At 21:33 of the Coal Plant Video

At 21:33:

Ed McKnight: I would like to ask Commissioner Kuntz, you talked about stepping up and taking leadership in this power process. And yet all the information I have, either the coal plant or Electric City Power, you have done nothing but lose money.

Channing Hartelius: So is that your question?

McKnight: If losing money is an indication of leadership, is that the kind of leadership that we need?

Hartelius: Did you under...did you get the question?

Diane Jovick-Kuntz: I did. And again your figures and my figures are different on the losing money. You've gone to the budget and picked one particular line item out of our budget and said we're losing, we're losing, we're losing. You have not gone and visited with Coleen Balzarini on a regular basis regarding this issue so you view us as losing, losing, losing. I don't view it that way, and I think with Electric City Power, because of the obligations that we have, for the contracts, for the next 20 years, there will be enough revenue to carry us through. And we will not continue to lose money.

Hartelius: Thank you Diane.

[Emphasis Added]

See, p. 28, p. 7 in Adobe Acrobat: Operating Loss, Electric Fund:
-404,973.

Actually, I think we have the same figures, don't we? And yes, I am picking out one line from the AUDITED financial statements. It's the line called "Operating Income (Loss)."

The obvious: If we're not losing, losing, losing right now, how can we "continue" to lose money? Good question, eh, Dr. Freud?

Format Update

Due to popular demand (uprising?) we have changed the debate format.

There will still be a $5.00 admission charge to help me cover my out of pocket costs.

The $10.00 vote, though, will be optional. If you want to vote for a winner, it will cost you $10.00. You are, however, free to attend the debate and listen without voting.

Remember: Wednesday, October 17, 7:00 p.m.
Northwest Center, 2201 Northwest Bypass

From Mayor Stebbins

I will be unable to participate since I will be in Billings on a family matter on the 17th and part of the 18th. I wish you well and hope you have a good turnout. As always, people who want to know where I stand on any particular issue are welcome to call me at 761.4108 or email me at donastebbins@bresnan.net

Warm regards,
Dona

Debate Coverage TV

It is my understanding that KRTV will be covering the Debate this Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. I sent an email to KFBB, but have not received a response.

Debate Coverage Radio

David from Greaterfalls received a note to the effect that the Debate will be taped by KGPR Public Radio for replay at a later date.

Debate Update...Uh...Update

We have another confirmed debater.

City Commission candidate, Michael Winters, has confirmed that he will attend.

That leaves Larry Steele and our two incumbents, Dona Stebbins and Diane Jovick-Kuntz.

Confirmed Debaters

Below are the Mayoral and City Commission candidates. Those who have accepted our invitation are in bold type. I sent another invitation yesterday to the four who have not contacted us yet. If you know them, please encourage them to attend.

Mayor:

Susan Kahn
Dona Stebbins
Ed McKnight
Larry Steele

City Commission:

Mary Jolley
Stuart Lewin
Diane Jovick-Kuntz
Elna Hensley
Michael Winters
Bill Bronson

Debate Update

I will be meeting with the CMR Debate Team this Thursday to finalize the format for the debate. I hope to announce that format by Friday or Saturday.

I will meet with them again early next week to finalize the questions. We have some, but not enough to choose from. If you have question ideas, please email them to me at fallsblog@yahoo.com. One of the most significant complaints about this setup was the fact that the public can't ask questions....well, ask 'em!

I am going to try to send another invitation out today urging those who have not yet committed to attend. We'll see.

Finally, one of my goals is to videotape the debate, digitize it, and put it on YouTube. If you or anyone you know can help me in this regard, please email me at the above-address.

Format Change

Oh, one more thing. As noted below, I met with members of the CMR Debate Team yesterday. I almost forgot to mention one more detail.

There has been criticism about the manner of voting for the 'winner' of the debate. People have suggested that it will create a mere "popularity contest" with groups of supporters voting for their favorite candidates.

In order to inject some objectivity into the process, there will be a second vote. The Debate Team will create its own ballot, and will judge the debate on a more technical basis, something along the lines of what they are judged on in their meets.

Thus, we might well have two winners. The popular winner and the technical winner. And if both are the same person, I might suggest that we will have a clear winner.

Debate Team

I met with the coach and members of the CMR Debate Team yesterday.

I was extremely pleased with the enthusiasm they demonstrated toward this event. These are smart young people, and they know what they are doing. I am very glad we asked them to be a part of this event.

They will assist with developing a format. There will be time limits on responses, just like a real debate. Also, we are going to work hard to develop a way for candidates to question other candidates about their positions. It seems to us that we can learn an awful lot about a candidate not only from his or her answers, but the way he or she approaches the consideration of the other positions.

They will assist with developing the questions to be asked. This is not because the questions will be "censored" as some have said. It is to ensure that the topic areas are presented in a concise, reasoned fashion that will be easily understood by candidates and audience alike. It will also help to ensure that the questions can be answered. Directly, and not through long, evasive ramblings.

We also plan to allow a certain number of students to attend this event for free. We're still working on the criteria. Since we have no idea about attendance numbers, we do not know if we have the ability to just allow all students to attend.

I am very pleased with the level of commitment I saw from these guys. This will be a good thing.

Debate Sponsor

I had an offer for a sponsorship in the comments: "I will put up the entire $400 fee for the building use for the debate, will accept GeeGuy as moderator, but I want a true town hall debate; No entry fee, no question fee,allow questions from the floor, anyone can ask any question when called upon. Call me: 965-3013,Ric Valois, The Tree Man"

With all due respect to Mr. Valois, the format is not for sale.

I called Mr. Valois last evening and explained to him that while I certainly appreciate his offer, we have many reasons for doing things the way we are doing them, only some of which appear here.

I think Mr. Valois and others intend to create their own forum more along the lines of what he discussed. More power to him. If I learn of such a forum, I will post the details here.

Our intention in choosing a structure for this debate is to provide a systematic format to allow the audience to hear the positions of the candidates.

We considered a more open format as suggested by Mr. Valois. We opted for more structure for several reasons. First, time is limited so we wanted to ensure that issues considered important by many people will be adequately addressed. Second, and probably most significant, is that we did not want this event to devolve into a free for all. While ticked off, red meat opponents of City Government might well relish an insult-laden shout fest, I don't want to be a party to any such thing.

And, how likely is it that an incumbent would choose to be a party to such a thing. If you were Mayor Stebbins, would you choose to stand up in front of the same bunch that has been haranguing you at Commission meetings and listen to them spew anger? I sure wouldn't.

Don't get us wrong; this is not about protecting the incumbents from criticism or difficult questions. It is about trying to create an environment whereby the incumbents can have a fair opportunity to present their point of view. We do not know if either of the incumbents will participate, but we want them to, so we are trying to create a venue that increases the likelihood of their participation.

Then Don't Come

Life is all about rules.

For all of you debate naysayers, give it a rest and grow up. GeeGuy, David at GreaterFalls and the others did NOT have to sponsor this event. I’m sure GeeGuy could find other worthwhile causes for his $400.00. They are trying to do a community service here. What are you doing besides complaining and finding fault? As far as I know, this is the only opportunity any of the candidates have been given to address the public and promote their platforms. The fact that a couple of them have criticized the rules pretty much indicates to me they don’t really appreciate the opportunity they’ve been given and neither do you. If they or you don’t like the rules, don’t come.

Sponsors

A commenter asks:

Who really wanted this venue in the first place? IF it's a supporter of Stebbins, then this is a rigged situation no matter WHO attempts to run it correctly. And this accusation is based on her history in office.

So pony up on the originator's name and association, it shouldn't be a problem for an honest person to admit they simply wanted to offer a debate.

However, IF it's a Stebbings supporter, I must ask why the pay-to-play as there are places that might be had for free so as to broaden the general public participation.

If its known who wanted this format then, perhaps, the nay sayers will be more trusting and positive.

Um, hello?

I picked the venue. And I'll tell you why I picked the Northwest Center, but I must admit that my reason is quite nefarious: It's the first place I thought of.

Seriously. I thought of it. I called them. It was available. And who is underwriting it? I am.

Who picked the format? David and I did. Why? Because it's different and interesting. Because we want a format where the candidates are challenged a bit, rather than simply reciting talking points. If they don't want the money, they can certainly donate it to charity.

A friend of mine who has a great deal of political experience warned me that there would be all kinds of caterwauling and bitching. He was right. Wow, was he right.

But yes, I picked the venue. You see, there is quite a bit of legwork involved in setting this up. We had to work with the Commissioner of Political Practices on the format. We had to try to get coordinated with the CMR Debate Team, the coach of which is very busy (as are the students). We had to line up the moderator.

So I guess I didn't feel a huge obligation to try to find some venue that someone else might find more appropriate. I picked one, it's available, I booked it. I put my money down in the hope that enough people will show up that I break even.

If most people won't show up and pay $5.00, then I guess I'm out the money.

Now maybe you can tell us who you are?

Finally!

I have been chomping at the proverbial bit to make this announcement, but we had to get our ducks in a row.

They're lined up and quackin' (metaphor alert!).

Our friend David at GreaterFalls.com is taking the lead on a DEBATE for the City Commission and Mayoral Candidates. It will be sponsored by the Great Falls bloggers, and we'll be getting a great deal of help from the CMR Debate Team.

Here's the cool part. Not only will the questions come from you, the readers and the commenters, but there will be an actual winner of the debate. How, you ask? The audience will vote. And not only will they vote with their heads, they will vote with their pocketbooks.

Each attendee will be required to cast one $10.00 vote for the candidate he or she thinks won the debate. The candidates who receive the votes will also receive the money for their campaigns. Pretty interesting, isn't it? The Office of the Commissioner of Political Practices has already approved this voting method.

The exact format of the debate is still being worked out (again with the help of the CMR Debate Team) but will be some sort of modified town hall format. With local attorney Channing Hartelius serving as the moderator, the whole event will be designed to allow the audience to really get to know the candidates and how they perform under pressure.

If you have proposed debate questions, please leave them in the comments or email them to me. We'll then go through those submitted and select our favorites for inclusion.

Mark your calendars: October 17, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. Admission is $15.00, $5.00 for admission and $10.00 for the vote. It will be at the Northwest Center, 2201 Northwest Bypass.

I think that the local blogosphere, readers and writers, represents the most informed and interested members of our electorate. We're counting on you to prove that.

Please plan to attend.