OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY OF SHERIFF’S OFFICE BADLY LAGS OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES
Over the last two months, I’ve released a comprehensive, multi-part platform to highlight the changes required in the Sheriff’s office, and how I would approach the office of Sheriff if elected: performance-oriented (looking at data and establishing performance metrics to judge our efficacy), with proactive policies (education and building relationships with the schools), and most importantly, community-focused (building upon my 10 years as community safety officer).
I’ve highlighted several issues that need addressing: the lack of green policies and actions that reflect our community’s character; the alarming DUI and drug-related death fatality rates that badly lag that of neighboring communities and the US; and finally the lack of concrete actions on the part of the Braudis administration that can improve performance, from putting an officer in the schools to changing the shifts of nighttime officers.
THE TROUBLING STATISTICS ON SOLVING CRIME IN PITCO
During this campaign I’ve dug into the numbers, and simple metrics such as the drug and DUI fatality rate has shown there is a lot of room for improvement in how the office is led, organized, and executes its duties of providing for the safety of the public. The last set of numbers I’m going to present may be the most alarming, and indicative of the current Sheriff’s inactive approach to leading the office.
According to the Colorado Bureau of Investigations, Pitkin County badly lags other local jurisdictions in solving crimes—possibly its most fundamental responsibility. Since 2000:
Motor vehicle theft arrests success rate
Eagle County 46 18 39%
Garfield County 141 35 25%
Pitkin County 86 12 14%
Burglaries arrests success rate
Eagle County 346 69 20%
Garfield County 374 59 16%
Pitkin County 146 16 11%
Rapes arrests success rate
Eagle County 26 16 62%
Garfield County 15 7 47%
Pitkin County 29 2 7%
While the threefold higher DUI fatality rate than Colorado and sixfold (350 per million in 2005 versus 50 per million for US) higher drug-related death rate are troubling statistics, the low rate of arrests of Pitkin County in solving motor vehicle thefts, burglaries, and rapes point directly at the poor performance of the Sheriff’s office.
Think of it this way: While Braudis is running on a campaign of “trust” and “helping people,” 93% of the women that report a rape to the Pitkin County Sheriff’s department have not gotten justice—they haven’t even gotten an arrest. Is that compassion? How is Bob Braudis helping these women?
This brings up another question—are even all crimes even being reported to the Sheriff’s office? On April 4, 2006 Bob Braudis said in the Aspen Daily News, “If a credible witness who identifies himself- as opposed to an anonymous tipster-brings us evidence of drug commerce, we open a case report. If an investigation leads to probable cause, we will try to get an arrest warrant.” In other words, Braudis does not investigate anonymous tips. This may significantly affect the reporting of potential crimes by people who may feel uncomfortable directly identifying themselves to the police.
We need to ask a tough and critical question: why is the arrest rate so much lower for serious crimes in Pitkin County than our close neighbors?
Who is holding the Sheriff’s office accountable for its performance?
A HARD LOOK AT HARD DRUGS AND DUIs
Hard drugs and the Sheriff’s office lack of any education programs in recent years, and a publicly-stated lax policy of enforcement, has serious consequences for public safety. Remember, we are talking about hard drugs—cocaine, crystal meth, etc. These are not the innocuous soft drugs such as pot, that many associate as part of our town’s culture, and have shown in many studies not to have serious health consequences. Hard drugs are much different—but Braudis makes no distinction in his policies or enforcement.
Nationally the drug related fatality rate is estimated to be 50-60 people per million (see www.cdsp.org, a strongly neutral site on drug statistics). Pitkin County has had 11 in the last four years for a rate of 185 people per million—and 5 last year for a rate almost twice that. The long-term rate is three times the national average and higher that all major American cities except New Orleans, Albuquerque and Baltimore. Definitely not the company we want to keep when it comes to deaths from hard drugs.
To claim that hard drugs have not had an impact in our community, that drugs are not a safety but “health” issue, and that the Sheriff’s office had done all it could in educating the public and dealing with hard-drug dealers is not just inaccurate, but a dangerous “head in the sand” attitude that is ignoring the biggest safety risk—along with DUI deaths—to the public.
On to DUIs: On September 27th 2006 in the Aspen Times Bob Braudis claimed that his office has made 1004 DUI arrests since 2000. On October 14th the same paper printed the correct number: 329. That is three times less than Braudis claimed.
Will anyone hold Braudis accountable to publicly and knowingly misstating a critical figure to the press?
Why are stops relatively low, and DUI fatalities high? The reasons may be numerous, but the Sheriff’s policies clearly link to the results. The Sheriffs department has 16 deputies on patrol. Only 5 are certified on the intoxilyzer-the critical machine that deputies use to test a person blood alcohol content. One of those deputies, the intoxilyzer instructor just quit. So they now only have four deputies certified. The APD has 21 certified officers out of 25.
These policies and lack of training are leading to dramatically reduced DUI stops. Twenty-seven. That is the number of DUI arrests for 2006 the sheriff department had last time I checked, about two weeks ago. Shockingly, that is the same number as one officer in Snowmass Village has so far this year. One officer in Snowmass Village has the same number of DUI’s as the entire Pitkin County Sheriffs department with a patrol budget of $2,600.000.
As mentioned and documented, Pitkin Counties fatality rate for alcohol related crashes is three times the state average. And the sheriffs department is unwilling to change in the face of sobering statistics.
DOES THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE LACK RESOURCES TO EFFECTIVELY FIGHT DUIs AND HARD DRUGS?
Bob Braudis claims he spend his limited resources in the best interest of public safety. Again, claims and trust only go so far: in God we trust, all others bring data. Let’s look at the numbers.
Averages for the last five years:
Calls for service cases cost per case
Basalt 5401 512 $2148
Aspen 19691 1817 $2146
PCSO 13270 849 $3062
The numbers don’t lie; It cost the Pitkin County Sheriffs office 43% more per case than Aspen and Basalt. The inefficiencies are staggering: each PCS deputy is averaging only 33 cases per year while Basalt averages 47 and Aspen 52 cases per officer.
Looking at performance metrics such as call volume, and cost per case—and benchmarking them to competitors–is a simple, yet very common practice in business to understand how an organization is performing and how it can improve. Clearly, Pitkin County is badly lagging other agencies in some of the most basic performance measurements in cost effectiveness and productivity.
This lack of performance can be attributed to poor management and leadership: Of the 28 employees in the patrol staff, 10 are supervisors. A less than 2:1 employee to supervisor ratio is extremely top-heavy, expensive, and leads to process inefficiencies. It must be modified. Taxpayers are not getting a fair deal. Especially considering the poor rates of success in solving cases and keeping our community safe. Isn’t that what the office of Sheriff is about-enhancing safety and well-being of everyone?
Let’s summarize:
• A long-term DUI fatality rate three times higher than Colorado’s
• A long-term drug-related death rate three time higher than the US’s (and twice that of Denver’s)
• Success rates for solving crimes that badly lag Eagle and Garfield—in particular, a 7% arrest rate for rapes: nine times lower than Eagle
• DUI arrests in total that equal one Snowmass Village officer
• A cost per case 43% higher than Aspen and Basalt
• Over 50% lower cases per year handled per deputy than Aspen and Basalt
We are essentially paying more for a lot less safety than our neighbors.
The sheriff likes to say, “The sheriff you know”. Now that you know these numbers, maybe we can get beyond the rhetoric and talk about what really matters in this election.
hey rick – you’re definitely shedding some good light on the subject here. our town is different. you know that. we have extremes here. extremely wealthy, and extremely poor. extremely fit, and extremely unhealthy because of drugs.
it seems to me you would be best channeling your efforts as an employee of the sheriffs dept getting some experience and trying to make a difference. regardless, your data and facts have been a real eye opener, but they reflect our specific unique population makeup more than a poorly run sheriff dept. and let’s not put all the blame on the sherrif here.
the apd is part of this ‘problem’ as well. not to mention you’ve embarrased the very department you work for. are you going to adress that? i was out in town this weekend and that’s the general consensus, by the way.
hey rick – you’re definitely shedding some good light on the subject here. our town is different. you know that. we have extremes here. extremely wealthy, and extremely poor. extremely fit, and extremely unhealthy because of drugs.
it seems to me you would be best channeling your efforts as an employee of the sheriffs dept getting some experience and trying to make a difference. regardless, your data and facts have been a real eye opener, but they reflect our specific unique population makeup more than a poorly run sheriff dept. and let’s not put all the blame on the sherrif here.
the apd is part of this ‘problem’ as well. not to mention you’ve embarrased the very department you work for. are you going to adress that? i was out in town this weekend and that’s the general consensus, by the way.
Rick’s statistics are interesting, even alarming. Then how come it doesn’t feel like we’re in the middle of a crime wave? Not a rhetorical question, I hope a response is forthcoming. Rick’s numbers merit investigation: are the source credible? Is the math hazy? Are interpretations being overlooked?
Local news media seem disinclined to probe.
The whole theatre has gone way off-Broadway. After all, the “git Braudis” side is rife dubious sorts.
There’s the challenger himself, whose otherwise cogent study is marred by two huge gaffes: his wanking video, and the pretexting he employed in his effort to out Braudis’ whereabouts this summer. The outing effort itself sinks to a third gaffe in my book.
Then there’s Rick’s hit man, Michael Conniff, editor of this blog. The Con Man harangues Sheriff Braudis with the same repetitive innuendo technique you hear from Borg-like right-wing talk show zillionaires. With virtually every mention of Sheriff Braudis, Conniff repeats catch-phrase slander about Bob’s supposed zero enforcement. I wonder if KFNO, or The Con Man himself, would provide tapes of his show so the ACLU can count the iterations.
(For background on right-wing talk judo, google George Lakoff, cognitive linguistics professor at UC Berkeley. He’s written books about it.)
The list goes on, even without mentioning certain regular blog posters upon whose knee-jerk venality The Con Man seems to feed.
This is not to say that all of Braudis’ critics have made disreputable contributions.
But speaking of the ACLU, there’s that ACLU probe of a neighboring police department. I put it to you that if we change the guard at the PCSD, the venal types would demand scapegoats. Examples will have to be made, or the “git Braudis” legion will whip themselves into a new frenzy of armchair hectoring.
On Braudis’ side is the man himself, smarter than the average sheriff and roundly admired. Otherwise he wouldn’t have run unopposed these many years.
There’s always room for improvement. Which is why Magnuson should probably have taken the deputy job when Braudis offered it. Rick could have cast himself in the role of Helper, rather than Buster. That, you see, is the corner Rick is painting himself into.
Let the critics be answered. But I doubt most of them will hear a thing over the sound of hot blood pumping in their ears.
Rick’s statistics are interesting, even alarming. Then how come it doesn’t feel like we’re in the middle of a crime wave? Not a rhetorical question, I hope a response is forthcoming. Rick’s numbers merit investigation: are the source credible? Is the math hazy? Are interpretations being overlooked?
Local news media seem disinclined to probe.
The whole theatre has gone way off-Broadway. After all, the “git Braudis” side is rife dubious sorts.
There’s the challenger himself, whose otherwise cogent study is marred by two huge gaffes: his wanking video, and the pretexting he employed in his effort to out Braudis’ whereabouts this summer. The outing effort itself sinks to a third gaffe in my book.
Then there’s Rick’s hit man, Michael Conniff, editor of this blog. The Con Man harangues Sheriff Braudis with the same repetitive innuendo technique you hear from Borg-like right-wing talk show zillionaires. With virtually every mention of Sheriff Braudis, Conniff repeats catch-phrase slander about Bob’s supposed zero enforcement. I wonder if KFNO, or The Con Man himself, would provide tapes of his show so the ACLU can count the iterations.
(For background on right-wing talk judo, google George Lakoff, cognitive linguistics professor at UC Berkeley. He’s written books about it.)
The list goes on, even without mentioning certain regular blog posters upon whose knee-jerk venality The Con Man seems to feed.
This is not to say that all of Braudis’ critics have made disreputable contributions.
But speaking of the ACLU, there’s that ACLU probe of a neighboring police department. I put it to you that if we change the guard at the PCSD, the venal types would demand scapegoats. Examples will have to be made, or the “git Braudis” legion will whip themselves into a new frenzy of armchair hectoring.
On Braudis’ side is the man himself, smarter than the average sheriff and roundly admired. Otherwise he wouldn’t have run unopposed these many years.
There’s always room for improvement. Which is why Magnuson should probably have taken the deputy job when Braudis offered it. Rick could have cast himself in the role of Helper, rather than Buster. That, you see, is the corner Rick is painting himself into.
Let the critics be answered. But I doubt most of them will hear a thing over the sound of hot blood pumping in their ears.
“they reflect our specific unique population more than a poorly run sheriff dept.”
What? Do we have a “unique population” of rapists, thiefs and burglars that are just better at what they do? Is this “unique population” just so dammed good at commiting crime that they are impossible to catch?
It sounds to me like that this “unique popluation” is a minority group of people who are more than happy to bury their heads in the sand and ignore incompetence and inefficiency as long as they are free to do their drugs in peace. It is also that “unique population” that is more concerned with idolizing Braudis’ personality cult and trying to cling to a period of time that is long gone (Thank God), than having any respect for the laws of the land.
Braudis’ ideals are appropriate for a legislator, not a member of the executive branch. For those of you who were either too drunk or stoned in Civics class to remember what I am talking about, I’ve included the wikipedia link on the Separation of Powers under the United States Constitution for you to brush up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers_under_the_United_States_Constitution
“they reflect our specific unique population more than a poorly run sheriff dept.”
What? Do we have a “unique population” of rapists, thiefs and burglars that are just better at what they do? Is this “unique population” just so dammed good at commiting crime that they are impossible to catch?
It sounds to me like that this “unique popluation” is a minority group of people who are more than happy to bury their heads in the sand and ignore incompetence and inefficiency as long as they are free to do their drugs in peace. It is also that “unique population” that is more concerned with idolizing Braudis’ personality cult and trying to cling to a period of time that is long gone (Thank God), than having any respect for the laws of the land.
Braudis’ ideals are appropriate for a legislator, not a member of the executive branch. For those of you who were either too drunk or stoned in Civics class to remember what I am talking about, I’ve included the wikipedia link on the Separation of Powers under the United States Constitution for you to brush up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers_under_the_United_States_Constitution
Pastor Mustard, as for zillionaires, a quick glance at the Endorsements section of Braudis’ website will show you where his support comes from and allegiances lie.
Pastor Mustard, as for zillionaires, a quick glance at the Endorsements section of Braudis’ website will show you where his support comes from and allegiances lie.
More innuendo. To which my response is, “. . . and, your point is?”
Whereas my point is that Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Ingraham, etc. make big money selling snake oil like radio preachers of the 1930’s did. Except they don’t have to bottle it. They manufacture it daily out of fear and rage hormones, for lack of a more scientific term. Research their endorsers for a really spooky list.
Buy some today! For The Environmentalist Wacko© on your X-mass list.
More innuendo. To which my response is, “. . . and, your point is?”
Whereas my point is that Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Ingraham, etc. make big money selling snake oil like radio preachers of the 1930’s did. Except they don’t have to bottle it. They manufacture it daily out of fear and rage hormones, for lack of a more scientific term. Research their endorsers for a really spooky list.
Buy some today! For The Environmentalist Wacko© on your X-mass list.
Talk about snake oil!! Just look at what Air America tried to dish out. They were so for left and full of lies, the left couldn’t even listen to them and now they are bankrupt. Hannity, Limbaugh and O’Reilly have to sort through the advertisers wanting to get on their shows because their audiences are so big. To suggest that they have conned so many people and you and the select few in Aspen are the “enlightened” ones confirms your disillusioned perspectives on how life should be as opposed to what is actually going on.
One more thing, as far as the “fools” quote, it is attributed to both Franklin and Carnegie. Check out the links below.
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/765.html
http://jpetrie.myweb.uga.edu/poor_richard.html
Talk about snake oil!! Just look at what Air America tried to dish out. They were so for left and full of lies, the left couldn’t even listen to them and now they are bankrupt. Hannity, Limbaugh and O’Reilly have to sort through the advertisers wanting to get on their shows because their audiences are so big. To suggest that they have conned so many people and you and the select few in Aspen are the “enlightened” ones confirms your disillusioned perspectives on how life should be as opposed to what is actually going on.
One more thing, as far as the “fools” quote, it is attributed to both Franklin and Carnegie. Check out the links below.
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/765.html
http://jpetrie.myweb.uga.edu/poor_richard.html
Talk about snake oil!! Just look at what Air America tried to dish out. They were so for left and full of lies, the left couldn’t even listen to them and now they are bankrupt. Hannity, Limbaugh and O’Reilly have to sort through the advertisers wanting to get on their shows because their audiences are so big. To suggest that they have conned so many people and you and the select few in Aspen are the “enlightened” ones confirms your disillusioned perspectives on how life should be as opposed to what is actually going on.
Talk about snake oil!! Just look at what Air America tried to dish out. They were so for left and full of lies, the left couldn’t even listen to them and now they are bankrupt. Hannity, Limbaugh and O’Reilly have to sort through the advertisers wanting to get on their shows because their audiences are so big. To suggest that they have conned so many people and you and the select few in Aspen are the “enlightened” ones confirms your disillusioned perspectives on how life should be as opposed to what is actually going on.
“The list goes on, even without mentioning certain regular blog posters upon whose knee-jerk venality The Con Man seems to feed.”
Does it ever occur to anyone that someone could support Rick Magnuson as they know and trust him as a long time resident of the valley–that they actually think he could do a good job?
Personally, as I wrote about in my first blog, I have nothing against Bob Braudis. I just think Rick would bring energy, a fresh approach, and a different perspective and culture to the office.
Rick may not be the “ideal” candidate, but I think he is discounted far too widely about his ability to be sheriff. First, it was that he was using this as performance art. Then it was his support of “undercover raids” (which he subsequently debunked in several interviews). Next it was the way he approached Braudis’ absence (not covered by the press)–this BTW was covered more than the absence itself. Finally it is the biased Daily News piece that officially changed the debate from substantive issues to Rick’s “embarassment” (did this previous poster see the video???) through a year-old art piece.
Frankly, his initiative is showcased in the fact that he is running; clearly he saw a need and opportunity and went with it. His substantive , numerous postings have shown after 20 years in office, Braudis needs a challenge, and new blood (interestingly, Rick has more experience in public safety in running for office now then Bob had when he became Sheriff) may be what this office needs.
History is filled with successes of newcomers coming into a staid, unchanging, and static organization and creating change. Often it has to be someone like Rick–somewhat of an outsider, willing to challenge the established rules, but someone who also gets along well with others and can lead.
I think the need for change is apparent. Numbers and statistics don’t lie. I think we confound the fact that we live in a beautiful place, with a lot of conventional dangers (e.g., murders) absent as threats, to feel no changes are needed. But DUI deaths happen; drug deaths happen; rapes and other tragedies occur; and the one office we rely on to prevent and protect us from these tragedies, and bring people to justice when they happen, is not doing its fundamental job. And the cost to deal with a case (again often not successful) is much greater than other local agencies.
These statistics–like the others presented–are in the right magnitude, no matter how they are cut. Others have been challenged, and Rick’s been proven right (unlike Braudis, who as Rick mentioned in this post quoted a number 3-fold greater than reality, and was not challenged).
Why does our community care more about an art project, or an extreme, rarely used tool for dealing with hard drug dealers, or the (admittedly biased) papers’ reporting (of the Braudis absense), then the fundamental issue that a Sheriff office must deal with–public safety???
Why do we get “warm fuzzies” with Bob Braudis (see his website, Ibbotsen songs et. al.) and articles that basically portray Rick as a creep or wierdo–WAY off base for those who know him–to frame this election as “cult of personality?” When the statistics–NEVER investigated or presented by the press, never effectively challenged by Braudis, and never really taking a foothold in this race, show there is a massive need for change–or at least questioning–in this office?
This purportedly smart, liberal, “blue” community is, in this race, repeating the 2000 and 2004 general elections. This race is a microcosm of the Presidential elections. Warm, affable, lovable Bush versus cold, alien Gore or awkward, “French” Kerry; or even worse, outright mistruths such as those against McCain (fathering a black baby; questioning his sanity in SC primaries through push polling). Running against the gays in 2004. Making the issues anything BUT the real issues.
Whether it is gay marriage and flag burning in ’04, to now art videos and whether or whether-not Rick made a misleading phone call in ’06. The real issue in ’04 (as we painfully know now) was Iraq, threats in Iran and N. Korea not dealt with’ the real issue in ’06 is a now exposed abysmally poor performance of the Sheriff’s office, and high rates of drug and DUI deaths due to policies that are laxluster, and according to Braudis “won’t change.”
I am optimisitic, so I REALLY hope the debate here will turn substantive in this last month, and the debate this Wednesday will be a start. I can hope that we (and I) as a liberal community can showcase how a political race should be held, on the issues, and dealling with core ideals and philosophies, not trivialities and “personalities.”
I have not lost faith yet.
“The list goes on, even without mentioning certain regular blog posters upon whose knee-jerk venality The Con Man seems to feed.”
Does it ever occur to anyone that someone could support Rick Magnuson as they know and trust him as a long time resident of the valley–that they actually think he could do a good job?
Personally, as I wrote about in my first blog, I have nothing against Bob Braudis. I just think Rick would bring energy, a fresh approach, and a different perspective and culture to the office.
Rick may not be the “ideal” candidate, but I think he is discounted far too widely about his ability to be sheriff. First, it was that he was using this as performance art. Then it was his support of “undercover raids” (which he subsequently debunked in several interviews). Next it was the way he approached Braudis’ absence (not covered by the press)–this BTW was covered more than the absence itself. Finally it is the biased Daily News piece that officially changed the debate from substantive issues to Rick’s “embarassment” (did this previous poster see the video???) through a year-old art piece.
Frankly, his initiative is showcased in the fact that he is running; clearly he saw a need and opportunity and went with it. His substantive , numerous postings have shown after 20 years in office, Braudis needs a challenge, and new blood (interestingly, Rick has more experience in public safety in running for office now then Bob had when he became Sheriff) may be what this office needs.
History is filled with successes of newcomers coming into a staid, unchanging, and static organization and creating change. Often it has to be someone like Rick–somewhat of an outsider, willing to challenge the established rules, but someone who also gets along well with others and can lead.
I think the need for change is apparent. Numbers and statistics don’t lie. I think we confound the fact that we live in a beautiful place, with a lot of conventional dangers (e.g., murders) absent as threats, to feel no changes are needed. But DUI deaths happen; drug deaths happen; rapes and other tragedies occur; and the one office we rely on to prevent and protect us from these tragedies, and bring people to justice when they happen, is not doing its fundamental job. And the cost to deal with a case (again often not successful) is much greater than other local agencies.
These statistics–like the others presented–are in the right magnitude, no matter how they are cut. Others have been challenged, and Rick’s been proven right (unlike Braudis, who as Rick mentioned in this post quoted a number 3-fold greater than reality, and was not challenged).
Why does our community care more about an art project, or an extreme, rarely used tool for dealing with hard drug dealers, or the (admittedly biased) papers’ reporting (of the Braudis absense), then the fundamental issue that a Sheriff office must deal with–public safety???
Why do we get “warm fuzzies” with Bob Braudis (see his website, Ibbotsen songs et. al.) and articles that basically portray Rick as a creep or wierdo–WAY off base for those who know him–to frame this election as “cult of personality?” When the statistics–NEVER investigated or presented by the press, never effectively challenged by Braudis, and never really taking a foothold in this race, show there is a massive need for change–or at least questioning–in this office?
This purportedly smart, liberal, “blue” community is, in this race, repeating the 2000 and 2004 general elections. This race is a microcosm of the Presidential elections. Warm, affable, lovable Bush versus cold, alien Gore or awkward, “French” Kerry; or even worse, outright mistruths such as those against McCain (fathering a black baby; questioning his sanity in SC primaries through push polling). Running against the gays in 2004. Making the issues anything BUT the real issues.
Whether it is gay marriage and flag burning in ’04, to now art videos and whether or whether-not Rick made a misleading phone call in ’06. The real issue in ’04 (as we painfully know now) was Iraq, threats in Iran and N. Korea not dealt with’ the real issue in ’06 is a now exposed abysmally poor performance of the Sheriff’s office, and high rates of drug and DUI deaths due to policies that are laxluster, and according to Braudis “won’t change.”
I am optimisitic, so I REALLY hope the debate here will turn substantive in this last month, and the debate this Wednesday will be a start. I can hope that we (and I) as a liberal community can showcase how a political race should be held, on the issues, and dealling with core ideals and philosophies, not trivialities and “personalities.”
I have not lost faith yet.
atta boy hoover dam – let those floodgates open wide. we do have a unique population here in aspen. unique in the sense that we don’t want to be like every other cookie cutter township or city in the us. we like to do things ‘our way ‘ just like frank sinatra, with some class. unique in the sense that our town is the way it is because of the liberal/democratic mindset. that’s what makes our town so appealing, why republicans flock here in their corporate jets to buy real estate and party with hookers and blow – because the treehuggers and hippies and hideous liberals have made our town desireable. they have preserved the beauty, and the spirit that got us here in the first place. unique in the sense that we don’t want DEA vermin here. they got plenty of work to do elsewhere. if there’s such a problem here, and we are in fact in the middle of a crime spree/wave, then the apd can step it up too.
idolize braudis? not this camper, but given the choice, and the vote, i’ll take him over rick thanks.
remember those in our unique population are not really interested in a radical change. and we vote. democrat, across the board every time. rick is effectively the republican choice.
the minority in our ‘unique population’ share your mindset, and are those who support rick.
the best thing that will come out of this election will be a look at the budget, and operational discrepencies. also some public dialogue on how to make our town safer, change some of those sheriff dui shift times. i’m all for that. and noone wants a rapist or theif to go free. it will force the sheriffs department to work at a higher level. but remember – everything costs more in pitkin county. just look at the pumps, brother.
noone wants meth or heroine here either. coke – well that’s always going to be here. coke is pure evil – behind every bindle, somewhere down the line there’s a guy in a cartel ready to lop someones head off, or kill a judge and his family with a bomb. not good.
i’m gonna have to pass on the civics lesson, but thanks for the link for those interested. i’m takin my aspen high school diploma to my grave – bronzed.
atta boy hoover dam – let those floodgates open wide. we do have a unique population here in aspen. unique in the sense that we don’t want to be like every other cookie cutter township or city in the us. we like to do things ‘our way ‘ just like frank sinatra, with some class. unique in the sense that our town is the way it is because of the liberal/democratic mindset. that’s what makes our town so appealing, why republicans flock here in their corporate jets to buy real estate and party with hookers and blow – because the treehuggers and hippies and hideous liberals have made our town desireable. they have preserved the beauty, and the spirit that got us here in the first place. unique in the sense that we don’t want DEA vermin here. they got plenty of work to do elsewhere. if there’s such a problem here, and we are in fact in the middle of a crime spree/wave, then the apd can step it up too.
idolize braudis? not this camper, but given the choice, and the vote, i’ll take him over rick thanks.
remember those in our unique population are not really interested in a radical change. and we vote. democrat, across the board every time. rick is effectively the republican choice.
the minority in our ‘unique population’ share your mindset, and are those who support rick.
the best thing that will come out of this election will be a look at the budget, and operational discrepencies. also some public dialogue on how to make our town safer, change some of those sheriff dui shift times. i’m all for that. and noone wants a rapist or theif to go free. it will force the sheriffs department to work at a higher level. but remember – everything costs more in pitkin county. just look at the pumps, brother.
noone wants meth or heroine here either. coke – well that’s always going to be here. coke is pure evil – behind every bindle, somewhere down the line there’s a guy in a cartel ready to lop someones head off, or kill a judge and his family with a bomb. not good.
i’m gonna have to pass on the civics lesson, but thanks for the link for those interested. i’m takin my aspen high school diploma to my grave – bronzed.
“remember those in our unique population are not really interested in a radical change. and we vote. democrat, across the board every time. rick is effectively the republican choice.”
Woah!!! I thought democrats and liberals were for change, and the very meaning of conservative was to “resist change.” Sorry to bust your categories, but I am a hardcore democrat, i think liberal is a great word, and low-and-behold I am a Magnuson supporter. I have never voted Republican, probably never will (although I do like some moderate Republicans like the Governator and a ~2000-era McCain).
Stop categorizing this into superficialities, let’s get to the issues! This is not a republican/democrat thing by any means. Read Rick’s policies again–very progressive. Education- and preventative-based drug policy. Community based policing (based on his 10 years as CSO). Greening the department, including hybridizing the fleet and reducing energy consumption to Canary-Initiative levels. And a performance-oriented approach that will actually measure his department’s performance and take a TQM approach to actually improve it.
“it will force the sheriffs department to work at a higher level. but remember – everything costs more in pitkin county. just look at the pumps, brother.”
Rick’s benchmarks were against Aspen and Basalt–apples to apples, both in PitCo. Braudis’s office is 42% more expensive per call, with a conviction rate severalfold lower.
Other than that, I applaud the fact that you are actually taking the statistics and Rick’s message seriously.
PLEASE email or call Rick and try and keep an open mind about this election. I think if you are concerned about the performance of the department, you need to get more involved int his race. Re-electing Braudis is not going to hold him accountable–in fact, it will just perpetuate the current culture and regime (and don’t be surprised who runs next time if Braudis wins…if not Braudis, then a hand-picked successor).
“remember those in our unique population are not really interested in a radical change. and we vote. democrat, across the board every time. rick is effectively the republican choice.”
Woah!!! I thought democrats and liberals were for change, and the very meaning of conservative was to “resist change.” Sorry to bust your categories, but I am a hardcore democrat, i think liberal is a great word, and low-and-behold I am a Magnuson supporter. I have never voted Republican, probably never will (although I do like some moderate Republicans like the Governator and a ~2000-era McCain).
Stop categorizing this into superficialities, let’s get to the issues! This is not a republican/democrat thing by any means. Read Rick’s policies again–very progressive. Education- and preventative-based drug policy. Community based policing (based on his 10 years as CSO). Greening the department, including hybridizing the fleet and reducing energy consumption to Canary-Initiative levels. And a performance-oriented approach that will actually measure his department’s performance and take a TQM approach to actually improve it.
“it will force the sheriffs department to work at a higher level. but remember – everything costs more in pitkin county. just look at the pumps, brother.”
Rick’s benchmarks were against Aspen and Basalt–apples to apples, both in PitCo. Braudis’s office is 42% more expensive per call, with a conviction rate severalfold lower.
Other than that, I applaud the fact that you are actually taking the statistics and Rick’s message seriously.
PLEASE email or call Rick and try and keep an open mind about this election. I think if you are concerned about the performance of the department, you need to get more involved int his race. Re-electing Braudis is not going to hold him accountable–in fact, it will just perpetuate the current culture and regime (and don’t be surprised who runs next time if Braudis wins…if not Braudis, then a hand-picked successor).
rick’s ‘greening’ policies should be put into effect immediately. those are great ideas. agreed. trimming fat couldn’t hurt.
still don’t think rick has a chance, but his ideas will be talked about.
should be an interesting ellection. when’s the debate on grassroots?
rick’s ‘greening’ policies should be put into effect immediately. those are great ideas. agreed. trimming fat couldn’t hurt.
still don’t think rick has a chance, but his ideas will be talked about.
should be an interesting ellection. when’s the debate on grassroots?
The fact of the matter is that people are more concerned with dismissing the facts surrounding the operation of the Sheriff’s department because they feel that for some reason, Braudis is entitled to the Sheriff’s job. Michael is right, let’s keep in mind, Kienast handed Braudis the Sheriff’s position. Braudis was elected on Kienast’s coat tails.
Perhaps it is that line of direct succession that adds to everyone viewing Braudis as King. Just remember, you might very well be voting for King Braudis and very soon end up with Prince DiSalvo taking the reins.
The fact of the matter is that no matter how much people wish Braudis could be annointed King, he is just another elected official who is expected to be held accountable for the actions or inactions of his department.
The fact of the matter is that people are more concerned with dismissing the facts surrounding the operation of the Sheriff’s department because they feel that for some reason, Braudis is entitled to the Sheriff’s job. Michael is right, let’s keep in mind, Kienast handed Braudis the Sheriff’s position. Braudis was elected on Kienast’s coat tails.
Perhaps it is that line of direct succession that adds to everyone viewing Braudis as King. Just remember, you might very well be voting for King Braudis and very soon end up with Prince DiSalvo taking the reins.
The fact of the matter is that no matter how much people wish Braudis could be annointed King, he is just another elected official who is expected to be held accountable for the actions or inactions of his department.
“Rick’s benchmarks were against Aspen and Basalt–apples to apples”
michael – how dare you compare aspen to basalt. i’m insulted.
how about comparing jumbo shrimp to imitation crab.
or chateaubriand to a big mac.
or aspen to vail.
a self professed hardcore democrat/liberal that supports rick magnuson? consider yourself an anomaly.
“Rick’s benchmarks were against Aspen and Basalt–apples to apples”
michael – how dare you compare aspen to basalt. i’m insulted.
how about comparing jumbo shrimp to imitation crab.
or chateaubriand to a big mac.
or aspen to vail.
a self professed hardcore democrat/liberal that supports rick magnuson? consider yourself an anomaly.
“michael – how dare you compare aspen to basalt. i’m insulted.
how about comparing jumbo shrimp to imitation crab.
or chateaubriand to a big mac.”
ha ha ha–that’s (seriously) pretty funny.
Trust me, with the hub-ub of the Roaring Fork Club and its attempted hijacking of that town’s master plan, Basalt is fast encroaching on Aspen (from the greed perspective, that is).
“michael – how dare you compare aspen to basalt. i’m insulted.
how about comparing jumbo shrimp to imitation crab.
or chateaubriand to a big mac.”
ha ha ha–that’s (seriously) pretty funny.
Trust me, with the hub-ub of the Roaring Fork Club and its attempted hijacking of that town’s master plan, Basalt is fast encroaching on Aspen (from the greed perspective, that is).
glad to hear it. let me know how i can help – i know alot of developers. and i have a tractor.
glad to hear it. let me know how i can help – i know alot of developers. and i have a tractor.