The Future of Pike County political action committee recently announced five endorsements for Delaware Valley School Board. Highly recommended candidates are Pam Lutfy, Bill Greenlaw and Jack Fisher. Recommended candidates are Chuck Pike and Sue Schor. The full letter of endorsement is located on the PAC’s Web site, www.futureofpikecounty.org.
Advised by seven current and former student leaders, the committee reached its decision by individually evaluating each candidate that returned its survey. The Taxpayers United ticket of Bob Goldsack, Bernard Marasa and Patricia Wright were the only candidates who offered no response.
“We feel the each of five endorsed candidates offers specific skills and experience that will benefit the school district and our community,” said Marc Coda, PAC Chairman.
“Two important priorities shared by each candidate are ensuring greater transparency in governance and practicing longer-term, more responsible budgeting,” he added.
Austin Lamac, the PAC’s treasurer, said that the committee now seeks to actively fundraise and campaign on behalf of the endorsed candidates.
“Citizens can visit our Web site, donate ‘five dollars for our future,’ and join our mailing list to be notified of campaign events and volunteer opportunities,” he said.
The re-launched Web site includes a candidate blog, information about the committee and local voter information. Lamac said the site will also host an online town hall meeting with the candidates in mid-May.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
What is the difference between "recommended" and "highly recommended"?
ReplyDeleteIt reflects the level of support each candidate had within the committee.
ReplyDeleteWhat distinguishes a candidate between the two levels?
ReplyDeleteSome of the distinguishing criteria were experience, record, skill set, vision, thoroughness of survey, etc. Please read the endorsement explanation for our evaluation of each candidate.
ReplyDeleteThe distinction was meant to guide voters by expressing a degree of preference. Although these particular candidates are running on a ticket, they are all different. That said, we very much stand behind each of the candidates we endorsed.
Neither the endorsement document nor the press release explain the difference between "recommended" and "highly recommended." Why are Chuck Pike and Sue Schor not "highly recommended"?
ReplyDeleteRecommended–verb (used with object)
ReplyDelete1. to present as worthy of confidence, acceptance, use, etc.; commend; mention favorably: to recommend an applicant for a job; to recommend a book.
Highly–adverb
1. in or to a high degree; extremely
---
It was an internal decision made through a system of voting that indicated a significant enough gap of support between the candidates, which we felt warranted making this distinction. We feel the differences were self-evident in the candidate surveys and endorsement explanations and it did not require us to explain "why not" for Mr. Pike and Mrs. Schor. This is simply a best practice of political action committees we chose to use, as it reflects a degree of support and preference.
It is important to note that if any candidate did not meet our standards and expectations of a board member, we would have not have endorsed him or her, even if that meant endorsing less than five. Again, we very much support all of the endorsed candidates. But recognizing that all five candidate are not the same, we chose to provide a bit more detailed guide to voters.
I really don't understand why this simple question cannot be answered. How do you offer different levels of endorsement but offer no explanation of the distinction between the levels?
ReplyDeleteIf you want to provide a bit more detailed guide to voters, you should be able to explain the difference between your levels of endorsement.