To the editor,
Telling the truth, but leaving out the “whole truth” is misleading.
Thomas Galvin recently wrote an article in a local monthly publication stating his perspective on the upcoming election for Planning and Zoning in Prospect. He states who the Republican candidate is, and that, in addition, the Democrats have Gary Ploski and Gil Graveline running also. This is the truth, but not the “whole truth.” In addition to these three candidates, Tim Reilly is also running for a spot on the board, but he has not been endorsed by either major political party.
By leaving out Tim Reilly’s name, you are led to believe your choice is limited to only three candidates. When Thomas Galvin stated that he was voting for his endorsed candidate and the two Democrats, this raised a red flag. Why was he, the chairman of the Republican Town Committee, supporting Democrats over Tim Reilly? Here is my perspective on the situation.
According to the Town Charter, presently one Republican, and two Democrats must be elected to fill the expiring terms of the current board members. Each party had the opportunity to run three candidates. Because they didn’t, the only three they put on the ballot automatically win by default. Neither Ploski nor Graveline will fail to be elected.
Even though Tim Reilly was not endorsed by either party, he is registered as a Republican, and can only be seated as a Republican. Therefore, the vote comes down to the Republican incumbent and Tim Reilly. They both can’t be elected. Can you see how the story changes when you leave out the “whole truth?”
Democratic Town Committee Chair