Neither Ryan Mackenzie or Pat Slattery showed up at Tuesday night's debate.
In a way I understand Pat's decision. The debate was hosted by an organization whose president is now suing him. It's pretty easy to assume it's a very politically charged lawsuit. I do respect CEPTA as a grassroots organization that has been active in this community for over a decade, but I cannot give its president the benefit of the doubt here. The timing of this lawsuit announcement is just too convenient to see it any other way. So I do understand Slattery not wanting to attend this debate.
As for Mackenzie, I heard the last minute excuse was "other obligations" despite his RSVP commitment to attend to the event. It's clear either he or his handlers made the strategic decision not to show. Either that, or he clearly didn't care enough to honor a commitment with one of the community's most established grass roots organizations. Both excuses are unacceptable.
Twice I've tried to get Mackenzie's take on issues that I view as important. Specifically they include growth issues because I view them as critically important here in Upper and Lower Macungie and South Whitehall. One was the debate and the other was through the questionnaire sent out two weeks ago by the 'Friends LMT' organization. Mackenzie declined to answer.
As I outlined in a previous post I will be voting for Pat Slattery in the special election. His views do not line up 100 percent with mine, but no candidate's do. He is sincere and understands the 134th and our unique issues. I did not decide until last night who I am voting for in the Republican Primary.
Arlene Dabrow was the only candidate to show up last night. She gave earnest and honest answers to questions posed to her last night. She earned my vote.
For me it's Slattery in the Special Election and Dabrow in the Republican primary. To learn more about Dabrow visit her website here.
What are your thoughts on the Special Election and Republican Primary?
Farmland preservation is a well-debated issue in the 134th House District, particularly in Lower Macungie but also other municipalities. How would you balance the needs of the region to grow jobs and build business with local taxpayers’ concerns about preserving farmland and open space? Ryan MacKenzie: I support preserving our farmland and open space because this actually helps attract and retain job creators since it helps provide for a better quality of life for their employees. In the past, local government has taken the initiatives at preservation through local bond issues. At the state level, programs such as Growing Greener and Growing Greener II have been very successful at open space preservation as well. As State Representative, I will continue to support local governments and organizations who work toward open space and farmland preservation.
Patrick Slattery: I am deeply concerned about the balance of economic progress and farmland preservation and through my work on the Lower Macungie Township Environmental Advisory Council, chairing Citizens for Strong Communities and subsequently supporting the Friends for The Protection of Lower Macungie I have worked to strike that balance. Balance first begins with a clear and transparent process whereby citizens, municipal leaders, farmers and developers engage in an open process. Second, detailed cost benefit analyses must be conducted weighing economic and environmental consequences. Third, calculation of impact on taxpayers must be completed prior to approval. Often in massive residential developments, the financial impact on the local taxpayer is not properly considered resulting in property tax increases that can outweigh other benefits.
Mackenzie responded by questioning the fairness/non-biased approach of the 'Friends LMT www.facebook.com/friendslmt' questionnaire because of my post. I am currently the chair of the org. I definitely dispute this and was disappointed by this assumption by Mackenzie since all decisions and the formation of these questions was done by the steering committee which consists of larger group. Ironically some of which openly support Ryan and some of which openly support Pat. There was certainly NO bias in the questions and no bias in the distribution of responses.
Mr. Beitler is a liar in this situation and no one should believe him. Feel free to call the Mackenzie campaign and they will send you the emails, too. I am actually surprised the Patch hasn't followed up on this as I was told by the campaign they too were provided this email exchange.
www.facebook.com/friendslmt It was the groups intention to simply get these important questions answered about farmland preservation and growth issues. I believe we accomplished that. I also attended the CEPTA debate to raise these issues as well. Of course Mr. Mackenzie didn't attend. Arlene Dabrow did, and answered my question about farmland easements. Further, to correct you. I personally support Arlene Dabrow in the Republican Primary vs. Mackenzie. I support Slattery in the Special. (These are my personal opinions not the groups) No decision in 'Friends' is made unilaterally but by the steering committee. Ironically a cpl members publicly SUPPORT Mackenzie, he is aware of this. The patch as well as morning call were looped in on all communication.
You just posted not one but multiple incorrect items in your comment. I try my best to blog about important issues that affect the township and advocate for issues I believe in. Thats all. Lived here my whole life and have put my roots down here. My motivation is to help make my town a better place. I guess when you put yourself out there with your name on a by-line your gonna get this kinda stuff. Comes with the turf I suppose. And thats all I'm gonna say about that. As policy I typically only respond to people who put their real name out there and avoid engaging internet trolls.
Of course this logic is stupid. It's stupid with myself and friends and stupid with CEPTA. CEPTA, just like friends is ran by a board and decisions are not made unilaterally by one individual. Why didnt Mackenzie question the CEPTA chair's integrity? (as they did with me) Personally I think the CEPTA debate would have been a fair and unbiased event.