Thursday, August 5, 2010

Republicans Skirt the Hill County Treasurer Appointment

Sounds like the local Republicans might be having some doubts as to their prospective replacement candidate for the Hill County Treasurer’s race. Last night the Hill County Republicans publically interviewed Deputy Hill County Treasurer Wanda Larson about her desire to be appointed as the replacement candidate for Bill Gupton who was the Republican nominee that withdrew from the race to take an employment opportunity out of the area.

One fact that was stressed to us over numerous conversations with local Republicans today was that they didn’t seek Wanda out as their candidate of choice. Wanda lobbied them to appoint her AFTER the win by Sandy Brown was announced and Gupton withdrew. The local Republicans have some suspicions that Wanda just may be up to no good and that this sudden desire to be appointed is just a slick ruse to try and keep things at status quo in the Hill County Treasurers office and retain ousted Carrie Dickson as a deputy.

According to today’s Havre Daily News article about Wanda “She ran for the office as a Republican in 2002, but announced she was ending her campaign after the primary election. Larson said Wednesday during the meeting that personal issues came up in her life that prevented her from campaigning that year”
 This bold faced lie was collaborated today by a person who was a member of the Republican Central Committee in 2002 that said Wanda withdrew from the race after Carrie won the primary because “her purpose was served, which was to make sure Kitty Galbavy didn’t win the election” This person went on to say that Wanda had told him that with Kitty out in the primary there was no need for further bother in her quest to maintain the status quo in that office. The Republicans were essentially thrown under the train which apparently some remember as they voted to table a vote on appointing her as their “official” candidate at last night’s meeting

Contrary to what some people have commented on this blog the Corrector has never ever endorsed Democrat Sandy Brown for this position. We did however advocate for a cleaning up of this office with someone that was an outsider as was Republican candidate Bill Gupton.   You can verify this by doing a search of this blog in the upper left hand corner.

We do get bashed regularly on this blog for having conservative leanings and for lacing our opinions throughout our articles but we wonder why no one ever makes the same comments about the “professional” newspaper articles that are supposed to be opinion free. Case in point is tonight’s article by Timmy Leeds that said Wanda’s “responses to questions were similar to the stance taken by Brown in the primary” We were also told that countless people asked many questions yet the only Republican quotes were brilliant lines like “It’s difficult to run for office when you don’t live here” referring to Gupton and “We have some work to do as a committee” and then a quick shot at the person saying he declined to comment on his comment after the meeting. Why can Timmy lace his articles with opinion and twisting of fact and no one cries foul? The Corrector, which admits it is a blog slanted to the opinions of the author, is sending Timmy Leeds, alleged HDN “reporter” a personal invitation to submit opinion articles to our blog so we can provide you with some balance to our reporting. If you know him call him and ask that he accepts our kind offer to allow his real opinions to be known without the bother of hiding them in “News” articles.

Another opinion forming quote reported in Timmy’s article, which by the way we happen to agree with, said that Wanda “is not interested in making major changes in the staff at the office if she is elected” and she said “I would be keeping the same personnel” She is definitely a shill for the status quo in this whole scenario.

Take a look at the article in the HDN and see for yourself here

What say you readers? In light of these facts should the local Republicans appoint the devious Wanda to be their candidate?


  1. I fail to see what your complaint is regarding the opinions of Leeds. I read the entire article you linked and see no opinion offered.

    BTW, it's "corroborated" not "collaborated" and "bald face" not "bold face".

  2. It is good the have some one that isn't sold out one party or the other. No party is perfect. If you notice the HDN leaves out a lot of information the public actually needs to know just because it doesn't look favorably on some democrat: Like the county officials elected in the court house.

  3. If you see something going on at these offices you need to walk in and tell the commissioners when you see it so they can take action to get the problem solved.

  4. If you think these commissioners can or will do something about this office you are mistaken. The unprofessionalism in the Treasurer’s office that has been going on for a decade is steadily getting worse. Many, many people have complained to the commissioners nothing changes

    Personally I have complained to various county commissioners on three occasions I can think of over the last number of years. Once because he makes me mad as a taxpayer to go to the Treasurer’s office and see someone knitting in the background. If we have so much free time that we bring busywork to the office with us, we need to lay someone off. I was told “she was on break” which must be hours long because I have witnessed this numerous times. I complained to a commissioner about how unprofessional I felt the office was after I bought my car license from someone that ate potato chips from a bag by her computer as she typed. I was told to take it up with Carrie because she was the Treasurer. I told the commissioners about the rude treatment I witnessed one of these people give an older person trying to buy his license because he forgot to bring his registration with him. The gal basically told him tough luck and you will have to go back to Hingham and get your registration first when they can print them out from their county computer. Telling him he had to go back to Hingham was just plain spiteful. I was told later when I questioned a gal at the window that doing a replacement registration takes a few extra moments of their precious time so they like to train their customers to be sure and bring everything in first time. This time the commissioners told me they knew because they get many complaints but again, it is headed by an elected department head and they can’t do much.

    Face it Fuelburner, that whole courthouse is Hill Counties white elephant and needs a good shaking up. If the Republicans appoint this woman I am done with them too.

  5. Commissioner's DO NOT run the office, the Treasurer does. The commissioner's control the budget but that is it. They have zero power to change the daily workings of the office.

  6. Surely:

    You are correct that the Commissioner's do not run the office, the Treasurer does; however, you are incorrect when you say they only have control over the budget. They do have legal obligations as it relates to H.R. responsibilities.

    Specifically described in statute is the duty to supervise other County Offices, including to "require the officers to supervise staff in a manner that complies with personnel policies and procedures adopted by the county governing body."

    Indeed they have broad general powers afforded them by Montana law as Chief Executives. But if an officer is failing to do their job or to properly supervise their staff it is incumbent upon the Commission to see to it that the task is accomplished.

    Moreoever there is precedence for the Commission also to be advised in the hiring and firing of staff. Expecially as it relates to deputy staff. No where is it written that the Commission has final say; however, it is as I understand it, a well established rule that you run all these things by the Commissioners first.

  7. Specifically described in statute is the duty to supervise other County Offices, including to "require the officers to supervise staff in a manner that complies with personnel policies and procedures adopted by the county governing body."

    This would refer to the county personnel manual I believe. It's pretty black and white. The commissioners can require that an elected official/department head adhere to policies but they cannot come in and require anything further (IOW, they can't micromanage).

  8. Surely--give us all a break here with your constant splitting of hairs to try and sound more superior than everyone else.

    I would refer you to 7-4-2110 of the MCA's, yes they are referring to the employee manual, but also the general conduct of all offices. County Commissioners can and often do manage (not micromanage) the H.R. of their respective County. It is not micromanagement when someone goes to the Commissioners to complain about poor customer service and the Commissioners handle the situation. It has happened and it will continue to happen.

    The point I think Your Honor was trying to make is if you have a problem, you can take it up with the Commissioners.

    So when a violation occurs and the Commissioners become aware of it, they can and have in the past placed personnel on administrative leave and this is done in other Counties as well. Perhaps not near enough here in Hill County.

  9. Surely--give us all a break here with your constant splitting of hairs to try and sound more superior than everyone else.

    That's some funny stuff Railroader. I take it you don't like my replies. Bummer. LOL

    Certainly you can take anything to the commissioners but unless there is an actual violation of a law/policy the commissioners cannot dictate anything to an elected official. Suggest, yes.

    Splitting hairs indeed. Buck up fella.

  10. Surely--it's not that I don't like your replies, sometimes I find you quite funny and witty, but in this case you are indeed splitting hairs.

    What are we talking about here if we are not talking about a violation?

    Furthermore, I have first hand knowledge of this and you are flat wrong. I wish I could get into details, but alas that would reveal my identity and private information about a personnel matter so I'm not going to do that. Besides I don't know who you or anyone else on here for that matter. Anonymity is great isn't it?

    Surely there is one thing I think you need to realize about these laws you call "pretty black and white." You seem to know a little about the law, so let me give you a quick political lesson about the law.

    Legislative intent carries significant weight in the legal interpretation of language especially as it pertains to the separation of powers between specific branches of power and government entities. This is one of those areas. The legislature weighed in as recently as 2003 on this specific statute alone and made quite clear that the Board of County Commissioners has broad powers as it relates to the day-to-day management of County Government. As both legislators and executives, it falls on them to both create policy and enforce it, creating an interesting dichotomy at times of which is the rather gray line on separation of powers amongst County Elected Officials.

    To sum it up, let be borrow a line from President Obama! Let me be clear! I am not saying that the Commissioners have to be involved, I am simply saying the law is clear that if they choose to be involved and in the case I know about, most certainly did then they have the power to do so.

    So now I guess we're both splitting hairs, right?

  11. Surely there is one thing I think you need to realize about these laws you call "pretty black and white."

    I was referring to the county policy manual when I made that specific statement, not laws.

    What are we talking about here if we are not talking about a violation?

    Good question. I was responding to Your Honor's post originally wherein I (admittedly lazily) noted the power via the budget of commissioners.

    Perhaps we have gone a bit astray and are also splitting hairs?

  12. If complaining to the commissioners does no good what good would it do to complain to the department head (Carrie) when she is one of the worst offenders herself?

    She is the boss so to speak and she is the one that has allowed rude unprofessional behaviour, she allows them to eat while at their desks, and she is the one that has allowed her deputy to knit all along.

    I wasn't sad to see her get beat in the primary. How could it get any worse?

  13. We have been told that the Republicans are meeting Wednesday night to make a decision on this appointment