criteria for qualifications should go beyond the test of simple popularity among the voters. Too often we elect candidates based on how many people know them, or know  of them, without asking pertinent questions about their qualifications. For instance a candidate might be a good parent, but that doesn’t necessarily make them a good supervisor, just as being a good Christian doesn’t necessarily qualify them as a good supervisor. When a candidate for elected office presents his or her self as a good Christian, a red flag goes up in my mind that they are using God as if He has endorsed them for the elected office. When a candidate appears to be running as the result of only one issue, such as education, then we should question not only their qualifications but where do they stand on all important issues and how they are qualified to make a positive difference in bringing about necessary and meaningful change.

2. How much time does the candidate have, or is willing, to dedicate to the duties of the position?

This is an important criteria for voters to consider prior to casting their vote. This question goes beyond whether or not the candidate is qualified for the position. If they are qualified but don’t have enough time to dedicate to the performance of their job in the best interests of citizens, then they aren’t going to be an effective supervisor. I’m reminded of a comment made to me by the current chairman of the BOS: “Don’t call me after 9:00 PM with your questions or concerns”. That was a few years ago but since his comment I’ve kept a keen eye on how this supervisor performs his elected job and one of his biggest shortcomings has to do with how little time he puts into his efforts. He doesn’t have a personal platform as to what he will do and how he will do it in regard to improving conditions for his constituents or the county as a whole. When questioned about this his comment was: “That isn’t what this board is about. We do things as a group, not as individuals”. Forgive me if I disagree, but every political candidate should explain what they are going to do, if elected. It’s a cop-out for a politician to go around saying what they will do for you if they get elected and then after being elected they revert to a statement that they don’t champion individual causes, only what is decided as being the most popular among the majority of the supervisors.

3. Is the candidate intelligent or do they just have the gift of gab?

Local elections are far too often contested among some candidates that aren’t the sharpest tack in the box. They talk a good game but they are incapable of walking the talk. Simply and bluntly put, they just don’t have the intellect to evaluate detailed information and arrive at their own well thought out conclusions. This results in them either making a poor decision, refusing to take any action, or consistently following the lead of one or more of the other supervisors. So why are these candidates elected? This goes back to the old popularity factor where the voters don’t do justice to their evaluation of each candidate and instead listen to what the majority of people in their circle are saying about the candidates. Citizens in this group aren’t casting their vote but instead they are voting the way their friends have said they intend to vote. Our voting privilege should be taken more seriously and we should place a high value on what we get for our vote. It is, after all, the only true voice we have in deciding how we will be governed.

4. Does the candidate express good, creative, and feasible ideas?

I refuse to vote for any candidate that stands for the “status quo”. Firstly, status quo isn’t working in the best interests of the citizens. Secondly, anyone who is so one-dimensional as to present themselves as a political candidate without advocating for some improvement has no business being a candidate for election. Why would anyone waste their vote on such a candidate? When candidates do advocate for or against specific issues, this gives us an inside look at the real person.

5. Is the candidate a leader, or just another in a long line of followers?

Supervisors that just sit and wait on the county administrator to bring issues before them for decision are short-changing their constituents. A good supervisor is proactive enough to recognize issues that require improvement. A good supervisor submits feasible ideas to the board for consideration. A good supervisor puts enough time into the job to champion proposals from concept to fruition. A good supervisor thinks, instead of waiting on others to think for him or her. A good supervisor does more than just make decisions that will garner votes. A good supervisor exhibits courage and backbone to take an unpopular stance when in the best interests of the citizens.