That’s because at the Business Times, we don’t endorse candidates. I prefer it that way because if you endorse someone, especially someone who’s a friend or more than an acquaintance, you’ll tend to provide more favorable coverage to said candidate — even more so if they’re elected. It’s also why you’ll never see a “vote for” sign in my yard for any candidate. 

I’m just not comfortable doing any candidate endorsing along any line, although you might find an endorsement of a measure here and there. As you’ll see, the endorsement is usually a non-endorsement. But that’s just how I roll.  So in the interest of not endorsing anyone or anything, I’ll write about who and what I won’t endorse. 

First off, I never vote for any candidate who believes the answers to every problem come from government. Sadly, this applies doubly to candidates who promise to fix problems that are the result of government. Let’s be honest here. How many times have you heard the government is going to fix immigration, poverty, education, housing and a list longer than infinity? How many of those problems have been made exponentially worse because of government fix after fix? Answer? All of them. 

In considering the candidates for Grand Junction City Council, look at what problems they promise to fix. Identify the candidates whose main focus is fixing the problems of government fixing problems. Those who claim to automatically be given a magical, “Highlander” level of knowledge to know everything after vanquishing their opponent should never garner a vote. Sadly, this last malady sometimes affects even the good ones we elect. Let’s not make an even worse mistake on a few people running who believe they have all the answers for everything they believe government should do. Find the person saying government should do LESS. 

Never vote for someone who believes government should be in the business of being in business to do things private business should do. What comes to mind? Oh, let’s say landlords or theaters or creating jobs. Never vote for anyone who thinks they know which businesses to bribe to entice them to locate here while not paying taxes for a decade, only to be taken advantage of with a move out on day one of year 11. I realize I could be called a hypocrite for playing golf on city courses. But frankly, I didn’t create that mess. 

Can you say Hamilton Sundstrand? How about all the other deals done in the name of economic development that have gone awry, come up short on promises, never being audited, all while enjoying the fruits of their special deals. Hell, the last deal made with one of these folks never got to day ONE, let alone cheating the taxpayers and citizens for a decade. Come to think of it, don’t vote for a candidate who favors the private business partners of these previous, current and, I’m sure, pending boondoggles. 

Don’t vote for anyone running for city council who’s only been in Grand Junction a few years, yet claims to want to preserve the heritage as some sort of value. I’ve been here 20 years, own a business heavily involved in the community and have been fairly active in the community, but I’d NEVER make that claim. It’s not why you think. Everyone’s values are different. We already have folks on council who ran on preserving values and once elected, really found out what those values were. The point here is simple: Running on preserving heritage through values seems to create an atmosphere of “Let’s never discuss what I really think and will do while I’m trying to get elected.” 

Finally, never vote for anyone who thought shutting down our city, county and country was a good idea or thought special government favor programs for select businesses were a good idea. This sorts out those who don’t believe in people. Frankly, the ones who closed us or made special programs should be removed in both the public and private sector. But what do I know? I tend to think most people are good and believe in them. For those who aren’t good, we have plenty of criminal laws. No need to make more — criminals or laws. 

This brings me to my final point. Vote for candidates who promise to work for smaller government, transparency and freedom. While transparency is a good thing, it’s a bad thing to create more of it via larger government. But it sure campaigns good. 

I think you’ll find the answers of who not to vote for readily available, as I have. 

Lastly, a mention on referred measures. Never vote for government to create its own criminal enterprise or limit competition in any arena that should be an open market by giving favors to the select few in position to pay tribute for access. Never vote yes on any measure that proposes to fix a problem a previous measure caused or made worse. Which is pretty much all of them. 

So now go vote. No sense in listening to me tell you who to vote for, however. Which I didn’t.