Tuesday, June 12, 2018

Candidate Vetting-2018-from your elected delegates

Dear Highland 02 Republicans,

This election cycle we had 4 delegates vetting the candidates for US Senate (Mike Kennedy and Mitt Romney) and US House, District 3 (John Curtis and Chris Herrod)

I am listing their names and a link to the reviews that have been provided:

Wendy Hart, Precinct Chair: Candidate Review
Ruth White, Precinct Secretary: Candidate Review
John Dougall
Troy Dougall: Candidate Review



We also had 6 delegates vetting the candidates for:
Utah State House, District 27 (Brady Brammer and Jared Carman)
County Commission, Seat A (Tanner Ainge and Tom Sakievich)
County Sheriff (Jim Phelps and Mike Smith)
County Attorney (Chad Grunander and David Leavitt)

Here are our delegates and a link to their reviews:
Wendy Hart, Precinct Chair: Candidate Review
Devirl Barfuss, Precinct Vice-Chair: Candidate Review
Tim Heyrend: Candidate Review
Rod and Suzanne Mann: Candidate Review
Scott Smith

Thank you for electing us to represent you and to vet these candidates on your behalf. We hope that our insights will assist you in making good decisions as you exercise your right and your responsibility to vote.


Primary Candidates-2018-State Delegate White

From State Delegate Ruth White, who vetted the candidates for US Senate and US House, District 3.


As a state delegate, I vetted for two races, U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representative. I enjoyed meeting with the candidates and participating in the caucus and the convention.
The Senate race is between Mike Kennedy and Mitt Romney.  I voted for Mike Kennedy as I have far more confidence that he is a strong conservative and will vote accordingly.  With his history in the Utah House of Representatives, he has a solid voting record that shows he is what he says he is.  Some examples of his stances are that he has consistently voted against tax increases and spending.  He is strongly against federal government expansion and intrusion such as with healthcare, education, and the Utah Public Lands issues in which he pointed out that the BLM has been militarized and is unaccountable to the people.  He is not voting for any process that encourages federal power over the people.  I saw Mike Kennedy in the debate, and at candidate meet and greet events as he talked with delegates.  I was impressed with how very even tempered his nature was.  He never got ruffled or hot under the collar from my fellow delegates, or his fellow candidates.  That ability will play well for him when he is dealing with a hostile media, or working in the shark tank of D.C.   He has demonstrated he is a solid conservative who’s shown he stands on principle even in the face of adversarial heat and pressure.
Mitt Romney did not participate in the candidate debate.  I attended a candidate meet and greet event for him on which he did most of the speaking and allowed minimal questions.  He is definitely charming and a skilled public speaker.  He addressed general republican principles but was a little difficult to pin down on specifics.  So it was a bit more challenging to get a clear picture on where he stands.  I referred to videos posted by fellow delegates of additional Romney events throughout the state in which my experience was reinforced. On occasion he’d get annoyed when he was pressed to be more specific which I think is silly and senseless.  Some points he made were that the states take care of issues such as the uninsured, transportation, education and that he would push back against the federal government to bring the obligation of those things back to the states.  He put a lot of stress on the budget and stated that because of his relations with other senators and politicians he will be able to get things done.  Although he could talk well, I have great concern that there isn’t a solid track record that demonstrates a conservative history consistent with his claims.   He has at times in the past supported liberal policies, liberal candidates and has flipped back and forth on issues depending on how he perceived the political winds to shift.  When my job is to vet a candidate to assure he will be loyal to the party platform, I cannot say I have confidence Romney will do that.  I also find his claim that he will be more influential than a junior Senator could be because of his national “clout” to be dubious and a weak qualifier.  Mike Lee went to D.C. as a junior senator, has stood on conservative principle and has been a strong voice in the Senate.  When the folks at home are more concerned with draining the swamp, Romney is pointing out that he’s one of the “elite” insiders.  How does this claim show he’s got what it takes to stand up against the “establishment” when principle is on the line? Unfortunately, this claim indicates the opposite to me.  While Mitt Romney has charm and is a good public speaker, I can’t say he is a principled candidate that we can trust to stand for Utah.
The  House race is between Chris Herrod and John Curtis.  I voted for Chris Herrod as I felt he was the candidate that was most solidly in-line with conservative principles and the party platform.  He also has his experience in the Utah House to back him up.  I spoke with Herrod at a candidate meet and greet.  He was very well versed, on any issue put before him and addressed them very matter-of-factly and in a straight forward manner.  Some examples of topics he addressed were immigration issues--supporting reforms to make legal immigration better while working to stop the influx of illegal immigration; state sovereignty in regards to public lands issues; education belonging at the local level, he was against any federal overreach, and supports President Trump’s conservative agenda.  Truly he is a straight shooter down the party platform and his knowledge had breadth and was indepth. I also meet with John Curtis at a candidate meet and greet.  He was well-spoken and smoother in his self-presentation than Herrod was.  He also is very well versed in subjects and took a great deal of time to meet with the delegates and to discuss concerns.  I noticed on occasion he used some clever evasive language to avoid taking the hard stance on some topics, such as on his choice to gather signatures; the need to stop illegal immigration, claiming to align with the President on the “broader goal” just not on the “how-tos”; and avoiding the stickiness of LGBT rights vs. religious liberty stating that society needs to work those issues out, but declining to say how society does that or how policy would be made. Curtis is a former democrat which makes me wonder about his convictions.  Hopefully it was a true conversion and not an electoral necessity but some things cause me to wonder such as those evasive answers.  He also claimed to vote “No” on the Omnibus spending bill that was passed but neglected to mention that prior to this vote, he voted “Yes” to move it from committee and bring it to the floor for debate and vote.  His subsequent “No” vote was useless and would have been more effective defeating the Omnibus bill in committee where the vote was close and his fellow republicans needed his support.  It was unfortunate that he departed from his colleagues when the real crucible was hanging in the balance in committee.  Curtis was an excellent public speaker, well versed and made a great deal of effort to talk to delegates. But it concerns me when he avoided some hard stances with carefully crafted non-committal answers.   Chris Herrod was definitely knowledgeable, being very well versed in every issue, always answered in a straight forward manner, and is a definitely a solid conservative.

Monday, June 11, 2018

Primary Candidates-2018-County Delegates Mann

Rod and Suzanne Mann were county delegates.  Here are their opinions on the County races.


County Attorney: Chad. I have spent quite a bit of time talking with him. I believe he is well qualified and is concerned about prosecutorial overreach. I have no issues with him despite the many critiques I heard

County Commissioner: Tom. He impressed us both. I believe he will work hard for us and try to do the right thing. His values are similar to ours. I actually think Tanner Ainge would be fine but I like Tom’s grey hairs and marine background.

County Sherriff: Jim Phelps. We both like Jim a lot. I like the fact that he has identified specific issues that he sees coming and how he wants to address them. I also really like his positive energy. Mike is well qualified but doesn’t give me the same positive vibe that I get from Jim.

Neither were State Delegates, but here is their opinion on the Senate race.

Senator: Mike Kennedy. No explanation required.

Primary Candidates-2018-County Delegate Heyrend

County Delegate Tim Heyrend shares his thoughts on the candidates.  He was not elected to vote for the US Senate Race but is happy to share his opinion on that race, as well.


I voted for:
Mitt Romney for Senate, due to his national experience, clout, and balanced budget ideas.

Jim Phelps for Sheriff, great experience all around and many years of service as a U.S. Marshall.

Brady Brammer for House, I worked with Brady on the Highland Planning Commission. He is a super smart attorney who gets the job done and stood up for our community values time and time again on the Commission. He has the drive to finalize the east west connector for us.

Tom Sakievich for County Commission. He is a sage, experienced conservative who understands the County government process.

Chad Grunader for County Attorney. Many Years of experience and successful prosecutions in the most difficult and heinous felony cases.

Best Regards,
Tim Heyrend

Primary Candidates-2018-State Delegate T. Dougall

Here is the opinion of State Delegate, Troy Dougall:

For the State Races of US Senate and US House, District 3:

I'm supporting Romney largely because the Senate is a close-knit body built on personal relations and I think Mitt has worked with, campaigned for, and fundraised for nearly every Republican Senator, therefore I think he will be more effective at pushing through choice policy than any normal senator.

For Curtis the main thing I would say is that he is by far the most accountable and accessible person in Utah’s delegation and likely more accessible and accountable than the heavy majority of Representatives. Most people may vote a certain way hoping that 2 years down the line they’ll have other accomplishments to campaign on to mask the bad vote and that people will largely forget the bad vote. For John if he has a bad vote, he’s going to be facing voters in a week or two and will have to explain himself. This, naturally, largely prevents him from bad voting and raises his level of accountability to the people. 


Troy is familiar with some of the County races and their candidates, and this is his opinion on those, even though he was not elected to vote in those races at Convention.

I would recommend Jared Carman over Brady Brammer.

I honestly like both Mike Smith and Jim Phelps but I've gotten multiple opportunities to talk to Jim Phelps in a friendly/non-political manner and he is extremely nice. 

I absolutely recommend Chad Grunander for County Attorney. I've been able to talk to him a lot (he lives in John Curtis's ward actually) and it sounds like he is the most experienced and has had an extensive history prosecuting high level crimes like homicide and drug trafficking.

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Primary Candidates--June 2018--Precinct Vice-Chair


Dear residents in the HI02 precinct,

You elected me to represent you at the Utah County Republican convention in April and I wanted to report back to you as to how and why I voted the way I did.

County Commission Seat A – Tom Sakievich verses Tanner Ainge
I voted for Tom. I believe the commission needs a disciplined and mature person who has high level, organizational and planning experience within a governmental bureaucracy.
Tom served thirty eight years in the United State Marine Corps, the last few years being responsible for restructuring a major section of the Corps, affecting 180,000 members and saving several hundred million dollars in the process.
Tanner, on the other hand, is a very bright, quick study and has highly developed evaluation skills as a venture capitalist and was, without question, the best debater in the field of six candidates.
The tipping point for me was when each candidate was asked to say something they admired about the candidate sitting next to them. Five struggled with this question but from Tom, the compliments flowed like an open floodgate. He demonstrated that he is a self-confident, people person who is comfortable praising the good qualities of even a competitor.

Utah House Seat, District 27 – Jared Carman versus Brady Brammer
I voted for Jared Carman. I looked for a candidate who exhibited the qualities that I admire in Mike Kennedy.
Jared is a successful entrepreneur (2 tech companies, 3 patents), helped the Utah legislators draft and pass pro-family legislation and has worked for years to ensure parents rights with regard to their children’s education. He has experience working directly with the legislature and understands the value of and the challenges that face small businesses. My support for Jared has increased as I have gotten to know him personally since the convention.
Brady Brammer, on the other hand, has years of service on the Highland City Planning Commission and is familiar with the legislative process. In truth, he has an impressive resume. The deal breaker for me was circumventing the caucus system by collecting signatures to ensure that he would be on the primary ballot in June, regardless of delegate preference.

County Sheriff – Mike Smith and Jim Phelps
I voted for Mike Smith. I talked with both candidates at length and both would be good but for different reasons. Mike is stronger in administrative experience and is well known and supported by many of his fellow police chiefs. Jim, on the other hand, has vast and varied experience working with other law enforcement agencies as a US Marshal. I got the impression that Jim may be too closely associated with the County Attorney’s office, a bit of an insider. Even though they have to work together, as a citizen, I prefer that they be as independent as possible. Mike appears to be one more step removed from the other branch of the justice system and that, I think, gives the average citizen greater protection and may reduce preferential treatment of insiders.

County Attorney – David Leavitt and Chad Grunander
I voted for David.
There are accusations that the County Attorney’s office has been over zealous in prosecuting some cases. The office has also vigorously resisted the attempts by the County Commissioners to investigate and/or regulate (hold accountable) the county attorneys. I understand the need to for independence but I also recognize arrogance. Chad is the assistant County Attorney today. He obviously comes with extensive experience with the office and as a local prosecutor but he, in my opinion, is tainted by the history of the office.
David, on the other, has extensive experience in other counties at the County Attorney level in both criminal prosecution and defending counties and municipalities. For me, this is a very attractive balance. The County Attorney needs experience in both disciplines in order to run a balanced office. David is also an “outsider” to the Utah County environment. And probably most important, I have great respect for the two attorneys who represented him at the open houses when David had scheduling conflicts.

State Races
I was not a state delegate but have personal experience with two of the four candidates running for Congress or US Senate.

US Senate
I support Mike Kennedy. I know him personally and his values align perfectly with mine. He did NOT collect signatures but allowed the delegates to interview him and let them decide who would best represent Utah’s interests. Mitt, on the other hand, did pay people to collect signatures, thus bypassing the caucus system. Mitt’s signature health care legislation, as Governor of MA, became the template for Obamacare. Mitt is an experienced and highly effective executive but I have reservations about his personal politics.

US Congressional Seat District 3
I know Chris Herrod personally and worked on his campaign a year ago. Again, his values align perfectly with mine. John lost badly in convention but because he paid to have signatures collected, he essentially bypassed the caucus system and forced Chris into a primary, which is where the man with the most money won.

Thank you for electing me to represent you at convention and I hope you agree that I voted for the right people for the right reasons. I welcome your comments because it is impossible for one person to know everything about every candidate.

Devirl Barfuss, Precinct Vice-Chair

Primary Candidates--June, 2018--Precinct Chair

Mail-in ballots have arrived!

Thank you for giving me the honor of representing you in vetting our primary candidates.  I think our local level is the most important for all politics because we should be able to meet, discuss, agree or disagree, and still be neighborly.  As your delegates, we have spent in some case 20 -40 hours meeting, grilling, and discussing issues with these candidates.  I encourage you to talk with your delegates and get their opinions on the candidates.  (A list of our delegates can be found below, so you know who to contact.  The opinions of the candidates expressed are mine alone.)  Whether you agree or disagree with the delegates' opinions, their insights will prove valuable in assisting you in making an informed decision.

We are fortunate to have great candidates who were willing to put their hats into the ring and offer themselves up as our representatives.

State Races (Delegates: John Dougall, Troy Dougall, Wendy Hart, Ruth White)

US Senate:  This is the most high-profile race on this ballot and is between Mike Kennedy and Mitt Romney.

I voted for Dr. Kennedy.

Dr. Mike Kennedy has been serving our area in the Utah State House for the past 6 years.  He has a very conservative voting record and sees our national debt as one of the biggest problems we face on a federal level.  Dr. Kennedy has seen, first-hand, the problems with the Affordable Care Act.  He is a strong defender of individual and parental rights, especially on the medical front.  He has been on the appropriations committees at the State Legislature and understands both personally, professionally, and politically how to prioritize and how to balance a budget.  He is supportive of many of the current policies, such as the recent Tax Cut, and he wants to return control of education to the local level.  He understands the importance of returning control of Utah's Public Lands to the state.  Dr. Kennedy did not gather signatures, wanting to leave his political fate in the hands of those who he had to convince face-to-face.  Personally, I have known Dr. Kennedy for the past 6 years and have worked with him closely as a legislator.  I know he is very opposed to Common Core and federal intervention in education.  He is always willing to listen to every position and consider the merits of those arguments.  Even those who disagree on policy acknowledge his willingness to be considerate and kind to everyone.  This isn't just a show, it is at the core of who he is.

Gov. Romney, as most know, was Governor of Massachussets and a candidate for the US Presidency.  He is very well-known, nationally, and in political circles.  He was an "adopted son" during the 2002 Winter Olympics, when he took over after the scandal that plagued the beginnings of those games.  Initially, during the Meet the Candidates, there were not too many opportunities to ask questions directly of Candidate Romney.  As those events continued, a few more questions did come to light.  Mr. Romney seemed to learn quickly what the issues in Utah were; however, the Public Lands concerns were never addressed to my satisfaction.  Also, I had concerns about healthcare mandates, and as the author of the blueprint for the Affordable Care Act.  Mr. Romney does know people in DC and does have a lot of influence.  Gov. Romney gathered signatures to guarantee he was on the primary ballot.

I am unsure that Mr. Romney understands Utah's issues as well as Dr. Kennedy.  I think if he is advised by those who share your issues, he will vote correctly, but if not, I am unsure how he would vote.  I had hoped to get a greater understanding of Gov. Romney during the candidate meetings, but most of them were not as question-and-answer as the other candidates in all the other races.  Because of this, I know the public persona, but can't speak to anything else.  I had hoped for that not to be the case.

US Congress, District 3:  John Curtis and Chris Herrod

I voted for Mr. Herrod in convention to force a primary.  I am leaning toward supporting Mr. Curtis in the primary.

Mr. Curtis is our incumbent and has been for just a handful of months.  However, in those few months, I have been pleased with his votes.  Rep. Curtis joked, "I was in Congress for 2 days, and the House passed tax reform!"  (Many laughs.)  He voted against the Omnibus spending bill.  He understands the issue with public lands.  He's strong on border security but isn't sure he agrees with the President on the wall.  But he does agree with him on the goal of border security, including ports, airports, etc.  He has voted against deregulation.  His view on DACA is we need to add certainty to their lives, but continue with stronger borders. On Affordable Care Act, we need to not see insurance as a way to pay for basics, and supported removing the penalty for not having insurance.  He supported the Tax Cuts.  What I appreciated the most about Rep. Curtis was his accessibility and his willingness to talk with people, especially those who disagreed with him.  When he was in DC, he had tele-townhalls every evening till 8pm our time/ 10pm his time.  Since convention, he has had multiple events around our district, and his outreach to the people he represents is second to none.  I think when you hear the concerns of those you represent, you are better able to make wise decisions on their behalf.  Rep. Curtis gathered signatures to guarantee he was on the primary ballot.

Mr. Herrod has served in the Utah State Legislature and is very strong on the County Republican Platform.  He is consistent with the principles articulated there, and I have been very supportive of those principles.  Mr. Herrod is strong on border security and understands the great need we have to fix our legal immigration system.  As the husband of a legal immigrant, he has seen first-hand the brokenness of that process.  If we could fix legal immigration, then we would be able to make it easier for people to come in through the front door, as it were.  Mr. Herrod is opposed to Common Core and federal involvement in education.  However, he was not as available for delegate meetings as Mr. Curtis.  Mr. Herrod did not gather signatures.

County Races: (Delegates: Devirl Barfuss, Wendy Hart, Tim Heyrend, Rod Mann, Suzanne Mann, Scott Smith)

Utah House of Representatives, District 27: Brady Brammer and Jared Carman

I voted for Mr. Carman.

Both candidates support the East-West Corridor going through (road from just south of Lone Peak to the Alpine Highway), local curriculum decisions made in education, and think there is too much involvement from the state legislature in the local schools.  Both have been involved in drafting and working to pass legislation.  Both are supportive of families and religious freedom.

Mr. Brammer is an attorney who has represented cities and other governmental entities.  He is a Highland resident and currently serves on the Highland Planning Commission.  He is well-spoken and has great ideas on regaining public lands.  On Common Core, he believes that locally-based decisions should be made on curriculum (which is currently done).  He thinks there are too many education bills in the legislature every year.  He doesn't pretend to be an expert in the public school system, so he would leave that to the experts at the local level.  He said that in the process of making laws, it's important to understand how the implementation of those laws impact people.  He feels his experience level is broader than his opponent and more relevant.  He is in support of the caucus process but also feels the signature path is a good thing.  He gathered signatures to guarantee a place on the primary ballot.

Mr. Carman is a small business owner and Highland resident.  As a volunteer on the State Instructional Materials Commission, he has spent time evaluating textbooks and other materials for the state of Utah. He has lobbied tirelessly on both a state and a federal level for parental rights and freedom from top-down mandates, especially in education.  Mr. Carman understands small business and the burdens placed on businesses at the state-level.  On Common Core, Mr. Carman has been active in opposing it and trying to bring better math and English standards back to Utah.  He is concerned with the amount of micro-managing of education done at the state and federal level.  Mr. Carman also testified at the State Legislature in favor of a bill (that eventually passed) to prohibit the state from using SAGE scores as part of a teacher's evaluation.  He supports the caucus and did not gather signatures.  He recognizes that having to speak one-on-one with delegates requires a greater depth and breadth of understanding.  The caucus process also allows those without lots of political backing but good ideas and principles to run for office.

My take: With the number of education bills and the large percentage of the state budget going toward education, having someone who has been instrumental in following both the federal and the state mandates in education would be very beneficial.  We have too many people in the legislature who "defer to the education experts" instead of to their constituents.  Too much time and money is spent at the state level trying to control education, and the "best" ideas all seem to fail and get rebranded over time.  Mr. Carman has seen this revolving door multiple times and is poised against it.  I recognize that not every bill is an education bill, but every bill deals with individual rights and many have a direct impact on families.  Mr. Carman is very attuned to seeing the ramifications from that perspective.

County Sheriff: Jim Phelps and Mike Smith

I voted for Officer Phelps.  Both candidates gathered signatures guaranteeing them a place on the ballot.

Officer Phelps has been with the US Marshall's office and has worked extensively in Salt Lake.  He has seen the problems in Salt Lake and wants to prevent them from coming to Utah County.  He understands the role of sheriff is to protect individual rights but also to maintain the law.  He was involved in drafting legislation to remove policing power from the Bureau of Land Management personnel in Utah.  He is a strong defender of the Second Amendment, and understands the role a sheriff plays in maintaining freedom for the individuals in his purview.  He is not comfortable with the strings that come from federal funds.  He stated his first act as sheriff will be to request an audit before recommending whether to request an increase in the budget or not.

Chief Smith is the Chief of Police in Pleasant Grove City.  He is involved in many community policing activities, including a citizens' academy that trains citizens as police officers and allows them to simulate police calls.  He also advocates for a program where individual officers are assigned to specific areas and are asked to take a more personal interest in that part of the community.  While I think these things are good things, I am unsure that they are that necessary in Utah County.  Chief Smith would advocate for an increase in the budget with the County Commissioners.  When asked about taking federal money with federal strings, his response was that federal grants pay for the officers' vests and that it's important that tax money that we all pay and send to DC comes back to be used at home, e.g. the vests.

County Commission, Seat A: Tanner Ainge and Tom Sakievich

I voted for Mr. Sakievich.

Mr. Ainge ran for Congress this past year.  He is very well organized.  He took the initiative to meet with the heads of all the county departments and find out their issues when he decided to run.  He is enthusiastic and very capable.  He wants to change legislation to allow for greater property taxes to come to the locals in order to keep up with inflation.  He is in favor of a county tax increase.  Mr. Ainge gathered signatures to guarantee a place on the primary ballot.

Mr. Sakievich is a retired Marine Corps veteran and spent time involved in a restructuring plan for the Corps that saved many millions of dollars.  He is very concerned with fiscal spending and thinks there may be ways to restructure and become more efficient.  He felt one of the best ways to handle Utah County's growth is to work with the mayors and city councils in coordination.  Most of the growth in the County is under their jurisdiction.  So, the commission is in more of a coordinating position.  He is generally opposed to giving tax incentives in a growing community.  Mr. Sakeivich  did not gather signatures.

County Attorney: Chad Grunander and David Leavitt

I voted for Mr. Leavitt.

Mr. Grunander currently works in the County Attorney's office.  He understands the ins and outs of things as they are currently run.  He has a tough on crime attitude.  When asked why the County Attorney position was a partisan, elected position, he said it was because it was constitutional, but wasn't sure it should be elected and didn't think it should be partisan.  He stipulated that just because it is a partisan office doesn't mean people are targeted based on politics.  (This is a good thing to hear.) One of the concerns with the current County Attorney's office is the allegation that they charge for crimes at a level higher than the crime deserves and plea it down.  This increases the amount of convictions, if true.  I have some evidence to believe this occurs.  How often, I do not know.

Mr. Leavitt used to be the Juab County Attorney.  He is focused on not just the prosecutorial side of the attorney's office but also the civil advisory side, as the attorney for every elected official or board in the county.  He explained that as an elected official, his job is to serve the people of this county, and even if you are arrested and charged with a crime, he is still your servant.  Being your servant, he may still need to prosecute you, but you should not be treated disparagingly.  He commented that the judicial system exists to protect the people from a tyrannical executive, and juries exist to protect the people from a tyrannical judiciary.

I am grateful to you for electing me to serve in this capacity, to vet these candidates and to report back to you.  I am convinced that we get better candidates when they have to face average citizens and answer questions about their principles and their desire to serve.

Wendy Hart, Precinct Chair