Firefighters? Anyone?

[rapunzel]

Over the weekend, a ton of mustard yellow signs popped up around the area. All say "firefighters support....". They've endorsed candidates in every race. I hate name recognition politics, and would love to hear from a firefighter or two about why they endorsed each candate they are supporting.

Sign clutter. :bang:

[Smiling JOe]

Do you not like my signature lines? lol.

[BeachSiO2]

Is it the local firefighters union? I seem to remember them doing in the last round of elections also.

[jodiFL]

Hopefully they support this person enough to pick up all the signs after the election.:roll:

[sowalgayboi]

I hope they didn't use tax payer gas to put them up.

[enfuego]

It is my understanding they are required to pick them up and they are not placing the signes while on duty. Off duty only.

[scooterbug44]

I don't understand WHY the firefighter's union is endorsing candidates.

Are there people running on a fire suppression/forest management platform or other fire related topics I am unaware of? :idontno:

[enfuego]

Why should they not. I respectfully think that they are concerned about the political landscape just as much as anybody in SOWAL. I would speculate they they are extremely interested in the WCSO race as the Sheriff would be shoulder to shoulder with their boss during a time of crisis like hurricanes. I would also think they are extrememly interested in those positions on the BCC that represent the citizens of South Walton as they are responsible for their (citizens) safety.

[scooterbug44]

That makes much more sense - I haven't seen the signs, so in my head I was wondering why they were weighing in on something like the school board race. :blush:

[rapunzel]

I totally support their decision to endorse candidates, I just wish they'd have an editorial in the paper or a post on a website explaining WHY the are endorsing a candidate, rather than just throw up signs. It is my inclination to give some weight to the firefighters' recommendations, but I want to hear a reason for the endorsement, not just a bunch of signs.


And SJ, I have seen your reasoning for your support on this board...so I like your signature line. I'm also kinda surprised how many choices we have in common! :floor:

[scooterbug44]

Ditto - 'Firefighters support candidate "x" because they can be depended on in an emergency' carries much more weight IMO.

I am SO sick of all the campaign signs - so much visual litter, especially the folks who post them in clumps so they have multiple signs within 10-15' of each other or at pretty vistas over the coastal dune lakes! :angry:

[enfuego]

I Googled and found the following website. I am looking for a contact number

www.local3516.com

[John R]

Some of those yellow signs were illegally placed. They are since gone. It seems that the sign posse is in high gear. Many of the sheriff's candidates signs are illegally placed also.

[Smiling JOe]

I have yet to see 100% of any candidate's signs legally placed. Sometimes, I wish the big mowers would put a cowgate on the front and run them over.

[scooterbug44]

I had a lovely fantasy of closely placed campaign signs going "whumpity, whumpity" 'neath my tires/bumper.

They're lucky I love my car/don't have a cattle catcher! :biggrin:

[ShallowsNole]

I had a lovely fantasy of closely placed campaign signs going "whumpity, whumpity" 'neath my tires/bumper.

They're lucky I love my car/don't have a cattle catcher! :biggrin:

Yeah, I was about to mention that the little wire spikes they put in the ground are sharper than they appear to be. Might not be good for the bug's tires. ;-)

[brother bombero]

Hey Enfuego,
I checked out the website you found & found some general reasons why the firefighters are involved in politics. Seems there is a method to their madness.

[SoWalProfire]

Why do firefighters get involved in Local, State, and National Politics? You may know that during an election year/political campaign, candidates will attempt to form an inside connection with voters/voting groups, and tell the voters what they want to hear. For obvious reasons, this rhetoric cannot be trusted as fact to determine which candidate to endorsement unless the candidate has done in the past what he or she is promising to do if elected. As a Firefighter Association, our support and endorsement must reflect the candidate’s past voting record regarding issues that affect firefighters and the communities we serve; for example: safety, training, resource management and allocation, and a proven commitment to help us better serve our citizens. As firefighters, we chose this profession because inside each of us resides a passion to help people. To that end, we are dedicated to the safety and constant improvement of our community, our service, and ourselves. Furthermore, we attempt to align ourselves with candidates who share our passion, not just in verse, but also in deed. We endorse candidates who have proven this by their actions and not simply voiced it when asking for our vote or endorsement. We truly connect with you, the voters, because you are the same citizens we serve. We feel that a big part of doing the best job we can for you is to help you find elected officials who do the best job possible managing the resources that you provide for our services. This helps us maintain safer communities for you.


Our National Politics:
The International Association of Fire Fighters endorses political candidates based on the candidate's past voting record of support regarding issues that affect firefighters and the communities they serve. This support includes sponsoring/supporting legislation to improve the safety, well being, and improvement of the American/Canadian firefighter.


Our State Politics:
The Florida Professional Firefighters endorse political candidates based on the candidate's past voting record of support regarding issues that affect firefighters and the community they serve. This support includes sponsoring/supporting legislation to improve the safety, well being, and improvement of firefighters throughout Florida.


Our Local Politics:
The South Walton Professional Firefighters Association is comprised of highly trained professional firefighters, EMTs, Paramedics, Rescue Technicians, and Dispatchers. We are the men and women who arrive in fire trucks and ambulances and help you resolve your emergencies. Who in our community knows more about what is needed to provide a prompt, competent, and caring response in your time of need than the very firefighters, emergency medical personnel, and dispatchers who respond and mitigate your emergencies? Our local politics follow a similar paradigm in that we endorse candidates who have proven their support of these ideals throughout their term, and not just talked about it during their campaign.

Thank you for your interest in this important subject.

As for the signs; We are actively seeking more efficient (and more beautiful) means of participating in candidate support. Ideas are welcome.

South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc.

[Alan Osborne]

Just so everone one knows the truth, I recieved a question list from the firefighters UNION. I contacted their secretary (Coy Surprise) twice by phone and told him I had numerous questions in order to respond to the firefighters. I voiced my concern that the questions seemed to be written by a union attorney and told them I would not take a position on several of the subjects unless I was presented the facts and documents referred to in the questions. Coy called me back and said the president would get back with me and I said great! I suggested we have a forum for the candidates to attend a firefighters meeting and answer the questions in person. I even said I would be willing to do two sessions so the people who had duty the first session would have a fair shot to evaluate their next commissioner. This was met with silence. As someone who stood duty as a public servant for over 22 years I FULLY understand and RESPECT the need for these extremely important parts of our emergency personnel team. People forget our Emergency Personnel until they are laying in the highway or their house is on fire. I was a person who did respond to 9-11 and I WENT to the Pentagon and NYC. I respect your groups right to support any cadidate, I just wish I would have got a fair shot. To the President of the Association - I'm still waiting for your call and would like to know myself how ALL the firefighters came to the decision or did the union just get the response it was looking for. To the rest of the firefighters and emergency personnel, I still believe you are one of the most vital parts of local goverment and know you are standing duty ready to respond should any citizen need you. No matter if I have your vote or not, you have my respect and I pay those special taxes happily knowing you stand at the ready. My door will always be open to you. God Bless the family of the Okaloosa deputy who lost his life tonight. You, like the soldiers overseas, will always be in my prayers.

Alan Osborne

[graytonbeachguy]

Osbourne, sounds like you wanted to dictate the terms on which you would speak to a vitally important constituency in this county. I have observed you at County Commission meetings and find this to be par for the course. You demand to have the questions framed in a method that will justify your answer. If the questioner refuses to comply, you simply attack the questioner. As everyone knows, these ad hominem attacks are one of the basic fallacies of logic.

Your confrontational manner and inflexibility in your position indicates unfitness for office. A true representative of the people listens to all viewpoints, with sincerity and an open mind. You seem to have your mind made up and simply demand that others agree.

Indeed, firefighters and EMTs place the safety of others above that of their own. Just answer their questions without suggesting that a lawyer wrote them. Are you so afraid of the questions that you need to attack those who asked them?

Oh, and before you attack me as being a firefighter who is simply protecting the South Walton County firefighters, I have no connection with the organization. Taking away this personal attack on my comments, do you know how to craft a cogent response?

[graytonbeachguy]

Your reference to September 11th and the officer who gave his life today in service of the citizens of Okaloosa County is a cheap exploitation of two very tragic events.

Shame on you!

[Alan Osborne]

Bottom line is this, We still don't know what criteria was used for the endorsement!

My response was sincere, If you believe it or not is up to you.

[rapunzel]

Thank you for your interest in this important subject.

As for the signs; We are actively seeking more efficient (and more beautiful) means of participating in candidate support. Ideas are welcome.

South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc.

Here's an idea: Post the reasoning behind your support. Issue a press release with you reasons for support of certain candidates. I don't have any problem with the firefighters endorsing candidates, my problem is the lack of a stated reason. Your group has a website, and it would be easy to post a statement about the candidates you have decided to support, and give examples of the voting records that lead you to believe they'd act in a way that would benefit firefighters.

I think it's fabulous that firefighters care enough to devote time and money to endorsing candidates in a local election. I would just give the endorsements more weight if I could understand the reasoning behind the support.

[Johnny Post]

Bottom line is this, We still don't know what criteria was used for the endorsement!

Very good point. An endorsement that is not based on a candidate forum, i.e. Emerald Coast Association of Realtors, or some other criteria the public can examine is always questionable.

Also, anyone involved with South Walton Fire District out there? If so, was this an issue that SWFD was involved with?

On a somewhat related note, I keep hearing that some candidates are being approached by (or possibly approaching) SWFD to strike a deal for support for the district, in exchange for supporting that candidate. This is rather concerning, as it certainly stinks of the good ole boy politics so many on here complain about.

[brother bombero]

Alan Osborne, I've been sitting back and trying to take of this in. To reference your last post, I think the criteria used for their endorsement is stated clearly in the really long post above by SoWalProFire. And I'm with graytonbeachguy on this one. You have a reputation of being a controlling, close-minded hot head. This is Walton County Government, not the US Military. Your rank has no bearing here. Stand down from red alert. I am so sick and tired of people losing ground or basis in their argument, then breaking the "emergency glass" and using the "9-11" card to give their argument some credibility. That card is way over played, and frankly I find it disrespectful. If you want to show honor to those who died, how about a little respect. Do they still teach that in the military? I would think that as a political candidate, you would do your best to make friends and rally support, not make enemies and burn bridges. Did you ever think that your reputation had preceded you, and that is why they aren't responding?

[rapunzel]

Osbourne, sounds like you wanted to dictate the terms on which you would speak to a vitally important constituency in this county. I have observed you at County Commission meetings and find this to be par for the course. You demand to have the questions framed in a method that will justify your answer. If the questioner refuses to comply, you simply attack the questioner. As everyone knows, these ad hominem attacks are one of the basic fallacies of logic.



That's a pretty nasty line of attack, and I'm not sure that I agree that strongly advocating for fair/neutral wording, or requesting to be provided relevant factual materials to evaluate a problem is a cop out. I think it indicates a good bit of intellect and an understanding of how to avoid being manipulated by special interests.

I would love to see the questions the Firefighters' union sent out, so we could see for ourselves the criteria upon which the firefighters based their decision.

[BeachSiO2]

This is a very intriguing discussion. I think Punzy has hit the nail on the head with this one. It is great that groups are learning more about the candidates. I just think they could be even more persuasive (read powerful) by showing how they came to their conclusions, what questions were asked, what the responses were, etc.

I wonder if one of the questions were in relation to the current federal legislation that has been introduced in Congress in regards to collective bargaining? I would be very interested in some of the answers to that one.

[rapunzel]

Alan Osborne, I've been sitting back and trying to take of this in. To reference your last post, I think the criteria used for their endorsement is stated clearly in the really long post above by SoWalProFire. And I'm with graytonbeachguy on this one. You have a reputation of being a controlling, close-minded hot head. This is Walton County Government, not the US Military. Your rank has no bearing here. Stand down from red alert. I am so sick and tired of people losing ground or basis in their argument, then breaking the "emergency glass" and using the "9-11" card to give their argument some credibility. That card is way over played, and frankly I find it disrespectful. If you want to show honor to those who died, how about a little respect. Do they still teach that in the military? I would think that as a political candidate, you would do your best to make friends and rally support, not make enemies and burn bridges. Did you ever think that your reputation had preceded you, and that is why they aren't responding?

Why is this getting so heated? What are the rest of us missing?

As you can see from my signature line, I have decided to support Mr. Osborne. When I first asked the question about the criteria, I was merely leaning Osborne. When I saw that the firefighters had endorsed Mr. Braunstein, I was a bit surprised and wanted to know more about why they'd chosen to support him. In my mind, firefighters carry a lot of weight and I wanted to reevaluate Mr. Braunstein before I made a final decision.

Instead of a positive review of Mr. Braunstein's candidacy, or a new awareness of issues I had not yet considered (all these empty and abandoned houses in SoWal seem like a dangerous hazard, does one candidate have a plan to deal with them?), this thread has degenerated into an attack on Mr. Osbourne. That's terribly unfortunate if our goal is an informed voter.

We all know Mr. Osborne doesn't 'play ball' (it's why many of us do support him) -- but in a field of five candidates, attacking one person does nothing to help your chosen candidate.

[scooterbug44]

Osborne wanted to answer your questions and offered to do so in multiple public forums so all could attend - he just had some clarifications due to the phrasing that didn't seem to come from Joe Q. Firefighter.

Then he mentions how much he supports you and how he has personally been involved in emergency responses ............and all of a sudden he was under attack. My "something else is going on " radar sure pinged on that one! :idontno:

[SoWalProfire]

Bottom line is this, We still don't know what criteria was used for the endorsement!


Mr. Osborne, Every candidate who responded to our questionnaire by answering the questions on it and submitting their responses to our organization, was invited to our regular monthly meeting in June. During this meeting the members of our organization asked their own candid questions of each of the candidates. After all the candidates had their turn in the hot seat (so to speak), the membership held a vote. This is how we determined which candidates to support.

Each of these candidates received the same questionnaire you received. Each of these candidates did their own research and answered the questions to the best of their ability. This is how we have always done it. It would not be fair to provide "questionnaire aid" to any individual candidate. If the candidate does not answer the questions as written, then the candidate does not get invited to the meeting of the membership. We have never changed our process to bend to the will of any individual candidate.

Much like the constituency of Walton County District 5, we believe that our elected officials are in office to serve our needs, not vise-versa. Our agenda is a simple one, support the campaign of those who will support us. When a candidate suggests to us that he or she knows better what questions we should be asking and how those questions should be worded, it seems a lot like the tail trying to wag the dog.

My personal hope is that if you are elected, you will let your constituency determine what actions you take as a commissioner and not vise-versa.

You suggest that our process is not fair. I suggest this to you: It was not us who did not give you a fair chance for our support. It was you who denied yourself this opportunity.

A lawyer did not write our questionnaire. It was written by firefighters, who are more intelligent than some people give them credit for.

[Alan Osborne]

I appreciate your response. Just so you know, I was never invited and other than my conversation with coy, received no phone calls about this meeting from anyone. What candidates were there? I have attended everything I have been invited to or gave a response if I had a prior commitment. I would have like to have addressed the group myself and had a turn in the Hot Seat so to speak. Thats all I'm saying and I'll leave it at that. It has been very frustrating to find out about events after the fact. I don't blame you but I want you to know that I very much wanted to particpate. I do things for what I believe are the right reasons and it's everyone's right to disagree if they want. I have not tried to cut a deal with any group, I just wanted to make myself available. If people attack me for that then so be it. I did make the effort is all I'm saying.
Alan

[SoWalProfire]

Very good point. An endorsement that is not based on a candidate forum, i.e. Emerald Coast Association of Realtors, or some other criteria the public can examine is always questionable.

Also, anyone involved with South Walton Fire District out there? If so, was this an issue that SWFD was involved with?

On a somewhat related note, I keep hearing that some candidates are being approached by (or possibly approaching) SWFD to strike a deal for support for the district, in exchange for supporting that candidate. This is rather concerning, as it certainly stinks of the good ole boy politics so many on here complain about.

To my knowledge, SWFD is not nor will it be "involved" in any political action. This is so because of the Hatch Act. SWFD is funded by ad valorem tax dollars.

South Walton Professional Firefighters Association is the labor organization whose members are the men and women on the ambulances and fire trucks and are employed by SWFD. These two organizations are mutually exclusive. South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc. and their and interests are funded solely by membership dues and participation.

South Walton Fire District cannot legally "strike a deal" in support or opposition of any candidate. This would be in violation of the Hatch Act.

[scooterbug44]

What are the specific issues the local firefighters are looking for when endorsing candidates? Wages, health care, work conditions, management etc.

[SoWalProfire]

I appreciate your response. Just so you know, I was never invited and other than my conversation with coy, received no phone calls about this meeting from anyone. What candidates were there? I have attended everything I have been invited to or gave a response if I had a prior commitment. I would have like to have addressed the group myself and had a turn in the Hot Seat so to speak. Thats all I'm saying and I'll leave it at that. It has been very frustrating to find out about events after the fact. I don't blame you but I want you to know that I very much wanted to particpate. I do things for what I believe are the right reasons and it's everyone's right to disagree if they want. I have not tried to cut a deal with any group, I just wanted to make myself available. If people attack me for that then so be it. I did make the effort is all I'm saying.
Alan

Again;

Each of these candidates received the same questionnaire you received. Each of these candidates did their own research and answered the questions to the best of their ability. This is how we have always done it. It would not be fair to provide "questionnaire aid" to any individual candidate. If the candidate does not answer the questions as written, then the candidate does not get invited to the meeting of the membership. We have never changed our process to bend to the will of any individual candidate.

[scooterbug44]

While I'm all for rules and regulations in local politics, asking for more info or a clarification on a question shouldn't disqualify a person from participating in a public candidate's forum. Little draconian IMO.

[BeachSiO2]

SWProfire:

As I mentioned above, it might be even more powerful for your organization and helpful to others if you were willing to share reasons why your group voted to support the candidates you are. I realize it was based on a questionnaire and some additional live questions. Could you at least share with us the questionnaire and candidate's responses from those who did respond?

[SoWalProfire]

While I'm all for rules and regulations in local politics, asking for more info or a clarification on a question shouldn't disqualify a person from participating in a public candidate's forum. Little draconian IMO.

Again;

Each of these candidates did their own research and answered the questions to the best of their ability. This is how we have always done it. It would not be fair to provide "questionnaire aid" to any individual candidate.

Asking for clarification did not disqualify a person for participating. Not submitting the completed questionnaire did. This was not a "public candidate's forum”. Our meetings are not public. One must be a member or be invited. To be invited this particular meeting one must first complete the questionnaire and submit it. Every other candidate did this.

Anyway, it seems as if I find myself in the position of having to justify our methods to those who are only really interested in finding a way to sully our name and diminish the impact of our support of any candidate other than the one you are backing.

My guess is that if Sid Braunstein had not answered the questionnaire and subsequently had not been invited to our meeting, you would support everything I have entered into this forum.

If you have read my first post to this forum, then you know why firefighters are involved in political action. I think these facts are also supported and evidenced by our involvement in our communities in other ways. Every year, on our own time, and with our own funds we support our community by hosting a variety of events such as our annual charity golf tournament, the haunted woods at Halloween, the angel tree at Christmas, delivering thanksgiving dinner to local indigent families, delivering gifts to indigent kids at Christmas, the annual shop with a firefighter event, charity car washes, not to mention the thousands of dollars given by our organization to local burn victims and families affected by fires. We also raise money annually for MDA and St. Jude Children’s Hospital. We do these things to give back to our communities in return for them allowing us to be a part of this great profession and for allowing us to serve the community we love. We take a great deal of pride in caring for the people we serve. Our genuine hope is that this shows at every opportunity we are given to help someone in need.

Of coarse we are also concerned about our working conditions, pay and benefits, but please keep in mind there are many other professions that provide more pay and benefits than the one we chose. Few firefighters chose this profession for the money. We do it because we love to help people. Any candidate willing to prove their support of this ideal will have our support.

I will spend no more time justifying our political actions.

Again, thank you for your interest in this important subject.

[scooterbug44]

I certainly know that the SWFD are a community asset and also do a great deal of additional service to the community, that's why I want to know the issues that are important to them.

If I don't know what you consider to be the important issues or what our local firefighters want/need I can't help them get it, or use it as a criteria for figuring out who to vote for.

[SoWalProfire]

I certainly know that the SWFD are a community asset and also do a great deal of additional service to the community, that's why I want to know the issues that are important to them.

If I don't know what you consider to be the important issues or what our local firefighters want/need I can't help them get it, or use it as a criteria for figuring out who to vote for.

Our issues:
Knowledge of our District and the fire service in general.

Knowledge of established standards relating to adequate fire department staffing levels.

Candidates view on the need for safe and up to date life saving apparatus and equipment.

Candidate view on improvements needed in the local fire service.

Candidates view on fire district funding.

Candidates view on the local impact of service consolidation.

Candidates view on firefighters right to be actively involved in political action while off duty.

Candidates views on firefighters right to due process and to bargain in good faith for Fair and competitive working conditions, wages and benefits for firefighters.

[Smiling JOe]

Our local politics follow a similar paradigm in that we endorse candidates who have proven their support of these ideals throughout their term, and not just talked about it during their campaign.

I see that the firefighter's union for Okaloosa and Walton County have contributed to a particular County Commissioner Candidate, who has never proven his support in the way which you state qualifies him as your choice. Care to explain that? For all of the new candidates running, how could they prove their support in the past, if they weren't in power to make the decisions?

[Zebraspots]

Our issues:
Candidates view on firefighters right to be actively involved in political action while off duty.

Candidates views on firefighters right to due process and to bargain in good faith for Fair and competitive working conditions, wages and benefits for firefighters.

What kind of political action? Isn't the fire department/district non-partisan?

Isn't due process guaranteed by law? Is the SWFD a closed shop? Are they allowed to strike as part of the bargaining process?

[Smiling JOe]

Osbourne, sounds like you wanted to dictate the terms on which you would speak to a vitally important constituency in this county. I have observed you at County Commission meetings and find this to be par for the course. You demand to have the questions framed in a method that will justify your answer. If the questioner refuses to comply, you simply attack the questioner. As everyone knows, these ad hominem attacks are one of the basic fallacies of logic....

Excuse me, but to not understand that there is an extreme difference between the FireFighters' UNION, and the firefighters, is a big over site.

I've attended most of the BCC meetings when Alan Osborne spoke on behalf of 170 homeowners and their families. I can somewhat see how you might perceive Alan's position the way you do, but from my point of view, Alan has stuck to the facts, and it was the BCC and their Interim Attorney who were making him, jump through hoops, so that they could avoid the real question. Perhaps the UNION for the Firefighters have a similar attorney who tries to word the questions in such a way that they cannot be completely answered without candidate knowing more information. I haven't seen the questions, but I recall word problem math tests in elementary school, where the correct answer was: "not enough information given to know the answer."

[Smiling JOe]

SWProfire:

As I mentioned above, it might be even more powerful for your organization and helpful to others if you were willing to share reasons why your group voted to support the candidates you are. I realize it was based on a questionnaire and some additional live questions. Could you at least share with us the questionnaire and candidate's responses from those who did respond?

Our issues:
Knowledge of our District and the fire service in general.

Knowledge of established standards relating to adequate fire department staffing levels.

Candidates view on the need for safe and up to date life saving apparatus and equipment.

Candidate view on improvements needed in the local fire service.

Candidates view on fire district funding.

Candidates view on the local impact of service consolidation.

Candidates view on firefighters right to be actively involved in political action while off duty.

Candidates views on firefighters right to due process and to bargain in good faith for Fair and competitive working conditions, wages and benefits for firefighters.
Were these the "questions" asked, or are these just items of interest?
Anyone can have views on those subjects, and the subjects are very broad, yet, a candidate's responses have nothing to do with that which you state in a previous post, that your decision to support a candidate is based on proving himself in the past.

I'd like you to post the actual questions. By refusing to do so, you are ripping the credibility sheet from under your feet.

I'm beginning to wonder if the Fire District Board members have something to do with the UNION's decision to back particular candidates.

Our local politics follow a similar paradigm in that we endorse candidates who have proven their support of these ideals throughout their term, and not just talked about it during their campaign.

I guess I am even confused as to why the questions would be asked to any new candidates running, who had not previously held office, since your Union "endorse(s) candidates who have proven their support of these ideals throughout their term, and not just talked about it during their campaign."

[BeachSiO2]

What kind of political action? Isn't the fire department/district non-partisan?

Isn't due process guaranteed by law? Is the SWFD a closed shop? Are they allowed to strike as part of the bargaining process?

From where I am standing, it looks like the firefighters in question are not supporting candidates as part of the SWFD. They are supporting the candidates as part of the local firefighters union, no different that any other union and more power to them.

As for your second question, it has not been played up in Sowal as it has in other localities, but there is currently legislation regarding collective bargaining and unions for fire and police that have been introduced in Congress. Let me repost the local union link and I would recommend you looking at the bottom of the page from the firefighters point of view. http://www.local3516.com/

As you can imagine, there are many local governments that are actively fighting against some of the legislation for a variety of reasons, including costs. I have heard about it in a couple of other states where I currently work. It's not a simple cut and dried issue, and I don't claim to know the facts. What I do know is that it is much bigger than it seems on the surface and local governments in Tennessee and North Carolina use the word "bankruptcy" and "huge tax increase" when they discuss it. I am not surprised that it would be part of the process the local union is using for their decision making.

[SoWalProfire]

Excuse me, but to not understand that there is an extreme difference between the FireFighters' UNION, and the firefighters, is a big over site.

Of the 86 firefighters eligible by law to be in our labor organization, 85 are.

So, contrary to your statement, there is not an extreme difference between the firefighters union and the firefighters. You can spin it anyway you like.

We are not a closed shop. Every member has the right to join or not join. All but one are members. This is because being a member gives them even more opportunity to actively help this community.

[thisnthat]

What kind of political action? Isn't the fire department/district non-partisan?

Isn't due process guaranteed by law? Is the SWFD a closed shop? Are they allowed to strike as part of the bargaining process?

I do believe that the fire district and the firefighter's union are two separate entities. From what I have seen in the past, people think they are one and the same. As stated in a past posting, the firefighter's union is funded by the membership. They can do what they feel like with their own money.

[Smiling JOe]

SoWalProFire, I guess you will next tell me that Teachers Unions are the same as teachers. Unions are after the things which benefits unions. Regardless of 85 of 86 firefighters joining the union because of peer pressure or promises for higher wages, the Union is not the same as the firefighters.

I am a Realtor, not part of a union, because I am self-employed. Every year, Florida Association of Realtors automatically includes a fee on the bill to pay for PACs (Political Action Committees). One has to deduct that fee if they don't want their money to go toward the PAC. To say that Realtors are the same as the Florida Association of Realtors is not similar to what you are saying about the firefighters and their Union, but it is far from the truth. More often than not, I disagree with the stance of the Florida Association of Realtors. I will add that the Emerald Coast Association of Realtors (ECAR) endorses candidates, and while I am a member of ECAR, I don't necessarily agree with their choice of candidates. I haven't seen their endorsements this year, and I was pleased to see that ECAR hosted a Meet the Candidates forum without endorsing any particular candidates.

Say what you want about unions working for their members, but unions work for the unions.

Now back to my question, which you chose to skip -- Why does your union send out questionaires to candidates who have no previous voting history, since your Union "endorse(s) candidates who have proven their support of these ideals throughout their term, and not just talked about it during their campaign?"

[SoWalProfire]

I guess I am even confused as to why the questions would be asked to any new candidates running, who had not previously held office, since your Union endorses candidates who have proven their support of these ideals throughout their term, and not just talked about it during their campaign."


Sorry for the confusion. :blink: I just assumed that it would be clear to you that candidates who do not currently hold office have not had the opportunity to "prove" their support by action. So we let them "prove" their support by answering and signing a questionnaire, which they submit back to us. This is important because this puts in writing for all to see, where they stand on our issues. If a candidate chooses not to answer the questionnaire, it simply means that he or she does not wish our support of his or her campaign.

We do not hold it against anyone who does not wish our support. We simply do not support them. Fair enough? Our signs don't say "you are wrong for not supporting our candidate". They state, rather simply, "Firefighters Support (candidate name) for (Office)". We fully support your right to vote for whom ever you choose.

This whole thing started with someone asking why firefighters support political candidates. I believe that question has been answered repeatedly. It is starting to feel like a bit of a witch hunt. So carry on if you like, but I am done here.

So, use your American right to vote for whom you chose and we firefighters will do the same thing, collectively based on our own values, ideals and beliefs.

[SoWalProfire]

SoWalProFire, I guess you will next tell me that Teachers Unions are the same as teachers. Unions are after the things which benefits unions. Regardless of 85 of 86 firefighters joining the union because of peer pressure or promises for higher wages, the Union is not the same as the firefighters.

I am a Realtor, not part of a union, because I am self-employed. Every year, Florida Association of Realtors automatically includes a fee on the bill to pay for PACs (Political Action Committees). One has to deduct that fee if they don't want their money to go toward the PAC. To say that Realtors are the same as the Florida Association of Realtors is not similar to what you are saying about the firefighters and their Union, but it is far from the truth. More often than not, I disagree with the stance of the Florida Association of Realtors. I will add that the Emerald Coast Association of Realtors (ECAR) endorses candidates, and while I am a member of ECAR, I don't necessarily agree with their choice of candidates. I haven't seen their endorsements this year, and I was pleased to see that ECAR hosted a Meet the Candidates forum without endorsing any particular candidates.

Say what you want about unions working for their members, but unions work for the unions.

Ok, it just became clear that you have no idea what you are talking about.:bang:

My firefighters union local is completely autonomous. We answer to no one but our own membership. Our Executive Board is made up of elected dues paying members who act at the direction of the rest of the dues paying membership within South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc. Period. When you say that unions work for the unions and not for the members, I wonder who you think the "unions" are.

Furthermore, if you doubt our commitment to the safety and well-being of the members of this community as being our top priority you need to do a lot more research. After having done so, if you have any self respect or decency, I doubt that you will come back and try to sully our name and astound us with your ignorance again.

[aleonard]

I haven't seen the signs. May I ask who the firefighters have chosen to support?

[scooterbug44]

Anyone who agrees with the union apparently! :roll:

[BeachSiO2]

I haven't seen the signs. May I ask who the firefighters have chosen to support?

Per Punzy...

http://sowal.com/bb/showpost.php?p=439368&postcount=28

[aleonard]

Per Punzy...

http://sowal.com/bb/showpost.php?p=439368&postcount=28

Thanks, Haiku Master:bow:

I had seen his name in the thread, but had a brain spasm, I guess:blink: I didn't realize it was a BCC endorsement only or if they endorsed candidates in other races as well.

[SoWalProfire]

I haven't seen the signs. May I ask who the firefighters have chosen to support?


Tom Cooper - Sherrif
Sid Braunstein - WCBCC District 5
Maurice Gilbert - SWFD Seat 1
Scott Thurston - SWFD Seat 3
Jon Kazek - SWFD Seat 5

[bent]

Ok, it just became clear that you have no idea what you are talking about.:bang:

My firefighters union local is completely autonomous. We answer to no one but our own membership. Our Executive Board is made up of elected dues paying members who act at the direction of the rest of the dues paying membership within South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc. Period. When you say that unions work for the unions and not for the members, I wonder who you think the "unions" are.

Furthermore, if you doubt our commitment to the safety and well-being of the members of this community as being our top priority you need to do a lot more research. After having done so, if you have any self respect or decency, I doubt that you will come back and try to sully our name and astound us with your ignorance again.

I appreciate you posting on this site.

I feel you are getting the wrong idea. This is a place for back and forth. No reason to get defensive. Just because someone questions you, it doesn't necessarily mean they aren't on your side, even if they aren't voting for the same candidate as yourself. Remain calm and respond reasonably with the facts and you will be fine. Saying things like, "that's all I have to say", or using terms like "wicthhunt" are defensive, reactionary, and over the top. They make you seem a bit unreasonable.

I see nothing wrong with your process. It sounds like one candidate didn't return the questionnaire (I bet he wishes he had) so he didn't get the invite. I'll bet there was some communication lacking by one or more parties, or miscommunication. Maybe egos came into play? I don't doubt that you have a fine organization and have the public's best interests at heart.

Believe me when I say this thread is helping me to decide whom to vote for. We might have common interests and goals. I certainly agree with your premise about elected officials serving the public instead of the other way around. Flexibility, compromise, and negotiation are not dirty words but rather necessary qualities for the BCC and you seem to understand that.

[The Watcher]

To all who have concerns:

SWFD is one of the best Fire Departments in the area, let alone the State. It is no surprise that certain candidates (via their supporters) are crying about the SWFD endorsing Tom Cooper for Sheriff instead of their candidate. Much of this is due to the vibe on the street that certain candidates do not have as much support as once thought. So, naturally, panic sets in...

First, SWFD Union is NO DIFFERENT than an independant voter, such as myself. I have not set forth my support to any one candidate, so maybe that's a difference... Either way, who the union endorses is their business. I am so sorry that a few candidates want to dispute the decision of these fine men and women. (I've always said, that I'd rather have to call the FD then the SO to help me. The FD has stopped to change my tire, SO drives on by...)

Candidates and supporters of the candidates - get over it. SWFD has placed its support with Tom Cooper. You can complain about the signs and that you don't like the color, etc, etc, etc. You sound silly and you make your candidate look bad as you focus on appearance instead of context. Why don't you focus your attention on the Bay County Fire Department, maybe they can endorse someone... That wouldn't matter much would it?

Relationships, like that of SWFD and local businesses, neighborhoods and resorts do not happen overnight, they are built. They don't pass around $500 checks and gain support with the stroke of a pen and an open ended promise of "favors". They are cultivated, earned and then respected. This is based on years of PARTNERSHIPS. Those partnerships, in turn, mean support and in this case an endorsement.

Please stop questioning the reasons behind the SWFD's endorsement of Tom Cooper. They must feel he is the best man for the job. Move on and find someother reason to complain.

w

[SoWalProfire]

I appreciate you posting on this site.

I feel you are getting the wrong idea. This is a place for back and forth. No reason to get defensive. Just because someone questions you, it doesn't necessarily mean they aren't on your side, even if they aren't voting for the same candidate as yourself. Remain calm and respond reasonably with the facts and you will be fine. Saying things like, "that's all I have to say", or using terms like "wicthhunt" are defensive, reactionary, and over the top. They make you seem a bit unreasonable.

I see nothing wrong with your process. It sounds like one candidate didn't return the questionnaire (I bet he wishes he had) so he didn't get the invite. I'll bet there was some communication lacking by one or more parties, or miscommunication. Maybe egos came into play? I don't doubt that you have a fine organization and have the public's best interests at heart.

Believe me when I say this thread is helping me to decide whom to vote for. We might have common interests and goals. I certainly agree with your premise about elected officials serving the public instead of the other way around. Flexibility, compromise, and negotiation are not dirty words but rather necessary qualities for the BCC and you seem to understand that.

Sorry for the “defensiveness”.

When someone starts spouting pure uneducated, ignorant, and inflammatory rhetoric as fact in an apparent attempt to somehow damage the credibility of a group of people that I personally know to be decent, community minded and selfless, I gotta tell ya, it really gets my goat. I get a little angry when someone tries to pass themselves off as the local expert on our firefighters union because they caught a showing of “Hoffa” on TBS.

If one has an opinion contrary to mine, wonderful. It would be a pretty boring planet if everyone were just like me. However, stating something as fact which is obviously your opinion is intentionally inflammatory and is also obviously intended to make someone believe something which you do not know to be true or possibly make someone believe something that you know is untrue. And I take issue with that.

However, I will try to play nice from now on. Thank you.

[SoWalProfire]

Watcher,

Thank you for your post.

I would like to point out though, SWFD is South Walton Fire District. Nothing I have written herein is on behalf of this governmental entity.

I am the President of South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc. Our organization (though all of our members are employed by SWFD) is independent of SWFD and does not represent in any way the management or elected officials of SWFD.

Thanks again for your support of our rights.

[The Watcher]

I appreciate you posting on this site.

I feel you are getting the wrong idea. This is a place for back and forth. No reason to get defensive. Just because someone questions you, it doesn't necessarily mean they aren't on your side, even if they aren't voting for the same candidate as yourself. Remain calm and respond reasonably with the facts and you will be fine. Saying things like, "that's all I have to say", or using terms like "wicthhunt" are defensive, reactionary, and over the top. They make you seem a bit unreasonable.

I see nothing wrong with your process. It sounds like one candidate didn't return the questionnaire (I bet he wishes he had) so he didn't get the invite. I'll bet there was some communication lacking by one or more parties, or miscommunication. Maybe egos came into play? I don't doubt that you have a fine organization and have the public's best interests at heart.

Believe me when I say this thread is helping me to decide whom to vote for. We might have common interests and goals. I certainly agree with your premise about elected officials serving the public instead of the other way around. Flexibility, compromise, and negotiation are not dirty words but rather necessary qualities for the BCC and you seem to understand that.

If one wants the endorsement or support of a Union, they go ASK for it. The Union does not go out looking, begging for someone to ask them to support them. If a candidate dropped the ball, which they did, then it is on them for their own poor planning, poor communication and poor follow up. Those traits sound like things a good Sheriff should possess. The milk has been spilled, no more crying please. Move along, nothing to see here.:cool:

[rapunzel]

To all who have concerns:

SWFD is one of the best Fire Departments in the area, let alone the State. It is no surprise that certain candidates (via their supporters) are crying about the SWFD endorsing Tom Cooper for Sheriff instead of their candidate. Much of this is due to the vibe on the street that certain candidates do not have as much support as once thought. So, naturally, panic sets in...

First, SWFD Union is NO DIFFERENT than an independant voter, such as myself. I have not set forth my support to any one candidate, so maybe that's a difference... Either way, who the union endorses is their business. I am so sorry that a few candidates want to dispute the decision of these fine men and women. (I've always said, that I'd rather have to call the FD then the SO to help me. The FD has stopped to change my tire, SO drives on by...)

Candidates and supporters of the candidates - get over it. SWFD has placed its support with Tom Cooper. You can complain about the signs and that you don't like the color, etc, etc, etc. You sound silly and you make your candidate look bad as you focus on appearance instead of context. Why don't you focus your attention on the Bay County Fire Department, maybe they can endorse someone... That wouldn't matter much would it?

Relationships, like that of SWFD and local businesses, neighborhoods and resorts do not happen overnight, they are built. They don't pass around $500 checks and gain support with the stroke of a pen and an open ended promise of "favors". They are cultivated, earned and then respected. This is based on years of PARTNERSHIPS. Those partnerships, in turn, mean support and in this case an endorsement.

Please stop questioning the reasons behind the SWFD's endorsement of Tom Cooper. They must feel he is the best man for the job. Move on and find someother reason to complain.

w

Sorry for the “defensiveness”.

When someone starts spouting pure uneducated, ignorant, and inflammatory rhetoric as fact in an apparent attempt to somehow damage the credibility of a group of people that I personally know to be decent, community minded and selfless, I gotta tell ya, it really gets my goat. I get a little angry when someone tries to pass themselves off as the local expert on our firefighters union because they caught a showing of “Hoffa” on TBS.

If one has an opinion contrary to mine, wonderful. It would be a pretty boring planet if everyone were just like me. However, stating something as fact which is obviously your opinion is intentionally inflammatory and is also obviously intended to make someone believe something which you do not know to be true or possibly make someone believe something that you know is untrue. And I take issue with that.

However, I will try to play nice from now on. Thank you.

:wave: Just wanted to point out that no one has yet explained a positive reason to vote for Mr. Braunstein or Mr. Cooper.

Firefighters support simply isn't enough to sway me, as I am not a firefighter. I might be swayed by a reason for support, but without specific reasons I consider the endorsement meaningless -- which disappoints me.

[The Watcher]

Watcher,

Thank you for your post.

I would like to point out though, SWFD is South Walton Fire District. Nothing I have written herein is on behalf of this governmental entity.

I am the President of South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc. Our organization (though all of our members are employed by SWFD) is independent of SWFD and does not represent in any way the management or elected officials of SWFD.

Thanks again for your support of our rights.

My mistake (which I apologize for). Please refer to any of my references to SWFD to have been meant to be listed as SWPFA (Union).:blush:

[The Watcher]

:wave: Just wanted to point out that no one has yet explained a positive reason to vote for Mr. Braunstein or Mr. Cooper.

Firefighters support simply isn't enough to sway me, as I am not a firefighter. I might be swayed by a reason for support, but without specific reasons I consider the endorsement meaningless -- which disappoints me.

No one here needs to point out anything. There are dozens of other posts on SoWal, weighing the pros and cons of the candidates. This is about one Union and their right to endorse whomever they want. They do not answer to you or to me, they answer to themselves, thus the UNION. I am sorry that your candidate did not get this groups support, move along, nothing to see here.:bang:

[ShallowsNole]

So who exactly is crying over spilled milk because Tom got the endorsement of the firefighters? :idontno: Heck, I'd be shocked and surprised if he didn't.

[Geo]

No one here needs to point out anything. There are dozens of other posts on SoWal, weighing the pros and cons of the candidates. This is about one Union and their right to endorse whomever they want. They do not answer to you or to me, they answer to themselves, thus the UNION. I am sorry that your candidate did not get this groups support, move along, nothing to see here.:bang:

Watcher,

It says you've been a SoWal.com member for a year. If you have been a "watcher" of Punzy's posts all that time I doubt you would still be calling her negative. While she isn't shy about stating her opinion (thank goodness)- she is one of the most open to the opposing ones that I have seen on this board. She regularly seeks first to understand before being understood. She is about as close as one can be to fair and consistent, IMHO...

Anyway, I feel the need to stick up for her and for anyone else reading along on this thread who don't care to "move along" because we are interested to know why the union endorsed certain candidates. We see this as something of substance and I personally find it a bit odd that the question makes you defensive...

If you choose not to answer then don't. No worries. But hopefully someone else will- so stick around. There might still be something to see here...

:wave:

G

[Johnny Post]

To my knowledge, SWFD is not nor will it be "involved" in any political action. This is so because of the Hatch Act. SWFD is funded by ad valorem tax dollars.

South Walton Professional Firefighters Association is the labor organization whose members are the men and women on the ambulances and fire trucks and are employed by SWFD. These two organizations are mutually exclusive. South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc. and their and interests are funded solely by membership dues and participation.

South Walton Fire District cannot legally "strike a deal" in support or opposition of any candidate. This would be in violation of the Hatch Act.

This, along with other posts, tries to separate SWFD from these endorsements. If this is the case, then please tell us why Tom Cooper seems to think SWFD is the one endorsing him?

He even paid for the signs. http://www.voterfocus.com/ws/WScand/candidate_pr.php?op=rp&e=6&c=walton&ca=93&sdc=53&cname=Thomas%20M.%20'Tom'%20Cooper&coffice=Sheriff&rptdate=F1%20(4/1/2008%20-%207/18/2008)%20&rellevel=4&dhc=399&committee=N

See line 21 under expenditures, on 7/17/2008 - "SWFD Endorsement signs"

If political action is prohibited, it would seem Mr. Cooper may have a misunderstanding about who endorsed him, or SWFD may be more involved than is indicated.

[Yahoodie]

Did you send this questionaire to ALL the candidates?? including ALL the candidates for Sheriff??

[Yahoodie]

A question,
does Mr. Cooper. (who served on earlier SWFD boards) have his police standards up to date?

[Smiling JOe]

First, let me say that I fully support anyone's, and group's, and even any union's decision to vote and campaign for candidates. One of the issues of concern, per the firefighter's post, dealt with an individual's right to campaign as he or she sees fit. The law is the law, and the candidates running in this local election cannot change it, whether or not it is right or wrong. Personally, I have no concern in their choice to support one person over the other. I will add that I could care less which Sheriff candidate your union supports, unlike someone said.

Second, I stand by my statement that by belonging to an organization doesn't mean that one agrees with the group. My example of ECAR shows that. ECAR will endorse candidates, and I am a member of ECAR, but that doesn't mean that I support the same candidates.

Thirdly, your website details how the union determines which candidates you endorse, but that is obviously not correct, and that is why I posed the question, which remains unanswered. Holding a note card questionnaire with a candidate's responses, according to your website, is not how you determine your candidate of choice, yet it is how you say you determined the candidates whom you endorse. Select your choice as you see fit, but don't try to tell us one thing, while your website says something to the contrary.

Lastly, it is my understanding that you wouldn't allow Alan the follow-up questions to best answer your questionnaire. You may find that he would have been the most supportive of the emergency/rescue services, yet rather than give him the chance, you have chosen to support another candidate, who may not be as supportive. That seems rather crazy, IMO. On a similar note, do I correctly understand that you never even delivered a questionnaire to candidate Bob Hudson (BCC, District 5)? I understand that you had candidates sign for the questionnaires, and that would mean that if he signed, you have proof that he received the questions and was given the opportunity to reply. My information is second-hand, and may be incorrect. Will you please set that record straight?

[SoWalProfire]

We gave a questionnaire to every candidate who asked for our support.

[SoWalProfire]

A question,
does Mr. Cooper. (who served on earlier SWFD boards) have his police standards up to date?


Yes

[Smiling JOe]

Again;

Each of these candidates did their own research and answered the questions to the best of their ability. This is how we have always done it. It would not be fair to provide "questionnaire aid" to any individual candidate.

Asking for clarification did not disqualify a person for participating. Not submitting the completed questionnaire did. This was not a "public candidate's forum”. Our meetings are not public. One must be a member or be invited. To be invited this particular meeting one must first complete the questionnaire and submit it. Every other candidate did this....

We gave a questionnaire to every candidate who asked for our support.

This is confusing and sounds contradictory, but I'm not surprised given the other contradictions I've read.

[SoWalProfire]

First, let me say that I fully support anyone's, and group's, and even any union's decision to vote and campaign for candidates. One of the issues of concern, per the firefighter's post, dealt with an individual's right to campaign as he or she sees fit. The law is the law, and the candidates running in this local election cannot change it, whether or not it is right or wrong. Personally, I have no concern in their choice to support one person over the other. I will add that I could care less which Sheriff candidate your union supports, unlike someone said.

Second, I stand by my statement that by belonging to an organization doesn't mean that one agrees with the group. My example of ECAR shows that. ECAR will endorse candidates, and I am a member of ECAR, but that doesn't mean that I support the same candidates.

Thirdly, your website details how the union determines which candidates you endorse, but that is obviously not correct, and that is why I posed the question, which remains unanswered. Holding a note card questionnaire with a candidate's responses, according to your website, is not how you determine your candidate of choice, yet it is how you say you determined the candidates whom you endorse. Select your choice as you see fit, but don't try to tell us one thing, while your website says something to the contrary.

Lastly, it is my understanding that you wouldn't allow Alan the follow-up questions to best answer your questionnaire. You may find that he would have been the most supportive of the emergency/rescue services, yet rather than give him the chance, you have chosen to support another candidate, who may not be as supportive. That seems rather crazy, IMO. On a similar note, do I correctly understand that you never even delivered a questionnaire to candidate Bob Hudson (BCC, District 5)? I understand that you had candidates sign for the questionnaires, and that would mean that if he signed, you have proof that he received the questions and was given the opportunity to reply. My information is second-hand, and may be incorrect. Will you please set that record straight?

First - Thank you for supporting "even any union's" rights. (makes me wonder how you feel about ethnic groups)

Second - The difference between your groups and mine is that my "group" is called a "Union". The members of my group act as one (a unit, unified, together, Union) on any issue that you will ever be aware of. We thought so much of this ideal that we put it in our by-laws. We are more than just a business consort. We are not a social club. We are a brotherhood who trust each other with our lives. Our profession demands this. It's a firefighter thing. I don't expect you to understand.

Thirdly - I copied and pasted the text from our website to this board.

Lastly - (and I have answered this question at least once) We are not against Mr. Osborne. You may be entirely right. We may well have found that he would be more supportive of us. However, the reason he did not get our endorsement is that he would not complete the questionnaire as all the other candidates did without special treatment in the form us helping them answer the questions on our questionnaire. We have nothing against Mr. Osborne. If the majority of the voters put their faith in him, then he will have proven himself to be the best candidate for the position. Firefighters are Americans. We believe in the process.

And let's be clear. We are not hassling you about your choice. (I guess all the candidates you are backing completed your selection process to your satisfaction). So don't try to make our selection process seem invalid.

I am beginning to wonder what your real interest in this is. You seem awfully intent on diminishing any support for any candidate other than your own.

Do you own property in Driftwood Estates?

[seagrovegirl]

Sounds straight forward to me....I don't understand why you don't get it, SJ. What is confusing you?

Candidates that asked for support, were invited to the private forum, after completing and returning a questionaire. Those candidates were asked further questions at the forum by the union members. The union then decided on a candidate that would support them on issues that concern them. They were given a certificate of support from the union.

[rapunzel]

Despite implications to the contrary, I am not a Negative Nancy. I prefer to be known as Punzy Positive. I actually was hoping for some more information on what prompted the endorsement. Trust me, I didn't realize this was such a messy process. Bygones...

Anyone know which candidates the union has endorsed in the past? Do they have a history of endorsing quality candidates? Was I wrong to assume the endorsements would carry a lot of weight?

[rapunzel]

First - Thank you for supporting "even any union's" rights. (makes me wonder how you feel about ethnic groups)

Second - The difference between your groups and mine is that my "group" is called a "Union". The members of my group act as one (a unit, unified, together, Union) on any issue that you will ever be aware of. We thought so much of this ideal that we put it in our by-laws. We are more than just a business consort. We are not a social club. We are a brotherhood who trust each other with our lives. Our profession demands this. It's a firefighter thing. I don't expect you to understand.

Thirdly - I copied and pasted the text from our website to this board.

Lastly - (and I have answered this question at least once) We are not against Mr. Osborne. You may be entirely right. We may well have found that he would be more supportive of us. However, the reason he did not get our endorsement is that he would not complete the questionnaire as all the other candidates did without special treatment in the form us helping them answer the questions on our questionnaire. We have nothing against Mr. Osborne. If the majority of the voters put their faith in him, then he will have proven himself to be the best candidate for the position. Firefighters are Americans. We believe in the process.

And let's be clear. We are not hassling you about your choice. (I guess all the candidates you are backing completed your selection process to your satisfaction). So don't try to make our selection process seem invalid.

I am beginning to wonder what your real interest in this is. You seem awfully intent on diminishing any support for any candidate other than your own.

Do you own property in Driftwood Estates?

We all want the same thing.
1. An understanding of the issues you based your endorsement upon.
2. A statement regarding why you feel the candidates you endorsed would be the best people to represent your members and, one would hope, the people of Walton County.
That is all anyone ever asked for....

Unfortunately, I think this thread has raised a lot of questions rather than shed any light. I thank you for posting, but urge you to realize that the people posting are not attacking, but trying to redirect back to the two questions above. If the criteria the union uses to endorse is confidential and you do not wish to disclose it, then it might be better to just state that. I may have made up my mind regarding a candidate, but I assure you that a great many more have not, and this thread is an opportunity to reach them.

Just look at the number of views to get an idea how many are reading this, but not posting.

[scooterbug44]

I asked several times what the specific issues I should support for this election were and didn't ever get an answer so............ :wave:

Way to reach the undecided voters and make your voice heard!

[SoWalProfire]

Punzy Positive,

I don't think you have been negative at all. I rather enjoy most of your posts. But, I will have to respectfully dissagree that what I am about to post here is "all that anyone asked for".

Anyway, thanks for being you.

------------------------------------------------------
Why we endorse Sid Braunstien for Walton County Commissioner, District 5:
Mr. Braunstien was instrumental in working with former Fire Chief Les Hallman to maintain the Certificate of Need in South Walton Fire District. We believe he will continue to support the Fire District in keeping the CON in South Walton. Sid also has a history of positive community involvement. He has a sound knowledge of South Walton Fire District. He also understands how important minimum staffing issues are to a fire department as well as proper and updated equipment. Sid believes, as we do, that collective bargaining is necessary because the process demands that the parties justify what they are asking for. This prevents status quo increases in expenditures.


Why we endorse Tom Cooper for Walton County Sheriff:
The Firefighters support Mr. Cooper because of his exemplary record of serving South Walton Fire District as a fire commissioner for six years. This gave us the opportunity to get to know him well. He has not only stated his support of our issues, but has proven his support while in office. In his twenty years in law enforcement he has shown much dedication to the service of public servants as well as the citizens. All of this combined with Tom’s management performance and his experience in law enforcement make him the right man for this job.


Why we endorse Maurice Gilbert for South Walton Fire Commission, Seat 1:
Maurice Gilbert has served on the Fire Board for 12 years, currently as Chairman and has been instrumental in working with South Walton Professional Firefighters toward the common goal of improving service to our Citizens. He has a sound knowledge of South Walton Fire District. He also understands how important minimum staffing issues are to a fire department as well as proper and updated equipment. Maurice also believes that collective bargaining is necessary. He has maintained an outstanding record of care and responsibility for the Fire District as well as the community of South Walton.


Why we endorse Scott Thurston for South Walton Fire Commission, Seat 3:
Scott Thurston has invested in the community as a home and business owner of South Walton. Wanting to increase his involvement in the community, He has a sound knowledge of South Walton Fire District. He also understands how important minimum staffing issues are to a fire department as well as proper and updated equipment. Scott also believes that collective bargaining is necessary because the process demands that the parties justify what they are asking for. He too approached the firefighters in support of his goal to help improve the community of South Walton through participation as a SWFD fireboard member.


Why we endorse Jon Kazek for South Walton Fire Commission, Seat 5 :
Jon Kazek has invested in this community not only as a citizen, but a business owner. He has received an SWFD Life Saving Award, and has been a friend to our firefighters for quite some time. He has a sound knowledge of South Walton Fire District. He also understands how important minimum staffing issues are to a fire department as well as proper and updated equipment. Jon also believes that collective bargaining is necessary because the process demands that the parties justify what they are asking for. Jon approached the Firefighters because he wanted to more involvement in the community

[SoWalProfire]

To all posters in this thread,

No matter your viewpoint, I am glad that you all contribute. Without folks like you our community would suffer greatly. I am happy to be associated (in what ever small way) to each of you through this message board and in our community. Your passion is obvious and your determination impressive. Keep standing up for what you believe in. The courage to act upon your convictions is what separates the doers from the talkers.

Thanks for letting me be a part of this.

Mark Youngblood, President
South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc.

[Smiling JOe]

I am beginning to wonder what your real interest in this is. You seem awfully intent on diminishing any support for any candidate other than your own.

Do you own property in Driftwood Estates?

Other than trying to understand why you support who you choose to support, I have little interest. Where my interest lies is with my understanding that your union may have left out at least two of the best candidates from your process, based on the incorrect criteria found on your website. That criteria contradicts your justifications on this thread. You've posted it once, and I've questioned it twice, so I'll refrain from continuing to expect an answer which backs it up with the way in which you really choose your candidates of choice. Again, I question why a group of concerned people wouldn't want to include all of the possible candidates, so that they could have better knowledge of the best candidate to suit their purpose and agenda. I haven't bothered to look at your candidates of choice, but I did see the BCC Distr 5 choice of your union while looking through the contributions of each candidates. So, whom I support has nothing to do with my questioning.

No, I don't own property in Driftwood Estates, and have never owned, nor sold as a Realtor, property in Driftwood Estates. I have no personal, nor business connection with any of the candidates in the race. I've never even shared a cup of coffee with any of them. To correct your statement about me, I have defended candidates, other than my personal choice, right here on SoWal.com/bb, so I am not trying to suppress all candidates other than my choices. I have based my choices on listening to all of the candidates who have spoken, and on their bios which they have posted, as well as their responses given, and what I've actually seen in person at public gov't meetings.

Vote for whomever you choose as the best candidates, but I would encourage anyone to hear from ALL of the candidates before deciding on whom is the best choice.

[Smiling JOe]

Wow! Was it that difficult to communicate your reasons for supporting your choices? I feel like I just had my wisdom teeth yanked, for no reason. If you had posted that in your first post, we would have likely moved right along. Thanks for sharing.

[SoWalProfire]

Sorry SJ,

I got a little caught up in the whole "you treated Mr. Osborne unfairly" thing.

I'll try to keep a better eye on the ball next time.

[graytonbeachguy]

You use the pretense of "just trying to figure it all out" while you continue to argue that Ozbourn was somehow excluded. Just like your candidate, he didn't get the endorsement, so he attacked the organization.

If you REALLY want to "figure it out," here you go:

1. Call the firefighters association. Request a questionaire
2. Fill out the questionaire. Mail to the firefighters.
3. Wait for them to call you if they would like to hear more from you
based upon your answers to the questionaire.
4. Show up to the interview. Answer their questions honestly and
forthrightly.
5. Wait to be notified about how the firefighters voted.

It is a shame that you and Osborne have treated this as sour grapes. I suppose it is a testament to the importance of the endorsement of this group of public servants.

[Andy A.]

We gave a questionnaire to every candidate who asked for our support.
To be fair and honest, why should a candidate have to ask for your support in order for you to support them? It would appear to me you should send a questionaire to ALL candidates and then decide who was best suited to receive your support. Obviously, this is not how your union operates and that is easily understandable as ALL unions operate based on support of candidates they feel will be atune to what they wish be done in their interests. I don't expect unions to be fair in who they support but can only hope they will be honest in why they support them. I really don't expect that, either.

[SoWalProfire]

It would seem that "fair" and certainly "honest" couldn't be further from your mind Andy

Another fine example of partisan spin.

The rules are the same for everyone. And we won't go and ask a candidate to let us support him or her. If a candidate wants our support they will be treated the same way every other candidate who asks for our support will be treated.

I have made our interests clear. If you don't see how those interests are related to public welfare then I suggest you stop letting your own agenda blind you. You are obviously one of those people who believe that the word Union is derogatory. To be honest with you I use to be like that. However, after being in the Florida Fire Service for 17 years I have come to realize that Florida Firefighter Unions differ from Any other form of Union.

1. We don't strike. (even if it were legal)
2. We don't strong arm.
3. We are involved in our communities.
4. We know and like the people in our communities and they know and like us.
5. We lobby for laws that protect the public from the dangers of fire and medical emergencies. (with our own money)
6. We help people on and off duty every chance we get.
7. We believe that collective bargaining serves the public interest by requiring sound justification of our hours, wages and terms and conditions of employment Which we are required to research present and justify. This keeps cost low and service high by preventing status quo increases.

For you to imply that we are not fair or honest proves that you do not know us.

Prejudices never show much reason.

[Andy A.]

I had not seen the endorsment post prior to my post regarding the endorsements by the firefighter's union. Thank you for posting your reasons for support of the candidates. I do note that you feel all supported candidates will vigorously support your desired positions. That would be expected. It is, however, not necessarily a reason for any, other than your union members, to vote for them. I will base my vote on many criteria including your recommendations. I also note that you did not support any candidates other than Commissioner, Sheriff and Fire Commissioner. Do you have any recommendations for the other races? It would be interesting to see what they are.

[SoWalProfire]

Andy,

You will note that all this years official endorsements are for candidates who will have a direct impact on the citizens of South Walton.

[Andy A.]

I think it is more correct to state the candidates that will have a direct impact on the desires and wants of the Firefighters of South Walton County. Evidently your organization does not consider the races for the school superintendent and school board to be of direct impact on the citizens of South Walton County. I do.

[Smiling JOe]

Looking back through your endorsements, I didn't notice a FireFighters' Union endorsement for County Commissioner of District 3. Did I miss that one? Who's your choice?

[The Watcher]

So who exactly is crying over spilled milk because Tom got the endorsement of the firefighters? :idontno: Heck, I'd be shocked and surprised if he didn't.

As I understand it, a certain candidate or maybe two, have called the Union wanting to know/complaining, why they were not endorsed. I have only heard this so maybe it did or did not happen. Thus, the spilled milk.:cry:

[SoWalProfire]

I think it is more correct to state the candidates that will have a direct impact on the desires and wants of the Firefighters of South Walton County. Evidently your organization does not consider the races for the school superintendent and school board to be of direct impact on the citizens of South Walton County. I do.

Man, when you don't read things that please you here, you sure are fast to put words in someones mouth in order to support your partisan spin aren't you?

You work it man, (I'm sure no one will notice but me):blush:

Non of those folks asked for our endorsement.

[SoWalProfire]

SJ,

SWPFFA has not made a choice on that race.

[The Watcher]

I think it is more correct to state the candidates that will have a direct impact on the desires and wants of the Firefighters of South Walton County. Evidently your organization does not consider the races for the school superintendent and school board to be of direct impact on the citizens of South Walton County. I do.


For those of you wondering, this is what I was talking about in regards to spilled milk. It does not end.

'nuff said.

[SoWalProfire]

I think it is more correct to state the candidates that will have a direct impact on the desires and wants of the Firefighters of South Walton County. Evidently your organization does not consider the races for the school superintendent and school board to be of direct impact on the citizens of South Walton County. I do.


Strictly out of curiosity, (you killed any confidence i had in your objective credibility long ago) according to my posts so far, what do you see as the "wants and desires" of the Firefighters of South Walton County?

[Andy A.]

Man, when you don't read things that please you here, you sure are fast to put words in someones mouth in order to support your partisan spin aren't you?

You work it man, (I'm sure no one will notice but me):blush:

Non of those folks asked for our endorsement.
That is exactly my point when I said earlier that everyone should be provided a questionaire. I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth nor do I impart a partisan spin to any of your endorsements. You have only "picked" the people in races that have an implied impact on your organization's interests. IMO, your endorsements are worthless as they do not apply to all races. Tell us who you support for ALL local races, not just the ones regarding the Firefighter's union. IMO, you are very remiss in endorsing only a part of the local races. Sorry if that upsets you.

[SoWalProfire]

That is exactly my point when I said earlier that everyone should be provided a questionaire. I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth nor do I impart a partisan spin to any of your endorsements. You have only "picked" the people in races that have an implied impact on your organization's interests. IMO, your endorsements are worthless as they do not apply to all races. Tell us who you support for ALL local races, not just the ones regarding the Firefighter's union. IMO, you are very remiss in endorsing only a part of the local races. Sorry if that upsets you.

If you think I am upset you really don't know me. :funn:I am not. I think your candor is a bit humorous. :floor:

I am not here to tell you who I pick in any race. I have already told you who SWPFFA picked and the reasons why. I believe that is what this thread is about. Right??

My personal choices for any other race are frankly, none of your business.:D

[SoWalProfire]

Every incident that a firefighter responds to is complex but, our actions are based on two very simple and easy to understand mandates, and I list them here in order of priority:

1. Save your life.
2 Save your property.

We base our decision to endorse any candidate mostly on questions which, once answered, indicate the candidates commitment to helping us fulfill those mandates, whether the questions are answered by action (sitting elected official) or in writing (candidate questionnaire).

The questions center around some key points and though not worded exactly like this I think you will get the drift:

Are you willing to commit the resources to ensure that our staffing levels and equipment will allow us to do the best job that can be done for the citizens.

Are you willing to commit the resources necessary to ensure that we are not a training ground for firefighters to come and learn how to do their jobs correctly, then go to another Florida community in order to be fairly paid .

Do you support our RIGHT to be involved in politics OFF DUTY.

Where do you think our funding should come from.

This is the premise by which we make such decisions. We are not sorry if it displeases you. But we wish for your understanding because it is you we want to protect.

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to post this, Andy.

[idlewind]

If you think I am upset you really don't know me. :funn:I am not. I think your candor is a bit humorous. :floor:

I am not here to tell you who I pick in any race. I have already told you who SWPFFA picked and the reasons why. I believe that is what this thread is about. Right??

My personal choices for any other race are frankly, none of your business.:D


I want to let you know that one citizen (me):clap: appreciates your group, what you sacrifice to protect us and the courage it takes to speak out as a group on local issues.:clap:I may not agree with your stands (then again I may:yikes:) but I appreciate your viewpoint and perspective on how local races affect public employees and our fire protection. Frankly, whether you endorse a candidate in one race or every race is your business and your choice is your right.:bang: I also find that the attacks on your right to free speech distress me and cause me to more closely consider your positions than I might have because such attacks "burn me up.":pissed:Thanks for all that you do to protect me and my property, I for one appreciate it.:clap:

[Andy A.]

Every incident that a firefighter responds to is complex but, our actions are based on two very simple and easy to understand mandates, and I list them here in order of priority:

1. Save your life.
2 Save your property.

We base our decision to endorse any candidate mostly on questions which, once answered, indicate the candidates commitment to helping us fulfill those mandates, whether the questions are answered by action (sitting elected official) or in writing (candidate questionnaire).

The questions center around some key points and though not worded exactly like this I think you will get the drift:

Are you willing to commit the resources to ensure that our staffing levels and equipment will allow us to do the best job that can be done for the citizens.

Are you willing to commit the resources necessary to ensure that we are not a training ground for firefighters to come and learn how to do their jobs correctly, then go to another Florida community in order to be fairly paid .

Do you support our RIGHT to be involved in politics OFF DUTY.

Where do you think our funding should come from.

This is the premise by which we make such decisions. We are not sorry if it displeases you. But we wish for your understanding because it is you we want to protect.

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to post this, Andy.
Lets get one thing straight right now. I do not have a problem with your submitting a questionaire to candidaates, only with it not being submitted to all fairly and equally. Also, FYI, for 8 years, I helped put together regional EMS systems for the state of Oklahoma, so I am quite familar with the fact that you save lives and save property and I certainly commend you for it. I don't know where you got or perceived the idea I am attacking you. Nothing could be further from the truth! I am a Walton County citizen trying to understand why and how the local firefighter's endorsement for candidates of some very important elections was ascertained and whether it was applied equally to ALL candidates on just certain ones. If my requests, posts, or thoughts are out of line with your position, I'm sorry but so be it.

[SoWalProfire]

I don't expect unions to be fair in who they support but can only hope they will be honest in why they support them. I really don't expect that, either.

I think it is more correct to state the candidates that will have a direct impact on the desires and wants of the Firefighters of South Walton County. Evidently your organization does not consider the races for the school superintendent and school board to be of direct impact on the citizens of South Walton County. I do.

I don't know where you got or perceived the idea I am attacking you. Nothing could be further from the truth!...
If my requests, posts, or thoughts are out of line with your position, I'm sorry but so be it.

Your statements above are where I "got or perceived" that you were attacking me.

You imply that we are not fair. You imply that we are not honest. You imply that we are strictly self serving. You imply that we don't care about the citizens of our community by implying that we don't care about any races other than those in which we have backed a candidate.

If I am the only person here who feels that these remarks and implications are an attack or at the very least, inflammatory, then I apologize. However, I suspect that I am not alone and I find it in poor form for you to subsequently suggest that you were trying to be cordial.

If that is the case then I am no more guilty of "simply stating my opinion" than you.

[Andy A.]

I would say your use of the word "imply" is not necessarily correct. I am not trying to be cordial, only trying to gather facts regarding election of the candidates running for election that apply to ALL citizens of Walton County not just a chosen few. Maybe you should have just made your candidate support known to only your members since it appears to me from reading your questionaire that is to whom it applies. You, by your insinuations and demeanor, have lost any chance of a vote for any of your recommended candidates. I have always heard, "every vote counts". I hope it is so.

[SoWalProfire]

It's not that we don't care about the Citizens north of the bay. We do. But, we have a vested interest in the Citizens of South Walton County because these are the people who graciously allow us to serve and protect them. And again, if you don't see the public benefits in the questions we ask of our candidates, there is something else in you way. And as far as your vote counts, if you would let the opinion of someone you think as little of as you obviously think of me, change who you vote for, one has to wonder about the soundness of your selection process in the first place. My guess is that you and I would never have been engaged on this thread if all our choices matched yours. Good day to you, Sir.

[Andy A.]

You do not understand. I do not have any derogatory feelings toward you personally. I am honestly sorry if you took this to be true. Your recommendations for the upcoming election do not meet my standard for the selection of election to office. And, yes, we would have still been engaged in this discourse because of your and my attitudes toward how candidates should be endorsed. Good day to you sir, as well. BTW this will be my last post concerning the election recommendation by the Firefighters Union.

[FF 2]

As a firefighter and a member of 3516, I have been involved personally supporting candidates by placing signs and participating at events at the National, State and Local level. Just as you may want to try to convince me as to why you are supporting a candidate or you may have a sign in your yard expressing your choice. I support the those candidates because I have heard them speak and have asked others why they are supporting them. As for the signs, I have placed more signs than I care to count, I have also picked those signs up and then some. Please be assured I will be picking signs up again this year.

[Dennis Wise]

Mr. Osborne, Every candidate who responded to our questionnaire by answering the questions on it and submitting their responses to our organization, was invited to our regular monthly meeting in June. During this meeting the members of our organization asked their own candid questions of each of the candidates. After all the candidates had their turn in the hot seat (so to speak), the membership held a vote. This is how we determined which candidates to support.

Each of these candidates received the same questionnaire you received. Each of these candidates did their own research and answered the questions to the best of their ability. This is how we have always done it. It would not be fair to provide "questionnaire aid" to any individual candidate. If the candidate does not answer the questions as written, then the candidate does not get invited to the meeting of the membership. We have never changed our process to bend to the will of any individual candidate.

Much like the constituency of Walton County District 5, we believe that our elected officials are in office to serve our needs, not vise-versa. Our agenda is a simple one, support the campaign of those who will support us. When a candidate suggests to us that he or she knows better what questions we should be asking and how those questions should be worded, it seems a lot like the tail trying to wag the dog.

My personal hope is that if you are elected, you will let your constituency determine what actions you take as a commissioner and not vise-versa.

You suggest that our process is not fair. I suggest this to you: It was not us who did not give you a fair chance for our support. It was you who denied yourself this opportunity.

A lawyer did not write our questionnaire. It was written by firefighters, who are more intelligent than some people give them credit for.

When Dennis read in the paper, The Walton Sun, that the firefighters had decided to endorse Tom Cooper for sheriff, he immediately called the station to find out why as this was the first he was hearing about it!! He was never sent a questionaire or asked anything by phone or in person, never invited to speak at any forum for the firefighters, and was eager to let them know that he was cross-certified as a firefighter himself. (His father and Uncle and many other relatives were firefighters). He never got a call back! I speak for my husband now as he is at a function that I will not mention again, so as not to be accused of exploiting this very sensitive situation. I think I can speak for Dennis now, as I know this to be a fact, as he waited and waited for that call to come in. He never got a chance to state his positions and the fact that he was cross-certified as a firefighter. I write this now as it seems they were mostly concerned about the sheriff candidates......and it simply isn't true that they were all invited to a forum for comparison, unless of course his invitation got lost in the mail, which I suppose is possible, but I would think they would have followed up if they were really serious about endorsing the right person for the job.

Sheila Wise

[Smiling JOe]

FF2, I hope you are placing those signs in a legal manner, only on private property with owner's permission.

To the FireFighters Union, you mention that you have not endorsed a candidate in the Dist 3, County Commissioners Race, which is one race which can directly affect funding for emergency services. I'm curious to know if either of those two candidates asked for, received and, or, returned your questionnaire. Also, are you still trying to gather information on them? Larry Jones has written and recorded record showing how he votes for such things, so would it be safe to deduct that he is not your choice?

[Smiling JOe]

Shelia, if I correctly read an earlier post, the firefighters union issued questionnaires to the candidates whom asked for the firefighters' support. Then, and only then, if the candidate returned the completed questionnaire and they felt the candidate was worthy, they asked the candidate to be a part of their forum. I hope they will correct me if I misunderstood their qualifications for issuing the questionnaires.

[Dennis Wise]

Shelia, if I correctly read an earlier post, the firefighters union issued questionnaires to the candidates whom asked for the firefighters' support. Then, and only then, if the candidate returned the completed questionnaire and they felt the candidate was worthy, they asked the candidate to be a part of their forum. I hope they will correct me if I misunderstood their qualifications for issuing the questionnaires.
Guess that helped in "narrowing" it down to one person....Tom Cooper. Sure is a shame Dennis didn't get an opportunity to present his qualifications/ideas/etc. to the SWFD, considering it could have made the difference.... if what they say is true. Guess we'll never know will we?

MAKE THE WISE CHOICE YOUR CHOICE


Sheila Wise

[Smiling JOe]

Referring back to some of the sample questions, it almost sounds as they are giving candidates ultimatums, are you for or against the highest possible emergency services. Personally, I'd love to see top-notch emergency services, and I have often stated that I think the people working in these jobs, need to be paid enough to keep them. I think the potential for problems with the possible answers comes from the fact that the County has cut the budget tremendously. We are no longer living in the "ideal" world of plenty of tax money, where we can afford to outfit every department with top of the line equipment, like we did for a few years. Get it while you can, seemed to be the motto, looking at the shiny pickup trucks of the TDC, Sheriff's Dept, Code Enforcement, etc. I think most people would value emergency services more than other departments, and maybe some numbers could be pushed around from other departments, rather than having "across the board" equitable cuts for the entire county, but the reality is that the County is not able to afford to outfit every department as it has in the past. In summary, I feel like the sample questions seem to suggest that money is no issue, when in fact it may be the biggest issue which the County faces.

[FF 2]

For those of you who are interested, I am supporting the current school board slate and current Supt of schools Anderson and Larry Jones for District for District 3. I supported Rod Smith for Governor but when Davis won I voted for Crist. I will be supporting Obama for Prez and I voted for Bush x2. There are times that even within our brother/ sisterhood disagree and we vote our heart. I hope for the sake of Florida that Crist is selected for VP.

[idlewind]

For those of you who are interested, I am supporting the current school board slate and current Supt of schools Anderson and Larry Jones for District for District 3. I supported Rod Smith for Governor but when Davis won I voted for Crist. I will be supporting Obama for Prez and I voted for Bush x2. There are times that even within our brother/ sisterhood disagree and we vote our heart. I hope for the sake of Florida that Crist is selected for VP.


By "current school board slate" do you mean you support the two incumbents?:confused: You are on the money regarding our governor, that is for sure.:angry:

[FF 2]

Yes, Mark and Mildred if I remeber correctly

[Smiling JOe]

For those of you who are interested, I am supporting the current school board slate and current Supt of schools Anderson and Larry Jones for District for District 3. I supported Rod Smith for Governor but when Davis won I voted for Crist. I will be supporting Obama for Prez and I voted for Bush x2. There are times that even within our brother/ sisterhood disagree and we vote our heart. I hope for the sake of Florida that Crist is selected for VP.


Wow! I sincerely appreciate you sharing that.

You must be the one firefighter who is not registered with their union, since you are voting for a Democrat, have already decided on voting for Larry Jones. (sarcasm off). If you ARE a member of the union, I am glad that you are willing to think and make your own decisions. I would hope that everyone does.

I know that in group settings, surrounded by peers, individuals tend to want to fit in with the other members, and sometimes, act differently once away from that group setting of peers. So, whether or not one is in a group, doesn't mean that they fully support the group's choices, just as I was explaining that my personal choices won't and shouldn't necessarily correlate to Emerald Coast Assoc. of Realtors.

Again, thank you very much for sharing your personal choices for candidates.

[BeachSiO2]

This whole discussion seems to me to have progressed well beyond the beating horse stage.

To me this all still goes back to this is one group is supporting, just like they supported Herman Walker in 2006. Based on all the angst they have received, I will be surprised if they participate in the discussion any longer. I wouldn't. I think after much discussion/banter/questioning they put up why they selected who they did? Some may not like it, some may say the process was unfair, and some may not agree (I don't on all of them). But the way I see it is that I have NEVER taken anyone's endorsement over my own and it is every citizen's responsibility to look into why they want a certain person to be or not be elected. We now know why they chose who they did and if anyone reading these posts honestly think the firefighters would have chosen anyone else then they haven't done their homework. I don't live there and could have picked their candidates in all races except for two of the fire board seats.

Do you think Osborne or Hudson would have answered their questions in a way that is better then Braunstein. I don't but if you think they would then go and do some research. Moreover, tell them why they picked the wrong person.

Do you really think that anyone would have answered better than Cooper. He was on their board!!! Don't fool yourself, and once again, if you think someone else would, tell them.

As for fire board members, I don't know enough but in the simplest form Maurice Gilbert makes sense or he probably wouldn't have been such a long standing member and chairman.

I guess my point is that the firefighters took a position on who they felt best supported their interests. They are a special interest group like all the rest, and that includes you and me. We also are trying to decide who we think would best serve our perception of the way things should be. So why are we nitpicking the results when in reality there is no other way that it would have come out (if you know the people involved).

It's up to us to take this as another piece of information and add it to all the other pieces of information to make an informed vote. I appreciate the firefighters decision and rationale for it. It does not hold any more weight than some other opinions, or my own research. Sorry I am now off my soapbox.

[FF 2]

First JOe I am a longgggggg time member and proud of my association, I support the decision we have collectively made and if I had not would vote as I see fit. As far as the School candidates and Lary Jones I have had the opportunity to speak with them all in the past and have appreciated the work they perform on my behalf as elected officials. When I had the opportunity to support Herman Walker in 2006 I did for numerous reasons including the rezoning of the 5 districts which provided South Walton the opportunity to have 2 votes on the board, and he voted in favor of the CON for SWFD to provide Emergency Medical Transport if my memeory serves me correctly. Oh and in spite of our support he got spanked. This is the nature of politics, you lose some and you win some. We were also involved with Sara Commanders Race.

[The Watcher]

Lets get one thing straight right now. I do not have a problem with your submitting a questionaire to candidaates, only with it not being submitted to all fairly and equally. Also, FYI, for 8 years, I helped put together regional EMS systems for the state of Oklahoma, so I am quite familar with the fact that you save lives and save property and I certainly commend you for it. I don't know where you got or perceived the idea I am attacking you. Nothing could be further from the truth! I am a Walton County citizen trying to understand why and how the local firefighter's endorsement for candidates of some very important elections was ascertained and whether it was applied equally to ALL candidates on just certain ones. If my requests, posts, or thoughts are out of line with your position, I'm sorry but so be it.

Mr. Oklahoma:

The "ascertained" candidate supported by the Union is the business of the Union. Equal application to any/all candidate is a mute point. The Union is answers to itself, not the public. The Union is there to protect its members from Incompetence that exists in other departments like, the Sheriff's Office (PBA/FOP).

I am not saying that the FD Union feels that way, just making the very real comparison. If our officers were rep'd by a Union they'd tell you straight out how it is there (it sucks by the way). I am not suggesting they/we unionize either, just stating opinion.

b seeing u.

[Tao]

Mr. Oklahoma:

The "ascertained" candidate supported by the Union is the business of the Union. Equal application to any/all candidate is a mute point. The Union is answers to itself, not the public. The Union is there to protect its members from Incompetence that exists in other departments like, the Sheriff's Office (PBA/FOP).

I am not saying that the FD Union feels that way, just making the very real comparison. If our officers were rep'd by a Union they'd tell you straight out how it is there (it sucks by the way). I am not suggesting they/we unioniz