A Dodgy and Deceptive Campaign

Of our local elections, with a spring general election next Tuesday, one may confidently say two things. First, there is one contested Whitewater election on the ballot, between incumbent Lynn Binnie and Paul Yvarra for the 4th Council District.

Second, and sadly just as true, the Yvarra campaign is running the most error-prone and deceptive campaign this city has seen in many years. Through a series of flyers that he grandly labels as ‘position papers,’ Paul Yvarra offers a concoction of false claims, many of which are deceptive by implication or omission, with other points demonstrating economic ignorance.

Error alone is bad; deceptive implications are far worse.

Not along ago, I wrote in support of Lynn Binnie’s candidacy, and it was an independent endorsement; I have no professional or social connection to either candidate in this race. For many years this has been a website of independent commentary from Whitewater; it will be a website of independent commentary for far more years to come.

I’ll address the four flyers that I’ve seen, although Mr. Yvarra may have more or will produce more, assuming that he has a reservoir of additional confusion from which to draw. The flyers to which I am referring are entitled, “Time for a New Direction,” “Single Family Housing Position Paper,” “Economic Development Position Paper,” and “Senior Position Paper.”

Housing. It’s here that Mr. Yvarra works several dodgy statements, intended to sow worry. He writes about a supposed ‘big box development’ that he contends was meant for the area of Indian Mound and Walworth, but there’s been no such plan, and his claim shows that either (1) he doesn’t understand the planning process, or (2) doesn’t care and will simply advance any mere rumor. The contention that neighbors rose up “in mass” [sic – it’s en masse] against the proposal is fantastical.

Similarly, Mr. Yvarra distorts the March 10, 2010 Planning Commission session about a residential property development to which he objects; the project didn’t receive funding, but it also had no – that’s no as in none – opposition at the meetings at which it was discussed.

This was, by the way, a well-regarded and carefully considered proposal. Candidate Yvarra is free to consider it less so, but not a single person in this town of fifteen thousand – including Mr. Yvarra – spoke at a meeting in opposition.

Paul Yvarra contends, more than once in his flyers, that he’s opposed to low-income housing in this city, and he worries that low-income housing will become student housing.

Let’s be blunt: there’s no program to fund additional low-income residential housing in this city, and pushing rumors about possible developments that simply aren’t planned or truly possible is designed to create worry among homeowners that’s unfounded, and that’s cynical.

Notably, Lynn Binnie has never advocated that approach, in any event. Never.

I’ve written more often about poverty in this city, I think, than anyone else writing or speaking on that local topic. Although Mr. Yvarra professes to be concerned about the poor, he’s not above scapegoating them.

Almost as bad, he seems to think that insisting on single-family housing, as a political position, will make it happen. Virtually the whole community would like more single-family housing for Whitewater. Those homes don’t appear, however, because a candidate insists on them, or argues against other kinds of homes.

If that were true, people would simply declare or wish themselves into new conditions.

Say what one might about the Yvarra campaign, but it’s hit upon a new product: Magical Thinking for Local Candidates™.

Team Yvarra’s housing claims are false, and evidence of economic error and misunderstanding.

Economics. It’s in Candidate Yvarra’s economic position paper that one finds real confusion. He argues that one has to fix the problem in “TIF 4” [sic], but his solution is no effective answer at all.

(It’s evident that Mr. Yvarra hasn’t read widely – if at all – about tax incremental financing, and he repeatedly jumbles tax incremental financing, the municipal funding concept, with tax incremental districts, the actual parts of a city where that concept might be employed. It’s TID 4, for example, not TIF 4.)

I see that TID 4’s distressed status is a problem, but I’m also committed to a sound solution and a fair accounting of what went wrong. Councilmember Lynn Binnie wasn’t even in office when TID 4 was created, for goodness’ sake – these weren’t his plans gone awry.

Significantly, Mr. Yvarra seems to think that selling off land in the industrial park is the solution to a distressed TID (distressed is both a condition and a designation under Wisconsin law).

That’s a limited option, useful but hardly a panacea. It’s easy to see why it’s limited: anytime a candidate insists that something (in this case public property) must be sold soon or quickly, he tells prospective buyers that, in effect, they can have it cheaply, and at under-market prices.

Mr. Yvarra, a candidate who claims to know & care so very much about single-family housing, should be able to see this point (although either he doesn’t or doesn’t care to be serious in his proposals).

It’s as though a homeowner, looking to sell is house, put up a large sign that said: I’M DESPERATE AND IN A HURRY – GO AHEAD, MAKE AN OFFER. ANY OFFER. PLEASE.

That’s not fiscal prudence – it’s a call to sell public goods below market, only further exacerbating a municipality’s challenges. Deliberate, careful, case-by-case: that’s the only sound way to protect a city’s position and avoid aggravating existing problems.

Crony capitalism – giving away public things at low cost to benefit insiders’ friends who could pay market rates – is a fiscal threat to government at all levels.

Seniors. The Yvarra campaign also offers a “Senior Position Paper,” by which they mean a flyer (one supposes) about issues of concern to senior-citizen residents, not a position paper that’s older than their others.

Funny, but in that paper Mr. Yvarra talks about issues of law enforcement as though they were of special concern to seniors – that’s silly, of course, as public safety matters to all the community.

Mr. Yvarra declares that he’s in favor of a police K9, as though Mr. Binnie and others were not. The implication is deeply misleading and unfair – everyone in the local government supports this program (with a combination role of detection and tracking for the dog they’ll select).

Honestly, as a libertarian I’ve written critiques of policing over the years, and yet I’ve not opposed this program.

It’s as though Mr. Yvarra said that he supports clean drinking water – of course, Mr. Binnie does, too, but the implication is meant to suggest otherwise.

On Fire & Rescue, the subject of an ongoing task force, Mr. Yvarra takes a similar approach: he declares that he wants a volunteer force, as we have now. Well, there’s no one in government who has proposed a change, not on Council, and not in the municipal administration. Some changes will come out of an independent consultant’s report, and some need to happen, but we will continue to have a volunteer force.

On bike paths, Candidate Yvarra advances a similar scare tactic, suggesting that Whitewater might spend millions on bike paths. Too funny, if it weren’t too sad and too misleading.

If I told you that Whitewater might become a huge outdoor waterpark, you’d have reason to think that I’d lost my reason. The Dells has no cause to fret – that’s not happening, either.

I think contested elections usually serve their communities well, but to do so those races need to be based on accurate information and sound analysis. Sadly, that’s not Mr. Yvarra’s approach.

Whitewater deserved better than this, but she can be assured of better representation if she wisely re-elects Lynn Binnie.