Addressing Misrepresentations

Dennis Anderson has once again taken statements and intent out of context to suit his narrative. My intent was to step back from discussions about the recall effort for now. Quite frankly, I was exhausted after the past month or so dealing with the entire mess. But then I saw the drivel from Mr. Anderson in the Montrose Press. Even though I had come to terms with the situation, I knew Commissioner Mijares could have chosen the right path but did not. Instead, he has only deepened his troubles through missteps that he seems unable to reverse. This ongoing behavior has made a challenging situation even worse for everyone involved.

While Dennis and his supporters remain obsessed with the resignations of Frank and Marti, it is important to clarify the facts. Frank was indeed a pleasant individual, but he lacked the qualifications needed for his role as County Manager. Marti, as County Attorney, demonstrated inadequacies in her performance. Both positions served at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) and the board made a decision, like it or not.  However, these resignations were never the core reason for the recall. The petition's stated reasons also do not capture the true motivations behind it. Dennis knows this full well, yet his stubbornness prevents him from acknowledging it, as doing so would dismantle the story he has been promoting relentlessly.

Citing Leslie Quon's resignation letter as an authoritative source is a significant overreach. Her credibility is undermined by her willingness to remain in what she described as a "toxic environment" solely to preserve her substantial six-figure salary. Furthermore, Commissioner Pond's statement about working to remove corrupt or ineffective county leadership to restore accountability does not imply any wrongdoing or forced resignations. It is simply a commitment to better governance. Dennis, let’s not allow inconvenient facts interfere with your preferred storyline. Clinging to this narrative reveals a lack of substance. There is truly nothing substantial to these claims.

To expand on this, consider the broader context of county governance. Boards often make personnel changes to align with their vision for efficiency and accountability. In Montrose County, these decisions were made in the interest of the public, not out of malice. Dennis's fixation ignores historical precedents where such transitions are commonplace. 

The Origins and True Purpose of the Recall

The recall effort was in motion long before Commissioner Mijares took his oath of office. It had no connection to the resignations of Frank or Marti. This plan was openly discussed by figures like Ray Langston, the disgraced former Chair of the Montrose County Republican Central Committee. It was then carried out publicly by his associates, including Jim Hogsmith, Phoebe Benzinger, and Linda Ganz. These individuals have a history of political maneuvering that prioritizes personal agendas over community welfare.

As I outlined in my previous article a couple of weeks ago, Commissioner Mijares has become his own greatest adversary. He would benefit immensely from a course like Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People." His interpersonal skills have fallen short, and merely acknowledging the need for improvement without taking concrete steps is insufficient. Actions speak louder than words in leadership roles, and Mijares has yet to demonstrate meaningful change.

Langston's involvement is marred by his own controversies, along with his cohorts, Don Coram and Commissioner Sue Hansen added fuel to the fire. Their unethical conduct and actions are well known and documented in previous articles available here on the coDOGEreport.com as well as in the Montrose Mirror. Along with Haugness, Benziger, and Gann, as their allies and the public face, amplified these grievances through the organized campaign that mobilized signatures for the petition. This was not a spontaneous reaction to specific events but a calculated strategy to reshape the county's political landscape.

Moreover, the petition's language, while formal, masked underlying motivations tied to ideological differences and power struggles. Voters were presented with surface-level concerns, but the driving force was a desire to realign the BOCC with certain factional interests. This premeditated nature underscores why the resignations are a red herring in Dennis's arguments. Understanding this timeline is crucial for Montrose residents to see through the misinformation and evaluate the recall on its merits.

Commissioner Mijares' Leadership Challenges

Commissioner Mijares's approach to governance has highlighted significant areas for growth. His communication style often alienates potential allies, turning what could be collaborative efforts into confrontations. In a county like Montrose, where community consensus is key to progress, such shortcomings can stall important initiatives.

It is worth noting that effective leadership involves not just policy expertise but also the ability to build coalitions. Mijares could apply principles of Carnegie by engaging in community forums, listening sessions, and outreach programs as has been noted in a previous article by this author. Instead, his inaction on self-improvement has perpetuated divisions. This is not an attack on his character but a call for accountability, as public servants must evolve to meet the demands of their roles.

In the context of the recall, these personal flaws have been exaggerated by opponents to paint a picture of incompetence. However, separating fact from exaggeration is essential. Mijares has achieved some successes, such as advocating for fiscal responsibility, but his relational deficits overshadow them. If he addressed these, he might mitigate the recall's momentum and foster a more unified county government.

Personal Reflections on Friendship and Loyalty

On a personal note, yes, Scott Mijares is my friend, and I have been among his strongest advocates. However, the harsh realities surrounding this recall and his handling of it have strained that relationship. I am deeply saddened by this development, as I hold friendships in high regard. My closest friend and I have maintained a bond since we were 12 years old, treating each other like brothers through life's ups and downs.

This fracture illustrates the toll that politics can take on personal connections. Supporting someone publicly does not mean blind loyalty; it requires honesty when mistakes are made. In Mijares's case, my candid feedback on his need for better interpersonal skills stems from genuine concern, not disloyalty. Friendships thrive on truth, and withholding criticism would be a disservice to not only him but to myself and other around us.

Reflecting further, this situation reminds me of broader life lessons. In any community, whether political or social, relationships are the foundation of progress. When leaders prioritize ego over empathy, they risk isolating supporters. My experience here serves as a cautionary tale for others in public life: nurture alliances, admit faults, and work toward reconciliation. Despite the sadness, I remain hopeful that bridges can be rebuilt if Mijares takes proactive steps.

Insights into Party Dynamics and Electorate Conversations

Regarding the electorate and the guidance provided to Mijares by the MCRCC, Dennis Anderson lacks accurate insight. He is not privy to those private discussions, and to be clear, neither am I. That said, I am familiar with the overall atmosphere within the party, an environment from which Anderson is excluded. He is not welcome at meetings, though I suspect he relies on informants for partial information. His access diminished notably after Sue Hansen's departure from the party.

The MCRCC operates in a insular manner, with conversations often centered on strategy and alignment. These are not public forums, and outsiders like Anderson can only speculate. His claims about what was communicated to Mijares are baseless, rooted in secondhand gossip rather than facts. The party's dynamics involve complex interactions, including debates over candidate endorsements and policy directions, which Anderson misinterprets to fit his agenda.  Anderson's exclusion stems from his own controversial history. Relying on outdated or incomplete intelligence leads to flawed analyses, as seen in his writing.

A Thorough Critique of Representative Jeff Hurd

Now, turning to Jeff Hurd, our so-called "Representative," where do I even begin? Let's examine his recent actions. Hurd was one of only four Republicans who declined to support the censure of Representative Ilhan Omar, (an in depth story can be found here), and the removal of her committee assignments. This followed her inflammatory responses to the Charlie Kirk incident and her statements prioritizing Somalia over American interests. Such positions demand accountability, yet Hurd's refusal speaks volumes about his priorities.

Additionally, Hurd's stance on the GORP Act is misguided and detrimental to Montrose County. This legislation threatens economic harm by restricting land use and development opportunities critical to our local economy. Industries like agriculture and tourism could suffer irreversible setbacks. Despite this, Hurd shows indifference toward Montrose. He has been invited multiple times to speak in the county, only to dismiss it with the remark that "Montrose is not worth it." This statement predates any resolutions by Mijares and Pond or the Black Canyon fires, indicating a longstanding disregard.

Hurd's visit after the fires was nothing more than a phot-op to feign concern. In reality, he cares little for the county's welfare. Within the Republican caucus, Hurd commands minimal respect, largely due to his reliance on major Democratic donors. Sources indicate that his decision to protect Omar's positions aligns with shared donor interests, compromising his independence.

Expanding on Hurd's record, his voting patterns reveal a pattern of moderation that alienates conservative constituents. For Montrose, which relies on robust representation in Congress for federal funding and policy support, Hurd's apathy is unforgivable. His donor ties raise questions about influence, potentially prioritizing external agendas over local needs. Constituents of Montrose County and CD-3 deserve a representative who invests time in understanding and advocating for their concerns, not one who views the county as expendable.

Dennis Anderson's Tainted Perspective

Dennis, please spare us your hypocritical lectures. Your professed concern for Montrose County's well-being lacks authenticity. You do not even reside in Montrose; your home is in Delta County, which stands to gain from the GORP Act if it passes. This inherent bias taints your opinions on the matter, making them self-serving rather than objective.

Dennis Anderson's narrative is built on distortions and selective facts. The recall's true origins, Mijares's self-inflicted wounds, and Hurd's inadequacies all point to deeper issues in our local politics. Montrose deserves transparent, effective leadership that prioritizes community over personal or partisan gain.

Michael J Badagliacco, “MJB”

Michael is the father of five and grandfather of three, United States Air Force Veteran, International Recording Artist, passionate about the United States of America and the founders Genius of the Constitution and Editor-in-Chief, Colorado DOGE Report (coDOGEreport.com).