Sending Letters to Candidates and a Response from Mike Hardy

Earlier this week I wrote a letter to the mayoral candidates in Payson, Utah.

Frequently, when local elections are held, the low profile of the elections makes it difficult to get a clear picture of the candidates. So, in order to get the data I need to distinguish the candidates, I will email the candidates. I try to keep the letter to 4 questions, and, invariably, the responses (or lack thereof) tell me a lot about the candidates.

Maybe it is just because my questions dovetail nicely with my way of thinking, but I tend to find that the responses I get are much more helpful than the responses I get from some of the blah questions politicians are frequently asked.

Some of my questions are fairly standard, but I try to mix it up sometimes. Some common go-tos are "why are you running for [the position]", "if you are elected, how will you be able to act as a check against abuses perpetrated by [other branches of government]", "what role do you see citizens having in promoting their own welfare, and what limitations do you see to that role", etc.

I almost always ask why they are running. It is a question they probably get a lot, so it is an easy one for them to respond to with practiced fluff. Nevertheless, even that is telling, and, surprisingly, some candidates actually have good answers. One thing I have learned in the process, is that a surprising number of people who get elected (over half, including incumbents) don't even understand what the responsibility of acting as an elected representative actually entails. I've seen answers like "there's no such thing as checks and balances at the local level."

I currently publish all of my responses on my voter guide.

Earlier this week I wrote a letter to the mayoral candidates in Payson, Utah. I already new that I would prefer somebody other than the incumbent, and after doing some research, I could find nothing of any substance about the other candidates, so I drafted a set of questions. I differed from my usual approach this year, in that I gave each candidate a different, tailored question, as the final question in each email. So far, Mike Hardy has been the only one to respond.

Here's my letter to Mike:

Mike Hardy,

I am a blogger and voter looking to find out more about the candidates for Mayor in Payson, so I am emailing all of the candidates to find out more about them.

What inspires you to seek the office of Mayor of Payson?

How would you describe the job of Mayor?

What responsibility do you see individual citizens as having in promoting their own welfare, and the welfare of society, and what kinds of limitations you see to that responsibility?

As a city councilman, what city issues did you feel were were important to you.

    Sean Cox

His response is as follows:

Sean

I decided to run for Mayor because we need to solve some very complicated issues which I don’t believe the current Mayor can solve. We have a money problem. We have about 1 million dollars a year in debt service (created by councils previous to my time) that need to be refinanced or eliminated so that we can solve infrastructure and development problems. We have been doing better in the past 8 years. We need to get better. I am running for Mayor to help solve these problems, to bring unity to City Government, and to work closely with the public in providing a better Payson. I have lived here for 15 years.

The Mayor’s job is one of rallying the troops so to speak. We need to work together as a team. We need to take input from not only the council, but staff, and very importantly from citizens. We also need to develop contacts with County and State Government that will help us solve the problems the city faces. I am the person that can do that.

Individual citizens need to be involved. It is disheartening for instance to have a budget hearing and no citizens show up to voice their feelings or priorities for our budget. Society as of late has tended to compartmentalize things. The feeling seems to be, you guys handle the city stuff unless I get mad at you and then I will get involved. We need to change that attitude when it comes to our local government.

As far as limitations are concerned, it is appropriate for individuals to promote their own welfare. That is what our economic system is built on. When they that within the limits of the law and don’t hurt others, then I feel they should be free to do what they want. Individuals also need to be involved with their government. We won’t know what ideas for solving problems that the public has that could be useful unless we have feedback.

I believe that the biggest problems we have are as follows:

1-Finding new sources of cash without raising taxes, fees, or rates, to help resolve
        Infrastructure issues-Water and sewer being the two most important, with roads and storm drain obviously critical
        Development issues. Citizens want more shopping, eating establishments, etc. These won’t come until we can encourage wise development.
        Law and order. We have to get more aggressive.
        These are just some of the issues.

I love this town. I want to help make it a better place to live. Please feel free to call me if you have questions or to write. I would love your vote.


Michael Hardy
Payson City Council Member

He responded pretty quickly, and it wasn't terribly hard to find contact information. These are good signs, and the content of his response seems fairly good as well. The response has some actual substance and it is relatively conservative, though it could be a little stronger on citizens promoting their own interest and limits thereof.

I'd classify Mike Hardy as a conservative with some indications of mild statism. A better candidate would have shown fewer statist tendencies, but this seems pretty good. Statism is very status quo, and Mike Hardy's statist tendencies seem lower than average.

I also like the fact that he actually took a swipe at the current mayor. This is uncommon at the local level. I once analyzed a city council election and discovered that one of the city councilmen had sexually assaulted a city employee. A city investigation found that he had behaved inappropriately and there was pending civil litigation. This was known by all of the candidates, but nobody would criticize him for it, and he got reelected. This made me extremely suspicious of what might be hiding in the closets of the other candidates.

If a person is challenging another candidate and is unable to articulate any weaknesses in the other candidate, then he is either spineless, or his motivation for competing is self-interest rather than public interest. People get upset about attack ads, but in my experience, you should beware the guy who won't or can't articulate how he compares with his opponent. The nature of the criticisms offered can tell you a lot about the person doing the criticizing.

I'm still hopeful that I'll get another response (a response from Bill Wright would be ideal), but I'm satisfied that if people vote for Mike Hardy, they'll probably get a better than average mayor.

After reading Mike's response, I found myself wishing I'd asked about the mayor's checks and balances role rather that asking how he defines the job. Lesson learned. Every time I do this I get ideas.