We are faced with “hiring” our next County Executive and pay him $147,500 per year—a salary that says they should be qualified to hold the job. 

And that is where Jack Louws wins my support between these two.  Doug has never supervised more than two people.  How will he take on the administrative responsibilities of Public Works, Health Department, Finance, Human Resources, Information Technology, Planning and Building?  Jack has this depth of experience in both the private and public sector.

It might be easy for some to sit this one out.  Some I know will.  But there is too much at risk to cry over “what could have been” to sit this one out.

So while Jack might differ on policy issues from myself, I know that he will work harder at reaching out to all citizens. And, he comes to the job more qualified to earn $147,500 per year of YOUR money.

David, thanks for reinforcing the post.

We liberals, progressives, Democrats and Independents need to support Jack Louws by actually voting for him.  Without us, he will lose.  In addition to having shown that he listens to all sides on issues, as David points out,  he also has a reputation for fairness and integrity.  These are not just simple virtues, but super important attributes that we need in any of our Executives.  Council members can espouse a cause and be valuable, but our city mayors and county executive need to truly be honest and also be fair to all citizens.  This puts Jack Louws head and shudders above Doug Ericksen.  These are liberal values and we on the left can and should support Louws with our vote.  Those liberals who sit this out are damaging their own vision of our future.

I agree with you John. I shudder to think about Doug as county ex. and will be voting for Louws. Cause Doug don’t know Jack about being a County ex.

One additional thought - Mr. Louws has run a family business and knows what it is to make payroll week in and week out. He knows who it is that pays for County government - and what a burden a spendthrift in the County Exec’s seat puts on taxpayers’ shoulders. Mr. Ericksen, by contrast, is a Republican Party careerist who makes his living at the public’s expense and (of course) from his party’s wealthy sponsors.

We need more thrift, and less career building in our County government. And we certainly don’t need career politicians from either party to infect our local government with their institutional corruption.

Riley - you say Stalheim was “the defacto Democratic Party candidate” - for a non-partisan office? If true, perhaps that’s why he lost. It’s certainly the reason Mr. Ericksen, a Republican party functionary, should lose.

Clarification - John Servais wrote this article. The Dems were divided in this race, between Stalheim and Anderson. I don’t think either one was the defacto Dem candidate, and yes, I agree that Ericksen should lose because of his extreme Partisan views. He is not just a party figure, he is an ideologue.