For months, council candidate Dave Henderson has been saying that he jumped into the fray when a current council woman told him she didn't have "irrefutable proof" that we needed a millage increase in Feb. 2010.
He claims that statement alone showed him that council was inept, was trying to hoodwink voters, and was clearly not done making those "difficult choices" to "tighten the belt" like we all have to do in our own homes.
There's just one problem.
That's not what she said. I know because I asked her, and she shared with me what she told him in e-mail. Here is her response regarding that 1.9% millage request:
I always said that I strongly favored it. The quote from which Dave Henderson derives his soundbite is that we didn’t have irrefutable proof of the need for a tax increase that would satisfy everyone. To quote from the email I sent to him, “I. . .believe the necessity of a millage increase if we continue to offer a reasonable level of service and amenities. . .I may believe it because I have gone through the budget process trying to prove the city manager wrong.” The email also talked about the difference in opinions of essential vs. non-essential services. Since that email, I have repeatedly said that 80,000 people will have 80,000 ways to balance the budget. Therefore, we probably could never get universally acceptable “irrefutable proof” of anything—particularly without trust of elected council and staff and with people generally and aggressively feeding a distrust, instead of trust.
So, since it appears Mr. Henderson's entire political career is built on his inability to read correctly, I wonder if he'd consider dropping out now?