There are no pending issues of importance for the city council or the school board, so this election has been restricted to bland political posturing by the candidates. I didn't see anything in the material they have been handing out that sets any of them in any unique positions. It's all “Maintain a fiscally sound and responsible school (and city council)”, “Improve communication with the community”, “Create long term vision”. Blah.

They didn't even have a "Meet the candidate" night at the HS. Not sure who organizes those, and given the restrictions they set on questions it is not a loss for the community.

Clifford had an ad in the TVN that listed the names of her supporters. Judging from the names on that list, I am guessing that she is the candidate of the old McLeod cabal, which had a philosophy consisting of “rubberstamp anything the superintendent proposes”, and act as shields, preventing any parent from having their issues brought before and acted on by the board. But McLeod is gone, so I don't know if that group has any relevance now.

Douglass has numerous slick flyers out and a big half page ad in the TWG. I guess he is the “buy your way into office” candidate. It will be interesting to see his campaign expenditure filing, will he break the record $8K spent by Joanne Peters in her election?

Steve Von Jasinski had a surprising letter to the ed in the TVN, he gave a glowing recommendation for "Arron Bowman" for the City Council. Given that he is a big D and Bowman is a teabagging R, you wonder what caused that letter (although the standard R and D positions have little effect on local votes, no candidate for the city or school have asked for county backing from the R and D central committees). Rumor is that V.J. has plans for taking the presidency of the council, and with no possibility of changing the minds of the current fellow council members he wants a new member who will be his vassal. Good luck with that, V.J.

(I just noticed, V.J. misspelled his name in the paper, it's Aaron, not Arron.)