Dear Editor:
With those words uttered, it started the most controversial and contentious BoCC term in recent history. A board that has the appearances and actions of one with a chip on its shoulder, a score to settle, and an agenda not always in the best interests of RBC. Let’s talk recall.
The grounds of recall 2 are expanded and generalized from the grounds of recall 1. The grounds of recall 1 were found to be valid and true in a court of law. The grounds of recall 2 were not challenged in court. Also the voters have final say on the grounds.
The grounds never state Moyer acted unilaterally. For those that argue recall is unfairly targeting Moyer specifically, neither Woodruff nor Gates were eligible. Rector has resigned rendering that argument moot.
First Moyer states that he has served with honor. While I appreciate some of his efforts, I feel that there has been enough bad to warrant the recall. Moyer is not part of some anti-conservative/MAGA witchhunt.
He then tries a sympathy plea. I am sorry that you cannot be mature enough to have friends that hold different viewpoints. Society has bought into the lie that if I disagree with you, I hate you.
Next he takes aim to specifically call out the County Clerk. There have been numerous posts on his official RBC commissioner’s page openly attacking former employees and other duly elected officials for just doing their job. The clerk is not spreading “libel.”
Then he states that the recall is driven by those upset/unhappy with budget cuts or those that feel entitled to your tax dollars. First, citizens are aware of falling federal and tax revenue and understand the need for hard budget cuts. Second, who are these “entitled” people? This is a generic talking point with no real evidence behind it and as such is hollow and without merit. Finally, with budgets being larger with and deficit spending, how is that fiscally responsible?
He next tries to guilt you in that if you support the recall you also don’t care about the costs associated with the recall. To insinuate that the right of the citizens to hold their elected officials accountable is somehow forfeit, subject to, or hindered by cost, budget, timing, or election cycles is downright insulting.
Also he tries to state that his removal from office will result in instability. How? This is baseless. Voters have an opportunity to vote Ginny Love as interim commissioner into the next term. Seems smooth.
He also states the grounds are untrue by a third party. The third party investigation found no workplace harassment as defined by federally protected statuses. It exonerates nothing about behavior that falls beyond that narrow scope of which there are many claims.
Moyer states he is for personal property rights. However he was the only commissioner to vote against a stance of neutrality and instead opposed the right of the Seely family, private property owners, from selling the Crystal Creek Ranch to the entity of the Seely family’s choosing.
Moyer also has a possible conflict of interest in some zoning regulations. While he recused himself from the actual vote; as commissioner he could craft policy that would directly benefit himself — as he is a subdivision land owner — as well as influence the votes of the other commissioners to result in a favorable outcome for himself.
We all in RBC understand the need for voter integrity. The vote to defund the Dominion voting machines was based on zero evidence of voter tampering or fraud in RBC or any outside connection. This seemed clearly based on adopting an agenda talking point only.
Finally, Moyer states he is an advocate for water use in RBC. There is cause for concern over the way funds are dispensed from the CCITF for Wolf Creek and if the proper application process with stakeholder feedback should have been followed instead of suspended. Again board not following process.
The recall grounds are meritorious, it is not Morlan vs Moyer, it is not sour grapes, it is not an attack on conservative principles.
Finally Gary Moyer is absolutely correct; “anyone is replaceable,” even himself.
Jason Spieth
Meeker
Thoughts expressed on opinion pages are exclusively those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of the Herald Times. You are welcome to submit signed letters on matters of local interest to [email protected], mail to PO Box 720, Meeker, CO 81641 or drop off at 304 4th St., Meeker. there is no charge.
Due to space constraints, please keep submissions 500 words or less.
