Supervisor’s race should be about more than signs
Paso Robles Mayor Steve Martin.
By Steve Martin
Candidate for San Luis Obispo County supervisor and mayor of Paso Robles
–Well, the First District Supervisorial race is on. The first issue to surface? Not water. Not public safety, Not jobs. And certainly not civil discourse. Just what is the burning issue that rises to the surface first for public debate?
The placement of campaign signs. Whose goes where. Whose is blocking whose. My distinguished opponents are locked in a hot dispute over signage.
Campaign signs, I am told, are a necessary evil. Voters decide based on the size and number of campaign signs, whether it be the big 4’x8’ models or the sprout-everywhere yard sign version. At least, that’s the common wisdom. So, you will soon be seeing my signs also; probably not as numerous or large as others, but as I said, they seem to be a necessary evil. And you can be sure that wherever we place our signs they won’t be blocking our opponents’ signs. (If they do, just tear them out and throw them away.)
Honestly, though, do voters really decide which candidate to support based on signage? I don’t think so. I think people are concerned about the future, including the future of water, public safety, economic development and yes, being a little more civil to each other when it comes to public debate.
“So,” I asked myself, “what’s a goal-oriented, forward-looking candidate for supervisor such as I to do?”
Well, as I said, there will be signs. But there will be more than signs.
There will be “Virtual Yard Signs.” (Brief campaign videos that spotlight the really important issues of this campaign which you are invited to share with others.) There will be email, Twitter and Facebook updates. Stay tuned for more info on this and other ways you can keep informed and be involved.
It’s the 21st Century, my friends, and that means we can be much more creative, much more informative and much less offensive when it comes to getting out the message. Bottom line: fewer signs, more message.
I hope you like my campaign signs, but I don’t want you to think they are what my candidacy is all about. While my distinguished opponents may continue to jockey for the primo sign locations, I will be concentrating on getting the real information about the important issues of this campaign into your hands and minds.
And, if you are just aching for a yard sign, please send me a note and I will see you get one. If you can’t wait that long you can actually download a window sign from this website and display it proudly as you wait for the real thing to be delivered.
Just don’t paste over my opponents’ signs. They’re kind of sensitive about that kind of thing.
I’m Steve Martin. I’m running for First District Supervisor. I respectfully ask for your vote!
Thank you!
Steve, you are right, the issue isn't about signs. BUT . . . when you have candidates who (unethically, in my humble opinion) place their signs to block another's sign, it IS A SIGN (pardon the pun) of integrity, or lack thereof. Especially when the individual (me, in this instance) likes ALL the candidates, it can easily be little insignificnt issues like signs that tip the scale of opinion. By the way, I also do not appreciate the demeaning of me and other people who may have those opinions. That is too much like calling for being Politically Correct (e.g., you have to agree with me, or you are totally wrong).
I agree there is much more at stake than signs but it tells me something about character. Both seemes to have broken an agreement about the date when signs should be put up according to another article. And then one decided he was more important than the other candidate. So would I want them representing me as a supervisor? Not likely as I dont trust them to plan by the rules of decent curtesy and respec, so sadly lacking in this country. Our county seems in general to respectfully disagree in civil discourse….all part of democracy. It was disappointing to see two candidates act as if that is not important.
Steve, you are right, the issue isn't about signs. BUT . . . when you have candidates who (unethically, in my humble opinion) place their signs to block another's sign, it IS A SIGN (pardon the pun) of integrity, or lack thereof. Especially when the individual (me, in this instance) likes ALL the candidates, it can easily be little insignificnt issues like signs that tip the scale of opinion. By the way, I also do not appreciate the demeaning of me and other people who may have those opinions. That is too much like calling for being Politically Correct (e.g., you have to agree with me, or you are totally wrong).
I agree there is much more at stake than signs but it tells me something about character. Both seemes to have broken an agreement about the date when signs should be put up according to another article. And then one decided he was more important than the other candidate. So would I want them representing me as a supervisor? Not likely as I dont trust them to plan by the rules of decent curtesy and respec, so sadly lacking in this country. Our county seems in general to respectfully disagree in civil discourse….all part of democracy. It was disappointing to see two candidates act as if that is not important.