LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dear Editor:

In reference to the recent filing of a Mayor Recall Petition.

I would like to address the issues that are being put forth as the reasoning for the recall petition by Mary M. Laughlin and Ashley Sisk and share my concerns as to the motives and conflict of interest of the petitioners.

First, “Not having the community’s best interest in mind.” A short list of the items the mayor has dedicated his efforts towards over the years in supporting the community’s interests includes, but is not limited to, the following:

Active support of bringing the Goodhand Theatre back to life, including his own work in cleaning up the theater, physically getting old theater chairs out of the theater and promoting the theater.

In support of our veterans in creating the veterans service memorial along with the sale of remembrance bricks for the celebration of our veterans.

Continuing to make Gotte Park a better place, adding Disc Golf, Pickleball Courts, Veterans Memorial, working with volunteer groups on horseshoe pits, and other improvements. This includes the current proposals to upgrade playground equipment at both the City Park and Gotte Park.

Bringing volunteers together to upgrade dock and pier facilities at Oliver reservoir.

Bringing volunteers together to help pour a replacement sidewalk for a senior in Kimball who did not have the resources to do this on their own.

Steered Kimball to an excellent financial footing along with the help of Treasurer and Clerk to allow Kimball to be well positioned for growth as business and government programs present themselves.

Promoting Kimball with the raising of the vintage drilling rig off I-80 by the golf course.

Working to guarantee Kimball’s electric system with upgrading Kimball’s ability to switch access should there be a failure.

Promoting and supporting the upgrading of Kimball’s Police Department.

What most of us in Kimball do not see is the mayor’s constant physical involvement and personal time given to the city that is NOT a requirement of the mayor, but he does it anyway.

And much more.

Second, “Serving his own agenda.” I would like to know what the petitioners think that agenda is and should be asked to give examples. And what I mean by examples are concrete facts and not opinions, suppositions, or hearsay.

An effective elected official will NEVER make everyone happy. They will, however, have the best interests of the city in mind and work towards that. Any effective mayor should and must have an idea of what his or her vision is for the city (an agenda) and how he or she wants to accomplish this. He or she must also work towards the benefit of all citizens and not succumb to a minority that is unhappy with certain results, cannot move on, or seeks validation on social media for a perceived injustice. We are not a society or government that is governed by minority.

Third, “Disrespect and mistreatment of city employees and elected officials. Over the past months there has been turnover within the city government. Some of this was a result of behavior or actions that were found to be unacceptable for any workplace. Others were voluntary. Mayor Prunty is an outspoken and driven individual. He is passionate about the city but can also be a bull in a china shop. He also at times needs to take a breath and step away and let the individuals in the city do their work. He will be the first one to defend and promote the individuals who are deeply committed to the city and doing the work. He has recently made sure that key employees have been recognized for their efforts and is responsible for asking that an employee appreciation dinner be put together.

As relates to elected officials, within the city that leaves the council members and, in my time, serving on the counsel this past year, I know of no mistreatment of elected officials. If anything, I have observed the mayor trying to go out of his way to attempt to work with members. This is also a two-way street, and a similar responsibility resides with the council members, which often times is lacking. Again, if the petitioners genuinely believe this, then give concrete evidence without hearsay or supposition.

Also, having one’s spouse not appointed to city administer is not a reason for recall. This is especially true given that every applicant that has been considered and interviewed is more qualified in their experience and background.

The administrator position requires an individual to demonstrate maturity in behavior and to accept defeat and setbacks. In this case, one only needs to read his comments on social media that only showed the lack of maturity and his belief that he continued to be the best candidate for the position. He participated in the interview process and lost. It happens to all of us. Each of us who has lost out on potential opportunities believe we were the best candidate regardless of not be selected. How you deal with losing demonstrates your capacity to not only be a good leader, but also the maturity to handle disappointment and help others through it so they have to opportunity and grow by your example.

Additionally, there is a serious conflict of interest in the intent to bypass the election process by a family member using the recall process to have their mother become the appointed mayor if the recall is successful. I do not know of a more blatant conflict of interest and self-serving action in subverting a legal process to promote their own agenda. This in itself should kill this petition. History has shown numerous individuals demonstrating little regard for what the rule of law stands for but use it to advance their own agenda that is not in the best interest of the majority of voters.

I recently heard the term “cancel culture.” This is now where in our society if somebody’s feelings are hurt, or feel offended, or feels put upon, they simply get “rid” of that person by dropping them on social media or calling them out on social media because they are upset, or it appears, filing a petition to recall because they are not happy. I think we are better than that.

Finally, and possibly most important is that Kimball for the first time in a generation is on the verge of being considered a viable city and county for support of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent Program. (GBSD) over the next decade plus. Allowing these issues to be a divide in the community will ultimately hurt us. Appearing to the outside world that we as a community are unstable and that they would be nuts to come to Kimball and expect to be properly supported. We cannot even present a cohesive community ready to do what is needed to support the programs, as we are too damn busy fighting amongst ourselves. Therefore, how in the world could we be even remotely capable of supporting such a program. Tell me now who doesn’t have the best interest in mind for Kimball?

Creg Pike

Kimball City Council member