I'm going to make this pretty short today. I wrote earlier about some annexation issues regarding OP and Stilwell and of course the big news yesterday was that the JoCo Commissioners voted to approve a smaller area of OP's annexation request.
Those against it vowed to fight on, including Tom Watson whose land is included in the annexation, but it will be money and time wasted along with the public hearing. It will happen and hopefully we'll gain some well thought out long term planning for that area. Hopefully, we'll avoid some of the other issues like leapfrogging, endless strip malls, etc that normally come along with haphazard planning in suburban sprawl.
I want to point out John Toplikar's "no" vote on the annexation. What a lame turd. I've watched this guy for the better part of 15 years in his public service and never seen him take a risk for the public. From his days on the Olathe City Council to a first failed bid for the House in which many elephants crossed and voted for a donkey in Ruth Ann Hackler to keep him from embarrassing us all further, I've seen this guy with the mental capacity only to know enough to just do with the majority of his constituents approve thus just hang around in public service for all these years. Of course he has gone on to serve us in several elected positions, City Council, Kansas House, JoCo Commission.....all with a amazing lack of imagination and creativity. I've love to see one creative initiative he has come up with that he had to fight for and risk going against his constituents because he thought it was right for the future.
So, he votes no on this annexation because it has zero risk. He knew the votes were there, he knows OP is the best equipped to handle to development of that area and he knows that if they didn't do it you'd have reckless developement all the way to Miami county. He knows all this and voted no because he knew it would be easier to say he was against it. We don't need a representative in his spot, we need a pollster. Let a poll decide the vote. What a pee brain. Surbaugh said in the paper she had friends on both sides who wouldn't speak to her over the issue. At least she has the stones to make the call and she along with the others stepped up and made a decision that was in the best interest of the area.
For some reason he has a strong organization that supports him and he would be tough to unseat but at least he is in a relatively low profile spot where he can't embarrass us too much. Look, he may a nice enough fella. I don't know him. He just doesn't seem very intelligent to me.
Let's be real here. It isn't an issue of IF the area will see massive developement over the next 10 years, it is HOW it will be developed. I'm not an OP resident but no question they are the best equipped to manage this expansion. I just hope they do it right.
Posts
4 comments:
Wow! For what seems to be a professional journalist, this guy does not know what he is talking about. I feel sorry for whoever reads this article, because as it plainly states - the writer did NOT know who John is and has NEVER lived in Overland Park, but yet feels compelled to go raving on a matter that doesn't even concern him! I would say that for such a prestigous writer, you should really find something else to do with your time than hammer out blatant words that in turn show how unintelligent you portray yourslef to be. John has been an impecable political figure in all of his history as a politician and only shows complete honesty, unwaivering beliefs in what the people want and what he knows is right despite those that are willing to disappoint 'the people' to promote only themselves and take the easy way out. If only you knew your politics and what kind of politician John really is, you wouldn't dare to write something so utterly incorrect and to so poorly misjudge another honorable person once again only trying to do the right thing.
On one hand I want to be honored that I'm noted as professional and prestigious but reading on I have to think the writer can't be talking about me. Clearly, the writer seems upset about anyone critical of John Toplikar. You know it really has been uncomfortable being critical of him all these years. He is a conservative like me and on essential big picture issues we probably agree most of the time. My problem is pretty much exactly what the writer admits and that is that Mr. Toplikar looks mostly at what the people want.
If we only needed people to figure out what the majority of the people, or the people who squawk the loudest, want and then vote accordingly then all you need is a pollster to represent us.
See, I think by doing this Mr. Toplikar always takes the easy way out because he can say that he is just doing what the people want. See, we need leadership from people who have vision to see and anticipate what is best in the long term and have the courage to act for the long term. For an example of this type of leadership see Republicans in the south in the 1960's as they rallied for Civil Rights....that's right....Republicans. Their constituents wanted Jim Crow laws, wanted segregation, wanted seperate but equal, wanted Rosa at the back of the bus. Would Mr. Toplikar voted against such measures because the majority wanted the status quo or would he out of conviction fought for others? Or President Bush acting on the war and knowing that it is umpopular but willing to let history judge his convictions. That is my problem with Mr. Toplikar. No vision, no leadership. You have to balance consituent wishes and leadership for the future.
Now, the writer suggests that this annexation issue might not concern me because I don't live in OP. I live in Johnson County you idiot and I live right by the affected area. My Johnson County taxes contribute to the services provided currently to the area. I also have a larger interest in knowing that those a little further south of me don't overrun the services provided in my neighborhood because they don't them built in their own backyard. By the way trust me, while I don't know Mr. Toplikar personally I've watched him for decades as I point out in my blog and sat through many painful city council meetings over in Olathe while Mr. Toplikar asked stupid questions and made more votes that only reflected what the ward thought.
Finally, I want to point out that being honest (complete honesty in your words) should be the minimum qualification for public service not something we honor with medals and badges. My guess is you say he is impecable because he stays out of conflicts of interest, doesn't get involved in unsavory situations, has good morals. I would agree that he is that guy. So what? Again, does that make him a good leader? It should be the minimum qualification.
Like I said earlier, it seems unnatural at some level to write about Mr. Toplikar because he and I seem to believe the many of the same things. I'd just like to see someone a little smarter with a little more imagination to solve our problems and display the leadership to make decisions that might not always be popular but with conviction it is the best thing for everyone for the long term.
Now that I've clarified my thoughts a bit more I'd welcome your thoughtful response.
Anonymous said...
"John has been an impecable political figure in all of his history as a politician and only shows complete honesty, unwaivering beliefs in what the people want and what he knows is right despite those that are willing to disappoint 'the people' to promote only themselves and take the easy way out."
May I refer you to the local news about the Most Honorable John Toplikar who is now facing a November court date for Misdemeanor Theft charges out of the city of Olathe...FOR STEALING CAMPAING SIGNS FROM HIS OPPONENT!
John Toplikar has made my decision very easy for this year's elections. I hope they throw his butt in jail. Once a thief, always a thief. So much for honor!
I am Glad i found this website.Added sojoco.blogspot.com to my bookmark!
Post a Comment