Williston, ND Active Issues

rwaitman · Senior Member

RE: Death as a campaign issue

Sigma · Veteran Member

So an article reporting a man’s suicide so a point could be made about pension contributions? Isn’t that a bit like using gasoline to mow the yard? Sure, it’ll stop the grass from growing, but using gasoline misses the point of lawn care.

I appreciate the clarification regarding what Ms. Evans are attempting to communicate on the website. I’m exhausted by the mental gymnastics required to link the topic of a man’s suicide to state pension fund solvency. The two topics are tangentially related only through the man’s employment with the pension fund. There is really no evidence that his suicide was a result of the stresses incurred by the pension funds troubles, and even if they were linked (ie. the stress got to him), I find it rather tasteless to bring it up. There are better sources that could be used to address the issue in both detailed and broad strokes. Heck, the ND Policy Council has an article about the pension fund troubles. Any one of these articles would be more fitting to make the case about problems with the ND pension fund, but the decision was made to go with the suicide story. I find that very interesting.

Ms. Evans is correct and there is something worth discussing here. She has a point in regard to the need to change employee contribution to the state pension fund and it is an issue that deserves public attention. Attention to the issue, that is, and empathy for the tragedy. These are two different things, and one should not intrude upon the other.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

The ND pension fund is estimated to be broke in 10 years. I guess I just assume many of you keep up like I do. This man can not be held totally accountable. He did what we employed him to do. It is a problem we must address at all levels. WE are the BOSS. It is time we step in and take this much pressure off of our employees.

Private sector operates in a common manner of employee invests 3%/ employer 3%. A shared contribution. This is the set up for retirement.

Now our tax dollars employ our gov't employees. This makes us the boss. We give our employees the full 6%. Employee does not invest anything. This pension is levied against all taxable property. Yes, many employees own property. This is also the job they chose. Property levies must grow as government grows to support this system. ND population has only increased 1.43% since 1960. Our gov't has grown in the thousand percentile. The rates are not sustainable.

The problem occurs on the local levels also. We can not put one individual in charge and play the blame game. Our apathy did this. We begin in the cities and towns. The state will follow.

They will complete a full audit of the system and who do you think will get the blame for the failure and short comings of our ND pension system. The articles had already started prior to this mans death.

Next, we need housing. We also need to have it provided with/by those who know how to operate in the realm of government grant programs. Our city assisted as a sub recipient and needed to take an active roll to assure the project moved forward. With the funds we assisted this group from Idaho to obtain, we do not want to have future issues in our ability to manage grants due to one housing project. Our city needs to demonstrate their ability to disburse these funds as they were directed to do so and assure those they have given these funds to, have complied with their end of the contracts they entered.

I don't want to issue my opinion on health care, just share information. Each person has to decide their health care.

I do have my ideas on city land sales in an effort to stimulate housing. Right now, city land does not pull in any tax. Let's sell vacant lots, depending on size, for a steep discount for specific housing purpose. Single family homes, one minor price, multi family dwelling at a greater but discounted price. No break on taxes due to the steep discount on the lot.

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Tuesday 27th of April 2010 07:04:03 AM

Sigma · Veteran Member

I was looking at Sue Evan's website today. I don't know much about her as a candidate or as a person so I appreicate the effort she has gone through to make herself accessible through the Internet. I clicked on the "Issues" page wanting to learn more about the platforms and issues that are important to this particular candidate. After all, a solid knowledge of what is important to a candidate provides an indication of what kind of elected official that person will be.

Three issues occupy the page. The first involves healthcare reform, the second is a .pdf regarding the Water's Edge project...then I found this. I read the article three times trying to figure out what issue posting this article is supposed to address. Perhaps Ms. Evans is adding a suicide prevention plank to her campaign. But I suspect this is not the case. I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, that this candidate is attempting to draw attention to the suicide as a way of implying fiduciary mismanagement of the ND pension fund by Steven Cochrane. At least, that's how I see it. I'm hoping that Ms. Evans can provide a better explanation as to why this man's tragic suicide is a political issue worthy of a spot on her "Issues" page. Surely it can't be the customary audit that occurs when at a change in top management. Surely it can't be the fact that Steve Cochrane was in charge of a large pension fund, because that would imply that all suicides of top executives is related to personal or fiduciary mismanagement, and that gets a bit too close to libel for my taste.

I eagerly await a response.

I'll move from addressing the candidate to the person now. Sue, that is a nice write up in the paper,.

-- Edited by Sigma on Friday 23rd of April 2010 04:05:03 PM