Local: Arbor District residents say Curphy Smith is barking up the wrong tree
An email just hit my inbox with a letter from Arbor District residents ragging on 2nd District Candidate Curphy Smith.
Here it is:
April 6, 2009
Neighbor-to-Neighbor
Election for City Council 2nd District is tomorrow. As 10-year residents of the Arbor District, located within the 2nd District, we feel the need to respond to Curphy Smith’s recent campaign literature. We have a long relationship with both Barbara Van Auken and Curphy Smith, and until now, we’ve remained rather quiet about this campaign. Information has been distributed from Curphy’s campaign camp that is over the top and unwarranted.
As many of you know, we have worked closely with Barbara on several issues concerning all of our neighborhoods. She has always been honest and forthcoming with information, which we respect. She’s dedicated to all the issues in the District, working tirelessly on them. Barbara’s promises to us have never been broken (we personally know Curphy Smith has broken vows and promises he’s made), and she has always worked hard for the 2nd District. Barbara respects Bradley University and its mission to provide a safe educational environment for their students and neighbors. Simply stated, Barbara understands the dedication and time commitment of being a council member, and is still passionate about being our representative. She desires the job…not just the title.
Her diligence to facilitate the rebuilding of the arbors in the Arbor District was supported not only by the neighbors, but the City Council. The City Council voted UNANIMOUSLY on April 10, 2007 to approve additional funding for the arbors, however most of the funds were allocated in the Capital Fund Budget before Barbara’s first term. The previous arbor was held together with metal bands, and a danger to public safety. The “extravagant monument, “ as referred to by Curphy’s campaign, is almost identical to the original, and was rebuilt per the request of the neighbors, to preserve a historical landmark for which the neighborhood is named; they weren’t rebuilt for Barbara’s benefit.
Barbara Van Auken has accomplished many great things and will do more for our District and our city. She has experience, fortitude, and she has our vote. Re-elect Barbara on Tuesday, April 7.
Respectfully,
Nathan and Michelle Wagner
April 6th, 2009 at 9:56 am
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Oh wait…was this not supposed to be funny? What a joke….
April 6th, 2009 at 10:00 am
If I learned just one thing from journalism school and from 20 years as a reporter/ editor, it’s that you never, EVER, pass up an opportunity to use a pun in a headline. Now that I think about it, it is entirely possible that is the ONE thing I did learn.
April 6th, 2009 at 10:28 am
I agree on the opportunity to use a pun in a headline, however my laugh attack was inspired by the ridiculousness of this letter from the Wagners. Of course they will be supporting Barb…they got what they wanted from her. I would venture to say that most other neighborhoods in the 2nd district weren’t as lucky…
Also, this extravagant monument, which is EXACTLY what it is, should have been funded by the residents of the neighborhood if they wanted it so badly.
April 6th, 2009 at 10:55 am
Billy, this is nothing more than a “friends and family” letter chain that is utilized by all the candidates and their respective campaigns. Guaranteed thousands of these types of e-mails are flying through the airwaves at this very moment and will continue up until the closing of the polls. You just happened to intercept ONE.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
The Arbor is a highly cherished landmark of which there were many in our City at one time. I’m glad to learn the facts (with someone’s name attached to it) after receiving such destructive piece of Smith campaign literature. Now I know where Mr. Smith stands about preservation. He will not be getting my vote.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
I’m guessing the Wagners don’t have a five-story parking deck in their back yard….
April 6th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
As a 2nd. district person who has lived up here for 43 yrs. I will so very glad when this is over . People have lost friends over this race . Its so very sad…..
April 6th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Gary threw BVA under the bus. Good enough for me.
April 6th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Fact:
1. The Wagner’s don’t have a parking deck in their back yard. But it is basically in their front yard.
2. CJ doesn’t have a parking deck in his backyard (or front yard) either. Obviously, not having a parking deck in one’s backyard eliminates you from concern for the Arbor District.
3. That anti-Van Auken hit piece that showed up on Saturday was filled with distortions.
Hey “Brewstar”, are you who I think you are? If you want to remain anonymous, try not using the same moniker as you do on the Uplands listserv.
Vote your conscience, but vote on the facts. And Diane, I have no idea what you mean about a “friends and family” letter. The Wagners are real people, and that is a real letter.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
What vows did Curphy break?
April 6th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
The Wagners are real people, and that is a real letter
I’m not disputing that.
April 6th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Diane is right, but “Only” is full of something. I would guess he is a campaign worker. Andrew, is that you?
The issue is squeezing seroius needs out of one area for the frivolous wants of another area with tax dollars.
April 7th, 2009 at 7:41 am
I had this letter hand delivered to my house last night. The Wagner’s are right, the piece that the Smith campaign put out was nasty. Infact, this whole campaign, on both sides, has been nasty.
April 7th, 2009 at 8:10 am
Hey West Duffer – If I wanted to remain anonymous, I would have signed in as Anonymous.
April 7th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Let me say this nathan wagner has been under bva behind so long he has lost his sence of right and wrong he was appointed to a board by bva and kisses that behind all the time , cruphy smith has a right to say what he feels in the 2 dst. bva has done the least she could for the whole dist. except the get drunk at all of the partys she attends get rid her before she has the city sued again!!!!!
April 7th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Well, “Brewstar” if you didn’t want to be anonymous, then why not just sign is as who you are. I find it odd that a candidate for office — or his wife — would use a pseudonym in a public forum. What happened to trying to get people to know who you are.