Dying Longton; Out On a Limb with End of Year Loose Ends

[CCarl]

The loose ends I feel are the result of last month's election, but not directly the outcome, as much as the process of that election. I know most people trust government officials to do the right thing, as we say so casually and often. My question back to that has always been 'right for whom?' So I have two major questions about our election process.

Q1: I know one person in town who had five people write in his name for a city council seat. I know another person who had two people write in her name for a school board position. Not one of those seven write-in votes were shown on the official election results. I have to ask WHY NOT?

In the last county commissioner election cycle the current incumbent, District 1 Commissioner beat a rival republican in the primary, then won an uncontested election in November. Uncontested meaning there was not a democratic nor independent candidate's name opposing him on the ballot. The rival he defeated in the primary decided to mount a November write-in campaign among members of his family and friends. His name could easily have been written in thirty or so times in November. How many write-in votes did he get? We may never know because those write-in votes were never shown on the official election results.

I have two screen captures of our most recent official City election results, one captured November 16 [9 days after the election], the second December 12 [35 days after the election]. The results are different. There are more total votes in the December capture. I have to ask, how, where, when, and why? Was there a recount? No one lost votes, unless it was someone whose name does not show on the December 12 capture. Were new votes 'discovered'? Is it possible people whose names are not shown on the December 12 capture somehow lost votes? AND why not show EACH person who got so much as a single vote?

Am I still the only person with questions about our election process? Or is it our election reporting process? Or is it the way the Election Official's office counts the votes? How does anyone know what is or isn't going on when ALL THE VOTES ARE NOT RECORDED FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE?

You see how easy it is for me, or anyone else, to speculate about the election results, about anything from simple calculation errors to fraud? [Did Trump really lose in 2020? Really? At least now, anyone should be able to see why that conversation is so easy to start and perpetuate, even at the local level.]

I think the wise move here would be to get an affidavit signed by each of the seven voters whose write-in votes were never publicly disclosed, and officially challenge the election results just to push the Election Official into full disclosure. And maybe get full disclosure of EACH AND EVERY vote in every future election?


Q2: Our County webpage has an overview of who is eligible to vote, although I did not see any mention made of felons-on-parole not being able to vote [which other webpages say is the case in Kansas]. I did not see anywhere on the County webpage what the qualifications are to run for office. And therein lies my second major question. I have never run for office so I have never seen any type of disclosure form that candidates sign when they register. If they have to sign any disclosure.

City Ordinance says the candidate must be a 'resident', but I cannot find a legal definition of 'resident' in City or County code. I know using the normal and usual definition means the candidate must live within the city limits. I think that is too narrow a definition. I think an owner of property within the city limits, who is thus vested and invested in the City, should be able to run for office whether that person lives inside or outside the city limits, but does live within the Township. That is something I think Council should consider.

It appears, if one is a resident, one can hold office in the City without any other considerations [other than getting enough votes]. Now comes the qualitative part of my question. Without getting into racist or discriminatory views, what type of person do YOU want to serve you in public office? Are you comfortable with a felon-on-parole serving you? A registered or unregistered child molester? Or other sex offender? A confidential informant, aka a snitch? A dealer of drugs to minors? Where do you draw the line? What is your comfort zone? Add to that short list as you see fit. Apparently all those 'characters' are currently eligible to hold office in Longton and elsewhere. And honestly, it may be discriminatory to prevent them. But I'm asking how comfortable you may be with having a person that takes advantage of others representing you? I know I think about it. [And I realize not all felons are advantage-takers. Many, too many, are simply victims of laws run amuck.]

And I have to laugh about it also. Longton has the gossip grinder, aka its rumor mill. If those type of 'characters' in office would bother you, you should encourage Council to make the residency/property ownership requirement have some time element to it, say three years. By then the gossip grinder would make sure everyone in town knew exactly the quality of person running for office. Problem solved, if it is a problem.

Some food for thought going into a new year, anyway. Or in this case grist for the grinder. On to 2024 with a new and improved (?) City Council!

[CCarl]

And that quickly I was informed that another person received two votes for a council seat that have never been published by the Official County Election Results. That makes nine uncounted/omitted votes in our November election. Are there more?

C'mon County, the people have little choice but to trust your honesty. How about showing ALL the votes that were cast in this, and every, election?!!

I don't care if half a dozen votes were cast for Alfred E. Neuman, SHOW THEM! Back in the day, when he 'ran' for office, his votes were tallied and announced. Why? Because it was the law to report ALL votes. I doubt that has changed.

For those of you who haven't met Alfred E. Neuman, check out Mad Magazine.

[CCarl]

It has been brought to my attention that a note was handed to the Council at last night's meeting, showing the write-in votes, including ones that have not been posted on the County's webpage.

That is good to know. But worrisome that those names have never been posted on the County website. Why? What is the agenda behind omitting them from publication?