Elk County Forum

Hello all,

I wanted to take a minute to introduce myself.  My name is Mike Cordell and I have filed to run for Elk County Sheriff on the republican ticket.  I'm sure you have seen some of my signs in the area and I look forward to speaking with you at local events and eventually as I go door to door meeting people.  I don't peruse these forums on a regular basis, however I would be happy to answer any questions you have for me.  I have a campaign page set up on facebook at www.facebook.com/sheriffcordell (http://www.facebook.com/sheriffcordell) where I post updates and information regarding my campaign.  You can message me there any time. 

I believe there needs to be some significant change within the Sheriff's Office in this county and I believe I have the experience and knowledge to institute those changes.  Please do not hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions and I would love to have your support at the polls in August and November!

Mike Cordell

There are some of us who get news from the forum, so it would be helpful if you would list your qualifications here.

Thanks.  :)

Please do add your resume' to this.  It is the easiest way for me to learn about you.

If you click on his www. site it will give you a lot of information.

I started in law enforcement in Oklahoma in early 2004 so I have just over 12 years of law enforcement experience. While in Oklahoma I was afforded many opportunities early in my career, including the opportunity to work with the district's drug task force. As an officer in Oklahoma I received the "Officer of the Year" award after implementing life saving procedures on a young man I found unresponsive in his room on a welfare check as well as an award from the State of Oklahoma for occupant protection for my efforts in DUI enforcement.

I came to Kansas in 2006 as an officer where I have been certified in Kansas ever since. I was ranked number one in the Kansas reciprocity academy class I attended. I served on my department's tactical team and was promoted to Detective in a short time. I worked at a couple agencies in the Wichita area prior to moving east to Moline and I have worked for the Wilson County Sheriff's Office as a patrol Deputy for 3 years.

During my 12 years in law enforcement I have become an instructor in several disciplines. I have been a guest instructor at the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center for new officers as well having taught various courses at other agencies for continuing education as required by statute.

Prior to law enforcement I served in the United States Army infantry with an honorable discharge. I have dedicated my life to service to my country and my community and it is my greatest hope that the voters of Elk County will allow me the opportunity to continue serving in the community my family calls home and where my wife and I have chosen to raise our children.

Thank you.  You have told me most of what I wanted to know.  The rest is personal and not appropriate for campaign purposes.  Good luck.

Agreeing with Wilma - thank you!

What's are your stand regarding the U S Flag on Sheriiff's vehicles and shirts?

Or will you go with the Kansas State Flag or neither?

To be honest I have no opinion one way or the other regarding the display of the American flag on police or sheriff uniforms or vehicles. It is my understanding that there is a small segment of the population that opposes such displays on the grounds that such displays are an indication of a police state or of the federalization of local law enforcement. I think this is a case of finding symbolism where there is none. I'm proud of my country and of the flag that represents the freedoms upon which this country is built. I swore to uphold the constitution of the United States and of Kansas both. 

We are all protected by those rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution of the United States and law enforcement is bound by the rules of law imposed by such. For this reason I find it contradictory to embrace the rights granted under federal law while simultaneously opposing the wearing of a national symbol by local law enforcement.

That being said, I have no intention to display the American flag on the uniforms of the deputies, not because of the inherent symbolism of the flag, but rather because I see no need for unnecessary patches added to the uniform.  The same goes for the patrol vehicles. Each added patch or decal is an additional point of wear that needs to be maintained or replaced when damaged in order to maintain a professional appearance. 

I hope that answers the question you were asking.  If not, feel free to clarify and I'd be happy to re-address the issue.

Sir, your answer better than many including incumbent Sheriffs who think that it makes no difference which flag is shown.

Our liberty is from God, not the Federqal Government.  The Constitution is to limit the Federals.  I think many of us view the Federals as our God.  Shall we be obediant to the Fed's or patriotic to America?

Thank you for answering my question.



 

     Would you care to share what major changes you believe need accomplished in our sheriff department?

There is not much that doesn't need to be changed within the agency.  Having spoken with both citizens around the county as well as law enforcement from neighboring agencies (of which I am one) it has become quite apparent to me that this agency lacks professionalism to a degree that affects every aspect of their daily business.  Citizens have told me that no matter how many times they call, they cannot get the sitting sheriff to return their calls.  Other citizens have walked in and been able to speak with Hanks, only to be treated very poorly and been the subject of profanity laced tirades.  This type of behavior, especially from an elected official, is entirely unacceptable.  It would be easy to dismiss these instances as exaggerations, except for the fact I have heard of these instances from multiple people in different situations.  I myself tried to get a hold of Hanks about 4 years ago and he refused to return my calls.  I finally stopped at the Sheriff's Office and requested to speak with him using the call box inside the lobby.  I could hear him from the other side of the door saying "tell him I'm not here". 

I believe the sheriff should be available to the general public.  I understand how busy law enforcement can be and I couldn't promise any time someone called or walked in the lobby that I would be immediately available as Sheriff, however I can promise I would return phone calls as well as schedule times to meet with people who wished to discuss issues with me in person.  That is the foundation of being an elected official.

This agency has had more turnover in the last few years than most agencies have in twice that amount of time.  The lack of leadership and willingness to throw others under the bus has been an underlying theme in the grievances of many of those who left.  I have spoken with deputies that left and each one of them has been supportive of my campaign.  None of them have left feeling as though this agency is operating properly or effectively.  There are issues I have discussed with outgoing deputies and others that have worked under Hanks that would not be appropriate to discuss publicly until those issues could be addressed from an administrative perspective so I will not delve into those issues.

One of the former deputies was writing bad checks to both individuals and businesses around the county for quite some time.  I know for a fact that Sheriff Hanks was made aware of this behavior, which is a misdemeanor crime, and he did nothing.  The deputy in question was allowed to continue the behavior and when Hanks was informed about the offenses he simply made the deputy go in and pay the checks.  This type of behavior goes against everything law enforcement stands for and the deputy should have been terminated and prosecuted, however he eventually resigned of his own free will to pursue another job driving trucks.  This of course will cause issues any time one of his cases is brought to court.  This is known as "giglio" in which the defense is allowed to bring up criminal behavior of any witness in order to bring into question their credibility.  I think if you speak with anyone that served on the recent jury you will find that was the case.  I have been personally approached by numerous people who were involved in that jury trial who, until that time, had no idea how ineffective this organization truly is.

You will also find in speaking with those people that the quality of the reports turned in by the deputies, namely the narratives and affidavits, is most definitely sub par.  Participants in that jury trial have repeatedly told me that they were surprised by the poor quality of the investigation conducted by the Sheriff's Office.  This could also be evidenced by filing an open public records request for copies of the narratives from any of the reports done by the sheriff's office. 

All of this information is readily accessible by speaking with anyone involved in the recent case and I'm sure by speaking with anyone involved in prior trials.

There are also numerous other changes within the agency that need to take place to allow them to more effectively do their job.  I would love to discuss these changes, however I also would hesitate to lay out my entire plan for the department while campaigning for the position that would allow me to actually make those changes.  I hope you understand the detriment that could potentially do.  This is of course just an overview of what needs to be done and it will be a long process to rebuild this department into a professional organization we as citizens can be proud of.  I hope to have your support at the polls to allow me to make the changes I see as necessary.

Since it appears that there must be some sort of "continuing education" for Sheriffs, is there some government requirement of education for candidates for Sherriff?  In other words, nowadays do the candidates for Sheriff have to be government approved?

redcliffsw,

Here is the Kansas State Statute for qualifications for office of sheriffsheriff

19-801b. Qualifications for office; attendance at law enforcement center required; exception; status and salary while in attendance. (a) No person shall be eligible for nomination, election or appointment to the office of sheriff unless such person:

(1) Is a citizen of the United States and a qualified elector of the county;

(2) possesses a high-school education or its recognized equivalent; and

(3) has never been convicted of or pleaded guilty or entered a plea of nolo contendere to any felony charge, a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as defined in K.S.A. 74-5602, and amendments thereto, or to any violation of any federal or state laws or city ordinances relating to gambling, liquor or narcotics.

(b) Every person elected to the office of sheriff for the first time, or anyone reelected or appointed to the office after having been out of the office for five years or more shall be required to attend the law enforcement training center as established by K.S.A. 74-5601 et seq., and amendments thereto, and satisfactorily complete the required training course of not less than 320 hours, unless such person has satisfactorily completed such training course within the five years prior to election or appointment, passes a written competency test and firearms proficiency qualification course developed and administered by the Kansas law enforcement training center or unless the commission, as defined in subsection (b) of K.S.A. 74-5602, and amendments thereto, waives the requirements of this subsection as provided in K.S.A. 74-5608a, and amendments thereto. Unless the requirements are waived, any person elected or appointed to the office of sheriff who has not attended the law enforcement training center shall hold office on a provisional basis, and such person shall attend the next scheduled training program at the law enforcement training center and satisfactorily complete such training program or the one subsequent to it, or shall forfeit such office.

(c) Each newly elected sheriff of each county who is required to attend the law enforcement training center shall be hired as a deputy sheriff and shall be paid a salary as deputy sheriff while attending the law enforcement training center. The tuition, board, room and travel expense for the sheriff-elect at the law enforcement training center shall be paid by the county.

History: L. 1972, ch. 75, § 2; L. 1974, ch. 114, § 1; L. 1975, ch. 157, § 1; L. 1977, ch. 89, § 1; L. 1982, ch. 322, § 1; L. 1983, ch. 93, § 1; L. 1995, ch. 180, § 5; L. 1997, ch. 168, § 1; L. 2012, ch. 89, § 11; July 1.

I am pretty sure this will answer your question. I'm not sure what you are meaning by "government approved", but as long as you have the above qualifications, you can run for the office of Sheriff.  Mike Cordell has all the requirements.

All newly elected sheriffs in Kansas are required to attend a Sheriff's training that is held at the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center usually the last part of November or the first part of December after the general election. Hanks was required to go to this after he won the election against me in 2004.  I was required to attend this when I won my first election in 1989.  In the later elections that I ran in and won, the state statute did not require me to attend sheriff's training again.

Does that explain what you were asking?

Yes ma'am, that about covers it.

Who owns the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center?

Thank you.

As a retired military person, I have served many years and find the wearing of the flag a sign of honor and patriotism. The extra cost of showing the pride in ones country is minimal. We are all protected by the constitution of not only the United states but also the constitution of Kansas. Is our country perfect? No, but I have seen countries all over the world and we are so very fortunate to live where we do. Where else can your kids hold hands after a ball game with the opposing team and say a prayer. We are Kansans and very proud of those that served and given their lives for our freedoms and would think twice about removing the flags off the uniforms and vehicles as we are proud of our heritage. We my not be politically correct all the time, but you will find none prouder of who we are. And by the way, when you are in the political eye of others, you wont please everyone.

You speak of a lack of professionalism. Would you please explain why you are no longer a Police officer in Andover? I know why.  Lack of Leadership, I knew many of the officers that worked there personally and know of none that were so called "thrown under the bus" and actually there has been only three  personal changes in the past two years.  One thing the Deputies all know is Sheriff Hanks will be there for them if they need him, no matter what time, day or night.  None of them ever mentioned your name and only wanted to move forward with their lives in a different direction. The only one I know that may have said that was the over educated idiot who just left there. He was on the drug check lane and a Deputy from another county asked that they get him off the site because he was an idiot.
Yes there was a Deputy that had problems with finances. His name is Rob, not Giglio. There is a procedure through district court that takes care of these issues. He no longer works in Law Enforcement and no he is not a truck driver now. What I do know is that he lost a child in 2011 to cancer and his marriage ended after that. I would not want to be in his shoes. I hope things in his life improve.  Maybe it's Doug's compassion for people  that was the problem. I have worked for many true leaders through the years and compassion is a positive trait when dealing with the lives of people. 
Now we should speak of Reports and Affidavits. They are in fact protected under KSA 22-2302 which states "2)   Affidavits or sworn testimony in support of the probable cause requirement of this section shall not be made available for examination without a written order of the court, except that such affidavits or testimony when requested shall be made available to the defendant or the defendant's counsel for such disposition as either may desire."    You say that the reports are so poorly written. So can you explain why the suspect was convicted on all seven counts?  Not everyone is an English major and a Law Enforcement Officer must get the Who, What, Where, When in the report.  Evidently they had that in their reports to get the convection. If you have seen these Affidavits, then I must ask you How are you getting unauthorized access to these reports or is your wife showing you these reports. This would in its self illegal and a direct violation of KSA 22-2302.  You also say that you have 16 years of experience in Law enforcement. Does this include your 3 years with Dish Network? Nothing wrong with having a job and I give you that. It does seem that you have had some turn over in your life as well.
You state that a poor relationship with surrounding counties. I know for a fact that they train with Chautauqua, Montgomery and Greenwood Counties and Neodesha PD  on Narcotics, armed suspects in buildings, and many other scenarios. Some Officers from surrounding counties hold credentials so when things happens in Elk County, they can respond across county lines and still have jurisdiction. Several of the Elk County Deputies have the same credentials for other counties.  Elk County Deputies help in drug lanes in other counties as well as these deputies helping in Elk county
I have known Sheriff Hanks for years and I also know many of the Deputies in Elk County and will say that he seems to have put a great team together that really care about Elk County and their neighbors, friends and family's they serve. Sheriff Hanks has made some great changes in their department and I know it is because he truly cares about the people of Elk County. I love the Face Book page and all the information it gets out to our community. He has new deputies and new ideas and from where I see it is Sheriff hanks has embraced the change and is looking forward to Elk County's future.

CCSD:  If you are going to endorse a political candidate, don't you think that you should identify yourself?  How can we believe something if we don't know who is saying it?

Facebook is fine for those who have it, but for us oldsters who are not really computer literate, it is just another unneeded complication in our lives.  What do we need with Facebook when we have the Forum?

Quote from: CCSD on April 03, 2016, 08:33:56 PM
As a retired military person, I have served many years and find the wearing of the flag a sign of honor and patriotism. The extra cost of showing the pride in ones country is minimal. We are all protected by the constitution of not only the United states but also the constitution of Kansas. Is our country perfect? No, but I have seen countries all over the world and we are so very fortunate to live where we do. Where else can your kids hold hands after a ball game with the opposing team and say a prayer. We are Kansans and very proud of those that served and given their lives for our freedoms and would think twice about removing the flags off the uniforms and vehicles as we are proud of our heritage. We my not be politically correct all the time, but you will find none prouder of who we are. And by the way, when you are in the political eye of others, you wont please everyone.

THe Sheriff's dept is not Federal.  And it shouldn't be accepting Federal money. 

The U S flag is of the central government and also it's the flag of the U S veterans. 

I'm thinking that we ought to be respecting the U S Constitution, not some 'flag code' that was invented in the 1920's and not the invented Federal social payments and programs that go along with it. 

Liberty is better than tyranny.

You are right, the sheriff's department is not federal.  It is county and it's first allegiance should be to the citizen's of the county.

What is this about accepting federal money?  This is the first that I have heard that our sheriff's department is doing so.

RE: KANSAS LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

KLETC is established by legislation and owned by the State of Kansas. The education part is governed by KU. That is the short answer without going into statutes.  Part of the fine money that is paid from traffic tickets supports KLETC, I believe.

I'm aware of the name of the deputy. It's not proper to post his name in an open forum. Giglio is the name of the ruling that requires disclosure of criminal issues or official findings of dishonesty or misconduct. I never said his name was giglio. Also, Rob did in fact leave here of his own free will to drive a truck.  He is no longer doing that.  I know what he is currently doing, however his certification is in good standing with CPOST because the giglio issues he should have incurred after committing misdemeanor crimes in Elk County were never pursued.  Compassion is a great trait, especially in a leader.  I'm quite compassionate, however I would never employ a law enforcement officer who is committing criminal acts whether on or off duty.  We, as law enforcement officers, derive our authority from the community and the community's trust should never be violated.  There is no excuse for that.

As for my wife, she has never once shown me a report or affidavit from the county attorney's office as that would be highly improper. The information in the affidavit is what is presented when the sheriff's office filed charges with the county attorney. It's also the information relayed to the jury as an arrest affidavit is a statement of probable cause. When an agency uses a singular form for the narrative and affidavit it becomes part of the public record.  It's the jury members themselves who raised the issue with me.  As for why he was convicted, I have had 2 separate jury members tell me they were absolutely shocked that they were able to agree on the conviction. 

You claim to know about me but it's clear you don't. I never worked for dish network. I did work for Directv at the same time I was working for Wilson County as a deputy so yes I count that time. As far as I knew working hard and working more than one job to provide for your family is and always has been acceptable.  I left DirecTV to allow more free time to campaign and to prepare for this year.  That being said, I never claimed to have 16 years of law enforcement.  I am in my 13th year in law enforcement now.

You mention the deputies training with neighboring agencies, however all the counties and training you mentioned are ONLY the training John Walker has done with other K-9 officers.  Monthly training is a requirement for a K-9 position and he does train with K-9 officers from other agencies, in fact they are the agencies you mentioned.  The other deputies have not participated in that training and do not routinely train with deputies from neighboring counties.  Also, commissioned law enforcement from neighboring counties need not possess credentials to assist Elk County, nor do they have them.  Anyone can assist a law enforcement officer, regardless of jurisdiction, when requested for assistance.  Neighboring county agencies do not hold Elk County in high esteem.  I personally know this after having spoken with numerous deputies from several agencies, as well as agency heads themselves.  I know where I draw my information and it's directly from the source. 

It is also clear that you don't know what is going on within the county. In the last 4 years I can count 6 deputies that have resigned and 4 of them personally reached out to me and offered support. They also offered me a great deal of insight into the internal strife within the department.  Three of the deputies who have left have done so in the last year.  That alone is an indication of a problem.  As for my statement of the professionalism, or lack thereof within the department, that is the most common complaint I hear from fellow citizens.

It is hard to take such inaccurate accusations seriously from someone who registered 2 days ago with an anonymous name and has used their only posts on this forum to attack me and my wife.  The venomous nature of your response would lead me to believe you either work for  the agency and are hiding your identity for that reason, or you are very close with someone from the agency.  Either way I think it's pretty apparent you are biased in favor of the Elk County SO.

You should keep the accusations to a minimum.  You clearly do not know me or anything about me and while I don't take your attacks against me personally, after all this is politics and I have thick skin, I definitely do not appreciate the unfounded accusations against my wife.  I would be more than happy to discuss my campaign with you any time.  My business cards have my phone number printed on them.  I have been fielding calls from citizens and will continue to do so.  My number is 620-381-6538.  Feel free to call me.  You can email me at sheriffcordell@gmail.com.  I set up a specific account just for my campaign.   I have a FB page at facebook.com/sheriffcordell.  You can instant message me there any time. I would much rather have a respectful conversation without the mud slinging.

Quote from: Janet Harrington on April 04, 2016, 09:52:46 AM
RE: KANSAS LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

KLETC is established by legislation and owned by the State of Kansas. The education part is governed by KU. That is the short answer without going into statutes.  Part of the fine money that is paid from traffic tickets supports KLETC, I believe.

We elect them and the Government indoctrinates them.  KU is a liberal and government owned. 

With all the required continuing education in this country, things aren't getting any better.  Wonder why that is?   One thing about it, America was not established for government mandates or programs.   

Traffic tickets capture them a lot of money.  No wonder - that way, they support their own bureaucrats.

At the least we can still vote for the office of Sheriff even though the candidates must be Government Approved.

Thanks for the info.

Mcordell,

The Southern Poverty Legal Center (SPLC) is a hate group just as the NAACP and the KKK are hate groups too.  For years, the SPLC has been mailing its literature to Sheriffs' across the country. 

What's your view of the SPLC?

Thank you.

To be perfectly honest I don't know enough about the SPLC to make an informed judgement about them. I do know the FBI relies at least in part on their classification and tracking of certain hate groups, however I have never seen any of the literature you are referring to, nor does it seem to me they have any information that I need to do my job effectively so I suppose I don't have an opinion about them.

If I received information from them I would make that judgement and determination based on the merit of the literature itself.

How about the other two hate groups, the NAACP and the modern KKK?  Any opinion?

My opinion is that we have no place in a modern society for organizations that embrace hatred toward others, nor do I believe in organizations that promote one group of people based on race. I wouldn't classify the naacp as a hate group, however I do believe they are discriminatory based on race and I wouldn't support such an organization.  That being said, I don't think either group will be a concern as sheriff of elk county as neither has any significant presence here.

Mr. Cordell.
If elected sheriff how many full time deputies do you plan on employing ?
I remember years ago that Lloyd Ford was the sheriff and had one sheriff's vehicle. A two door car. His deputy was a mechanic named Eubanks and Eubanks was only on duty when Lloyd needed him to help with an arrest, and he would strap on his gun and badge and hang a sign on his business that he would be back at so and so time.If that is incorrect maybe some old timer will correct me. The speed limit back then in Elk county was 70 MPH so more a chance of wrecks, than today.I'm sure the population of the county was more people too.
Do you think the sheriff's dept. needs all the expensive 4x4 pick-up trucks that they have and as many deputies ?
Thank you in advance for your answer.

I'm happy to answer your question, however I fear this is something we will not agree on. I have to base my answer and my opinion on the world we live in today and not how it used to be.  The citizens of this county deserve to be able to rest easy knowing that when they call for help, a qualified and competent law enforcement officer is coming immediately to their aid. We no longer live in an era where it is acceptable for someone to call for law enforcement and have no one respond for an hour because the officer had to be called at home and woken up to respond to the call.  24 hour law enforcement coverage is very important and this cannot be accomplished with 1 or 2 officers. The current staffing levels allow for 24 hour coverage of the county which I believe is very important. I do not plan to reduce staffing on the road.

In regards to the vehicles, I do not agree with the current fleet of trucks currently in use. There are more cost effective options available that would better suit the needs of law enforcement. I would like to phase those trucks out and replace them with more appropriate patrol vehicles which are more fuel efficient and purpose built.  4 wheel drive or all wheel drive is very important however as law enforcement works in all conditions, including unfavorable road and weather conditions.

If people in Elk County didn't receive immediate response from the Sheriff years ago, why should they expect it today except that some people expect too much from government. 
Perhaps they should move to town if they want more government support.

Sheriff Ford did OK with fewer men and vehicles and he was probably not a government approved Sheriff like the ones nowadays.

Elk County will never regain its former population numbers but it seems like the speed limit ought to be at least 65 mph on 99 & 160 highways like most other counties.

One thing for sure, living in Elk County is not the same as living in town. 

redcliffsw,

You have referred to government approval of the elected sheriff twice now but your wording is both incorrect and misleading.  The government doesn't approve the sheriff candidate.  That would imply the voters could elect a sheriff and the government could reject that choice because the government disagrees with it.  That is simply not the case.  The sheriff is elected entirely by the voters in the county.  The sheriff, like every other law enforcement officer, has to be certified and has to meet the standards of CPOST which is the Commission on Peace Officers' Standards and Training.  That is not government approval, but a requirement to meet the minimum qualifications to which every officer is held.  That's not a bad thing.  I'm not sure why anyone would want to elect someone to lead an entire agency that cannot meet the basic standards of a peace officer. 

As for manpower now versus the way it was in the 70's, we don't live in the same world.  In the 70's hallucinogenic drug use was more prevalent in large cities and heavily populated areas.  Now we are seeing a significant increase in the production, distribution, and consumption of drugs like methamphetamine in rural areas.  Along with this drug activity comes increases in property crimes and violence.  Elk County is not immune to these issues.  In the 70's people were probably a lot more comfortable leaving their homes and cars unlocked than they are now.  In the last few years working in Wilson County I have seen countless burglaries in rural areas, thefts from rural properties, and victimization of county residents.  These issues are not isolated to the cities.  In a great number of these cases, the suspect has been a known drug offender who is involved in either the use or distribution of Methamphetamine. 

As for the speed limit on county highways, the Sheriff has no control over that.  If enough people agree that the speed limit on county highways should be changed then it should be brought to the county commissioners who have the authority to make those changes. 

I do not believe stepping back manpower within the agency and reverting back to the way things were done in the 70's would be in the best interest of the citizens of Elk County.  There are other ways to work in a more budget friendly manner than to reduce the level of service the County should be receiving from the Sheriff's Office.  I certainly respect the opinions of the citizens and I'm glad to have this forum to discuss issues and to get insight into the views of those who I hope to serve.  I would leave you with this.  We don't keep fire extinguishers in our homes because they are good decorations.  We don't wear seatbelts when we drive because they are comfortable.  We don't install and maintain tornado sirens to let us know when it's noon each day and we don't install tornado shelters at our homes to give us somewhere to store canned goods.  All of these things are put in place not for the good days, but for the bad.  Likewise, we don't staff and equip a law enforcement agency for the times when nothing bad is happening.  We equip law enforcement agencies and provide sufficient staffing for those times when someone's safety is in jeopardy, when someone is being victimized, or in a time of need.  I have said before and I stand by the statement that in your time of need you deserve to be able to call for help and know that help is coming, that those who are coming are doing so as quickly as possible, and that when they get there they will be competent and capable to help you in the best way possible.  During the times when we are not being called upon it is our job to proactively work to keep citizens safe and secure and to defend those individual rights that are the foundation of this country. 

We certainly have some differing political views and that's ok but one thing I think we can definitely agree on is that the Sheriff's Office should serve to protect and defend the constitution and your individual rights.  That is better accomplished with sufficient manpower and equipment to do the job in today's world.

Sir, the CPOST that you mentioned is new to me however it's still the same modern thinking that people must be trained by and according to government standards.  Government standards are not Constitutional standards - they're socialist standards.  This country is not getting any better by the instruction of its people in the government indoctrination centers like CPOST.  Could this CPOST type of thing be another mandate by the Fed's? 

In most places the Sheriff is still electable.  I get the feeling that our overseers would like to do away with the office of Sheriff.  Nowadays, the Sheriff has to have the blessing of government to be the Sheriff and that appears to be pretty clear.  Like I said, let's call it government approval to be the county sheriff.

CPOST even has a website: 
http://www.kscpost.org/

You're right that we have differring views.  You're staying right in there.

Thank you.

       It is insane to suggest a 65mph limit for 99, especially through Howard. There are children that cross it as well as seniors. I have seen wrecks and near misses that happened because the speed limit was ignored. The DOT has studied the accidents and their recommendations for speed limits is based on real data. 99 is fine at 65 where it has been upgraded to a super two north of town. A look at how many semi trucks have caught the shoulder and wrecked south of town should tell anyone it is not a safe highway. Even the military crashed just south of town and shut the highway down.

      Meth has been a problem for quite some time. It isn't hard to spot a meth head, for one thing their teeth fall out. Meth labs have been a part of rural America many years. Matt Samuels was killed because of it. Hallucinogenic drugs are a thing of the past. What has surprised me is a seeming resurgence of heroin, at least in the urban scene. Both definitely are the cause for burglary, theft  and robbery becoming more common. Users can't get the money they need any other way. They need too much. That , I believe should be the main focus of any "war on drugs" as it poses the greatest threat for other criminal activity increasing.

Bullwinkle we agree with you on the speed limit, 55 is fast enough. We both spent many years in Elk County and were Witness to some BAD Accidents. We have seen Livestock on the Highway, Young People on Bicycles on the Highway. Bullwinkle we don't know who you are, but we like how you think and what you say.

I think 65 is too fast for a lot of the county because of the hills. There are plenty of places where it's already easy enough to crest a blind hill and have a hard time avoiding someone who is stopped on the other side. There are also some intersections that are on blind hills. Increasing the speed limit would make those areas more dangerous but again that's not within the sheriff's control.

When the limit was 70, the vehicles were larger.  What's so hard about keeping a vehicle on the highway these days?  Is 55 too relaxing to drivers and putting them to sleep at the wheel?  Maybe the 40 to 45 mph range would be better.   

The limit on county roads is understood at 55 mph.   

Law people used to advertise themselves as proponents of public safety.  Cause why?   

Nowadays we hear 'click or ticket" ads on the radio paid for by the State or Federal government for their seat belt laws enforced by the State for money from the Fed's.  Shall we salute and honor our overseers for stealing our liberty?   

Driving used to also be an activity to which people dedicated their full attention. Now people are messing with their stereos, GPS, phones, and other electronic devices. People are talking on the phone with others and in many cases texting. Driving no longer gets the attention it deserves.

Red:  "Click it, or ticket" is a seat belt law.  It was passed and enacted.
Just because you don't care for your Constitutional rights, (or is it free will), to be compromised or taken away, why would you question a Sheriff when he is just following the law of his jurisdiction?  He/she has no control.  You do...vote out the SOB's that try to stifle you...not the Sheriff. 

I used to drive the back roads, too at 45.  To enjoy the scenery...until others got high and decided to play chicken.
It's not the speed, it's the "loose nut behind the wheel" !
ready....to walk in the woods where it may, or may not be safe with the 'meth cookers'.

Ready:  He'll have control if he's elected to the office of Sheriff.  The seat belt law was passed so that the State would have access to Federal money - the Fed's paid the State to pass the seat belt law.  Get it?  Why vote them out - put 'em in jail where they ought to be.  They're tyrants stealing American liberty and the Sheriff is in defense of American liberty - I hope.

And the woods are full of ticks, chiggers and copperheads - until Fall.   

Quote from: Mcordell on May 08, 2016, 03:18:18 PM
Driving used to also be an activity to which people dedicated their full attention. Now people are messing with their stereos, GPS, phones, and other electronic devices. People are talking on the phone with others and in many cases texting. Driving no longer gets the attention it deserves.

Yeah, well if they run off the road, they probably won't be telling you that.

Funny that you mention that because most of the drivers using cell phones that I see are lawmen.  Nothing wrong with talking on a cell phone while driving. 

        You have obviously not been T-boned by a youngster texting/talking on their phone. My daughter was, with her two children in the car. I know of one similar incident that was fatal to a friend of mine. They are more dangerous than anyone else on the road. Just sit at any corner in Wichita and count the number of people on their phone. Most times I have done so, more than 70% were on their phone. I have been behind people speeding up and slowing down, weaving over the centerline. Were they drinking? No, they were on their phone.

       Vehicles smaller? Most trucks are actually larger, and pulling larger trailers. 45 and 50 footers. The old law kept them 40ft and smaller. Most pickups are larger as well, 3/4 ton and up.

Good point.

However, I don't see any correlation for so many Sheriff's employees to drugs, thefts, etc.  More government employees is an indication that this country is gearing up to wind down.

You don't see a correlation between crime rates and law enforcement staffing? If you are looking for government conspiracy you will find one whether it's there or not. I can assure you if I'm elected at no point will I or my deputies be "gearing up" to suppress the populace. I want an agency that is part of the community and serves to protect the rights of citizens.

I fail to see that more deputies keeps down crime.  There are probably more speeding tickets. 

It seems to me that if you're a constitutional sheriff, you would already be a part of the community and defender of liberty.  That's more than one can say about the majority of the Elk County Commission or the school board operation.

Stay right in there and perhaps you'll be the Sheriff of Elk County, Kansas.





 

So how's your take on the Click It or Ticket campaign being waged by the government?

Just think of the money being spent on media advertising.  Looks like some law people are adding support to the governments' campaign.  Could be some government grant money being awarded too. 

Thought you might have something to say about that issue.

I don't have an issue with click it or ticket. The intent is that grant money is provided to pay for the overtime wages of officers who work the campaign. It's not intended to be a way to gain money for other uses. By having the grant money, the agency is able to field officers who are specifically working toward occupant safety enforcement. This is, in my opinion, better than using county tax dollars to accomplish the same goal.

Then you really have no problem or any real issues with tyranny.
 
You would take government grant money to use against the citizens.  There's most likely other outside sources of money that would be acceptable to you as sheriff.

It appears that you would not be a constitutional sheriff.  You're too liberal.

Since you do not have an issue with the thing called "click it or ticket", then I'm of the opinion that you're not ready to be the Sheriff.   Fair enough?

         Seat belts save lives, pure and simple, no argument you can make to disprove that.

      I do have issues with checkpoints where you are detained simply for using the road and are scrutinized in every aspect. It is like being in another country.

Redcliff,

I'm more than happy to answer your questions just as I do anyone else's, however I do so knowing that you and I are not going to see eye to eye on many issues.  It's simply human nature that we are not going to agree on everything.  Clearly this is one of those areas.  I respect your right to form your own opinion about me and cast your vote however you see fit, even if your opinion is based on faulty logic.  Equating my willingness to support and use click it or ticket funds to increase occupant safety in the county to me not having a problem or real issue with tyranny is a false equivalence at the least.  These funds are allocated to pay only the wages of officers to work the road to enforce occupant safety laws.  The alternative for a Sheriff who wishes to do the same thing without accepting grant money would be to use local tax dollars to pay for the same enforcement efforts.  I think in a county where people are already taxed quite considerably, the use of budget tax dollars for this would be irresponsible and would lessen the available funding for other important expenses such as equipment and training.  This is most definitely not "taking government grant money to use against the citizens" as you claim. 

Further, drawing the conclusion that acceptance of click it or ticket funding is symptomatic of a sheriff that would be willing to accept other outside sources of money is a logical fallacy that, quite frankly, is ludicrous.  If I am elected Sheriff of Elk County, I can assure you I will fight to defend your rights and would give my own life to protect the citizens of Elk County from harm.  Click it or ticket is in no way a violation of your rights. 

If your issue lies not only with the grant money, but also with the enforcement of seatbelt laws, I believe we may disagree once again.  Earlier this year I responded to a call of a reckless driver that had left the roadway and came back onto the roadway on K39 Hwy westbound.  While I was en route to the call, I got a second call from a passerby that was reporting a car in the ditch.  Upon arrival I found the car from the original call in the ditch.  The car had left the roadway on the north side of the road and had the unfortunate luck of doing so at a concrete culvert.  The vehicle went airborne and struck the other side of the culvert at a fairly high rate of speed.  I made my way down into the mud to the driver window where I found the driver seat-belted in the driver seat and unconscious.  I then went around to the passenger side where I found his wife.  She had not been wearing her seatbelt and clearly had significant injuries from the impact and it appeared she was struggling to breathe.  I requested a helicopter to respond to transport the injured and while waiting for EMS and the helicopter to arrive I stayed on the passenger side of the vehicle and watched helplessly as the woman died in front of me.  The driver was extracted from the vehicle and transported to the hospital where he survived the ordeal.  Had the passenger been wearing her seatbelt, she likely would have lived as well.  This was not the first time I watched someone die at an accident scene that wasn't wearing their seatbelt and unfortunately it won't be the last. 

Last night I responded to a call, also on K39 hwy, of a vehicle in the ditch.  This vehicle was eastbound and left the roadway to the north, also going over a culvert in a very similar fashion.  This vehicle was more badly damaged and had flipped, coming to a rest on it's wheels.  The driver was wearing their seatbelt and was able to exit the vehicle and walk away with very minor injuries.

I could inundate you with statistical data on seatbelt usage, however I'm sure you would claim those studies were funded by NHTSA which is a tyrannical arm of the oppressive government that's just trying to keep the populace subservient so there's no point in doing so.  Instead I offer you my own personal observations as to why I know seatbelts save lives.  Our own community was touched by tragedy not long ago which may have been mitigated with seatbelt use.  If my actions in enforcing seatbelt use and in utilizing grant money to cover the related expenses of such enforcement save even one citizen's life, then it will be worth it. 

You are absolutely entitled to your opinions about me, the government, and seatbelt use, but until you watch someone die in front of you, until you have to knock on a door and tell someone their loved one will never come home, all of which could have been easily prevented by using a seatbelt, your opinion will not sway mine.

To answer your question, yes, that's fair enough.  It's fair enough for you to base your vote on whatever you wish.  It's fair enough for you to form your own opinions about me, even if they are based on repeated bait questions where you actively look for a reason to disagree with me.  I respect your right to do so and if I'm elected Sheriff I can promise you I won't hold it against you and will treat you fairly and professionally, as I will any other citizen.  I take my duty to my community very seriously.  I understand I won't have your vote at the polls but when I'm done working my 12 hour shift overnight tonight, serving the citizens of this community, I'll ponder over your accusation of me being "too liberal" and "not a constitutional sheriff" and in the early morning hours, as most people are just starting their day, I'll go home and lie down and sleep soundly knowing I have done everything I can to be fair, professional, and respectful and that in the end I'm just not going to have everyone's vote no matter what I do.

Bullwinkle,

I also do not believe in setting up checkpoints to indiscriminately stop motorists with no reasonable suspicion and I will not organize, nor will I or any of my deputies partake in such tactics in Elk County if I am elected.

Nobody has said that they're against the wearing of seat belts.  However, it's a bad thing when government force is used to enforce such for socialists' goals of so-called "public safety" by lawmen, especially sheriffs who ought be defenders of the consititution and American liberty.

Again, your last post of statements reflect no real isssues with tyranny in America.  You appear to be bent for the ways of tyranny.

Your reasoning to force the wearing of seat belt is much like the reasons for banning of guns.

One social program supports and furthers another social program.  Socialism has worked its way into much of our lives and there's no end in sight for further government encroachment against our individual liberty that remains.

We ought to look to the founders and the Constitution, not to the government agencies and programs.  I'm for electing sheriffs who will stand for American liberty and who are not beholden to government tyrants and their crony capitalism.

So how do you balance these stated ideals with the fact you have openly supported the re-election of Doug Hanks who has accepted thousands upon thousands of grant dollars for the purchase of vehicles and equipment?  You claim to be opposed to such funding, however in practice it seems you are only opposed to it when it pertains to me and my campaign.  Either way, I wish you the best.  Also, click it or ticket started today so buckle up and drive safe.  I'm pretty sure the current Elk County SO is participating.

Quote from: Mcordell on May 23, 2016, 11:48:29 AM
So how do you balance these stated ideals with the fact you have openly supported the re-election of Doug Hanks who has accepted thousands upon thousands of grant dollars for the purchase of vehicles and equipment?  You claim to be opposed to such funding, however in practice it seems you are only opposed to it when it pertains to me and my campaign.  Either way, I wish you the best.  Also, click it or ticket started today so buckle up and drive safe.  I'm pretty sure the current Elk County SO is participating.

Cordell,

How have I openly supported your opponent?  Based upon your comments, it appears to me that you and Hanks are balanced.  You're both open to accepting outside influence in the form of grant money.   Obviously, you're both government approved to be sheriff.  Government wins, we lose. 

I'm not interested in the governments' click it or ticket campaign.  It's un-American.  It's a fascist program and I don't think you understand that.  Again, government wins, we lose.

I wasn't referring to on the forum

Thank you. This was intended to be a place to discuss the election specifically and I would have preferred it stay in that topic but I'm always willing to discuss concerns with citizens. I appreciate you steering is back that direction  :)

This thread is not the place for personal opinions and questions that do not apply to the subject.  It is shameful that some of you have turned Mr. Cordell's simple question and answer thread into a personal ranting thread.  Can't you forget your personal peeves long enough to move to another thread, preferably one of your own making?

         I have to say, Mr Cordell, that you have moved up several rungs on my ladder. It only gave me pause when your postcard pictured you in what looked to me like SWAT gear. Iv'e always been partial to the image Andy Taylor portrayed as a small town sheriff  ;). He seldom carried a gun. I would not expect you to jeopardize your life or any other by not being prepared , however. I have seen a few studies that examined some of the racial reactions to police shootings and they concluded that the level of violence was higher because the law enforcement response was seen by many as a military like takeover.

        The biggest concern I have with Doug is his health. He appears to have had some issues there. I do remember, however, him sitting down with a small child and helping him make out his Christmas list. That speaks for itself.

And I shall always remember that it was Doug who drove the ambulance at 80+ MPH trying to save my husbands' life by get in him to the hospital ASAP while the EMS crews from two counties worked on him. Then he sat with me until the pronouncement and waited until I had someone with me after that. I can never forget that , and Mr. Cordell I hope you read this with understanding. And I hope that you remember that we are all real people out here no matter what happens. I wish you the best sir. God Bless, Edie.

Bullwinkle,

My vest is definitely not swat gear but I do understand your point.  I think largely people see external vest carriers and wonder why on earth we as local law enforcement need such things.  What I can tell you from personal experience is, after over 12 years in law enforcement, wearing the Sam Brown style duty belt with all of the required gear on it can cause significant damage to the lower back.  My father was forced to medically retire from law enforcement due to irreversible damage to his back, exacerbated by the wearing of a traditional leather duty belt.  Our bodies were not meant to carry a great deal of weight around the hips, especially for extended periods of time.  Working 12 hour shifts there were days when I got home at the end of a shift and took my duty belt off and releasing the pressure from my lower back caused a great deal of pain.  This is not unique to me.  There are numerous studies online which have looked into law enforcement and the use of the Sam Brown duty belt and related injuries.  The number one injury sustained by law enforcement that leads to workman's compensation claims and medical retirements is lower back injuries.  These issues can be largely mitigated by getting the weight off the hips and onto a vest that distributes the weight evenly over the upper body. 

You may have noticed that law enforcement around the country has begun to move to an external carrier to accomplish the goal of reducing officer fatigue and injury rates.  Small agencies are not immune to these health concerns and in no way does the wearing of an external vest correlate to an increase in the aggressiveness of officers.  It is worth noting, my vest is no different than the external vest carriers you will often see Elk County Sheriff's Office wearing now and for the past several years.  Only recently have I started to see deputies in Elk County wearing a traditional uniform shirt with a concealed vest. 

I would also note, since I have begun wearing my external vest, I have noticed not once have I come home from a long overnight shift with back pain.  I can work an accident scene and be on my feet for hours and at the end of the shift when I take my vest off my back is pain free for the first time in years in law enforcement.  I am proof that implementing external carriers to distribute the weight of the gear we carry can dramatically impact officer safety, time off work for injuries, workman's compensation pay outs, and ultimately officers sustaining life long injuries which force them into early retirement.

I believe a little public education on the reasons for the vest would go a long way to remove some of the negative stereotypes associated with what people see as "militaristic gear".  Remember, the military didn't adopt the load bearing vest because it is intimidating or because it made soldiers more violent on the battle field.  The military adopted load bearing vests because it reduced fatigue and injuries in soldiers who carried heavy gear for extended periods of time.  The same applies to law enforcement even though we are not the military. 

If we get a chance to meet in person while I am wearing my vest, I would be happy to take it off and allow you to feel exactly how heavy all the gear is that we carry on our person each day.  Last I weighed the vest and gear (when I had a duty belt) it was nearly 30 pounds of gear.  That's a lot to carry for 12 hours!

Edie,

I'm truly sorry for your loss.  No amount of time takes away the pain of losing a loved one.  I'm glad you had someone there who comforted you and made you feel a little safer in that moment.  Sometimes one of the hardest things we in law enforcement do is to be there for someone in their time of loss. 

I never forget that we are all real people.  At the end of the day this is a community and we all have to do our part to leave it better than we found it.  In law enforcement we see people at their best and often at their worst but no matter what the circumstances, it is paramount that we treat people with respect and dignity.  I can assure you that is how I treat people and  you should expect nothing less.

       I took my son to visit the Marine museum at Quantico right after it opened. It was one of the best I have seen. They had the pack that Marines carry into battle and you could put it on to experience what it felt like, unbeliveable. Not sure I could pack that gear today. I am no stranger to work related back problems, having had an epidural to relieve the pain from a disintegrated disk. You are completely right that the public needs to know what it is like to pack the gear. I believe the pack system in use then was the MOLLE , and the combat load was over 50lbs. They newer systems have been developed to accomodate body armor.

     How much gear did you hump , Jarhead?

I have no idea Bull but I'm sure more than I can even lift today and then climbing mountains like Hill 1103 which means it was 1,103 meters high. I wasn't there long before I volunteered to be a radioman. The "prick twenty five" radio weighed 23.5 lbs, then a couple of batteries---the M-16 rifle—13 loaded magazines---2 bandoleers of ammo—at least 4- M-26 grenades---13 canteens(which were rarely all full)—chow---C-4---det cord---- etc ---oh Lordy, my back hurts just thinking of it. Thanks Bull for getting me in trouble with Wilma for straying from the thread.  :D
Mike, if all that weight on a belt hurts your back then I would imagine this 50 lb spare tire I carry around my waist might cause pat of my back pain. ;D
Back to the thread---I have heard people ask, they wonder if you are elected sheriff if you plan on keeping the current deputies and dispatchers or will you get rid of them all and put "your people" in the positions ?

Jar, you are not in trouble and neither is Bull.  Your comments have nothing of a personal rant in them.  Besides, I like your stories of your service days.

Also, that is a very good question.  What prompted it?

Jarhead,

I do not believe it would be proper to discuss specifics of personnel actions I plan to take, however my answer is neither. There are some good people working for the SO and I would love for them to stay. I have no intention of wiping the slate clean and hiring all new people. That would be a terrible mistake and would be unfair to those who deserve to stay. There are also some issues that need to be addressed and I will not promise nobody will be replaced. What I can tell you is those who are doing their job and deserve to stay will be afforded that opportunity if they wish and I look forward to working with each of those people. I have had discussions with a few employees and I have told them already that I will not be getting rid of them.  I have not spoken with everyone so please don't read that as I am getting rid of the ones I haven't talked to! That's not the case at all.

Quote from: Mcordell on May 06, 2016, 12:02:39 PM
redcliffsw,

  We equip law enforcement agencies and provide sufficient staffing for those times when someone's safety is in jeopardy, when someone is being victimized, or in a time of need.  I have said before and I stand by the statement that in your time of need you deserve to be able to call for help and know that help is coming, that those who are coming are doing so as quickly as possible, and that when they get there they will be competent and capable to help you in the best way possible.  During the times when we are not being called upon it is our job to proactively work to keep citizens safe and secure and to defend those individual rights that are the foundation of this country. 

We certainly have some differing political views and that's ok but one thing I think we can definitely agree on is that the Sheriff's Office should serve to protect and defend the constitution and your individual rights.  That is better accomplished with sufficient manpower and equipment to do the job in today's world.

Quickly as possible is the key word.   How quick do you think you can respond to a situation 15 miles away from howard down ELK COUNTY roads?   These roads are barely maintained and passable in dry weather much less wet weather like we have had the last month. 
Seriously folks live out here because they want isolation and its not to make drugs and do illegal activities either, and don't care about the conveniences of having a sheriff show up 5 min after your call to 911.  I come from a area of the US where the LEO's are the problem and I don't trust cops.  OF the handful i do, Hanks is one i would trust.  Why?  I've seen him personally in action responding to the death of my friends baby on memorial day a few years ago.   While i was performing cpr on her, he was assisting me when he arrived and that man must have drove like a bat out of hell to get there because the ambulance was 1 hour getting there he was there in 15 min.
I know I and most likely mr. redcliff will have taken care of any altercation that might have transpired long before you or anyone else could possibly get there.  The only thing you'll have to do is cleanup and reports.  Safety is our responsibility not the LEO's responsibility.   Again i point out that it took mr. Hanks about 15-20 min to get there when my friends baby died. We had to rely on ourselves for that period and we did the best we could.   Now we know that nothing we could do would have saved her not even if the ambulance was next door.  We rely on ourselves out here, not LEO's. 

Quote from: Bullwinkle on May 07, 2016, 12:19:55 PM
       It is insane to suggest a 65mph limit for 99, especially through Howard. There are children that cross it as well as seniors. I have seen wrecks and near misses that happened because the speed limit was ignored. T

In town i agree but out of town on county 5 mph isn't going to make a difference.

QuoteWhat has surprised me is a seeming resurgence of heroin, at least in the urban scene.

War on drugs is a waste of money, it hasn't worked in the last 30 years its been in effect only has gotten worse. AND a major reason Pot and heroine is on the rise is that the doctors won't prescribe pain killers for folks that are in critical pain.  Now when your in major pain you can go to the local heroine dealer easier than you can go to the doctor to get the same medication cheaper.

Want to stop that, then allow doctors to prescribe pain meds.

Quote from: Mcordell on May 10, 2016, 06:32:58 AM
You don't see a correlation between crime rates and law enforcement staffing? If you are looking for government conspiracy you will find one whether it's there or not. I can assure you if I'm elected at no point will I or my deputies be "gearing up" to suppress the populace. I want an agency that is part of the community and serves to protect the rights of citizens.

What crime rate?  Seriously is Elk County the new chicago?

Quote from: Mcordell on May 21, 2016, 03:20:11 PM
I don't have an issue with click it or ticket. The intent is that grant money is provided to pay for the overtime wages of officers who work the campaign. It's not intended to be a way to gain money for other uses. By having the grant money, the agency is able to field officers who are specifically working toward occupant safety enforcement. This is, in my opinion, better than using county tax dollars to accomplish the same goal.

In other words its a excellent money generating scam

Quote from: Bullwinkle on May 22, 2016, 01:22:13 PM
   
      I do have issues with checkpoints where you are detained simply for using the road and are scrutinized in every aspect. It is like being in another country.

Coming soon to your area!

I think one of the biggest questions that redcliff, ross and others on here are wanting to know is, are you going to be a constitutional sheriff.  By that I mean, the sheriffs office is the highest position In a state. Feds have no authority over a Sheriff in his county whatsoever as he is elected by the people of the county not appointed by a central government.  The question i have are you going to STAND with the citizens if the feds come in and start enforcing obama executive orders and any law that violates the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th and 10th amendment.   As it is our country is falling apart due to the irresponsibility of our central government and it will be upon the sheriff's of each state to stand with and defend the states against a federal tyrannical overtake. 

I see you dismiss redcliffs beliefs easily about tyranny.  I don't.  I see your point but i also see his and see the tyranny growing every day.  Our freedom is PARAMOUNT over and above any law that may be passed and i personally will defend my freedom.

       I may be wrong, but it my understanding that the Highway Patrol is the top of the ladder as far as law enforcement. Perhaps Mr Cordell can elaborate on this. It is the troopers that generally set up check points with cooperation from county and city officers. I know of at least one time that they were stopping people in downtown Howard and I think we had a trooper living here then. So, it isn't coming soon, it has already been here.

      Mr Cordell has responded to questions in a manner that makes me feel he would not be waging any campaign to glean money from enforcement of the law. I know several areas do. Take a look at Leon's speed trap for one. Before that it was the same thing in Andover.

     I have issues with young kids riding their hopped up ATV's around town well over the speed limit. I have no problem with someone riding one safely. That is where an officer has to make the call as to to danger present. With the whole countryside to ride as fast as they want and endanger themselves, speeding around town is simply irresponsible.

     

This is one where we need Janet's expertise.  I do know that there are situations where the KBI has to be called in but I think that the local sheriff still has jurisdiction.  It is simply the law that for certain things, the KBI takes over.  Mike, what can you tell us about this?

Quote from: Bullwinkle on May 28, 2016, 11:12:37 AM
       I may be wrong, but it my understanding that the Highway Patrol is the top of the ladder as far as law enforcement. Perhaps Mr Cordell can elaborate on this. It is the troopers that generally set up check points with cooperation from county and city officers. I know of at least one time that they were stopping people in downtown Howard and I think we had a trooper living here then. So, it isn't coming soon, it has already been here.

No sir, the only constitutionally authorized law enforcement officer is a sheriff. The sheriff is the one who carries out the business of the courts.  They are the one who get the warrants and serve them. They are locally elected and chosen by the people not the powers.  They have ultimate authority in their county. NO OTHER law enforcement agency can dictate what goes on in his county not even homeland, fbi, cia, or nsa. 

QuoteMr Cordell has responded to questions in a manner that makes me feel he would not be waging any campaign to glean money from enforcement of the law. I know several areas do. Take a look at Leon's speed trap for one. Before that it was the same thing in Andover.

I don't think he would be one that would lets call it for what it is, steal money from people through coercion or through decption.  Speed traps are easily solved by enacting a 10mph buffer.  most people won't go more than 10mph over a speed limit.  Some will but if they do then they get nailed and pay for it.

QuoteI have issues with young kids riding their hopped up ATV's around town well over the speed limit.

Your not the only one who has issues with it.  Time to fine the parents of those kids, if they have to pay some cash out for their childs actions then they'll make sure to correct the situation when it costs them dearly.

Steve, I should have said that the KBI can do nothing without the sheriff's permission.  I am pretty sure that the sheriff has absolute authority over his county.  No one or organization is above him.

Quote from: Wilma on May 28, 2016, 04:06:35 PM
Steve, I should have said that the KBI can do nothing without the sheriff's permission.  I am pretty sure that the sheriff has absolute authority over his county.  No one or organization is above him.

I agree i think its that way all over the US since they are the only consititutional law office.  It was setup that way from the beginning.

Quote from: Bullwinkle on May 28, 2016, 11:12:37 AM

     I have issues with young kids riding their hopped up ATV's around town well over the speed limit. I have no problem with someone riding one safely. That is where an officer has to make the call as to to danger present. With the whole countryside to ride as fast as they want and endanger themselves, speeding around town is simply irresponsible.

It's not just kids driving ATV on the streets and highways.
An employee of Moline drives on one the highway through Moline and that is illegal by state law.
And there are other adults doing the same thing. Speeding or not it is illegal.
What an example to provide to the kids and then condemn them for doing the same thing.

Just saying.

As far as fining the parents I don't believe a LEO has that privilege but he can ticket the person
violating the law. Isn't that correct Mr. Cordell? And will you ticket these adults that drive vehicles
that are not licensed for the roads?

Thank you.

Hello!  Apparently today was a busy day on the forum while I wasn't reading it.  I'll try to address each question as best I can.

Quote from: srkruzich on May 28, 2016, 07:18:51 AM
Quickly as possible is the key word.   How quick do you think you can respond to a situation 15 miles away from howard down ELK COUNTY roads?

As quickly as possible.  I suppose I don't understand the question.  Regardless of the road conditions at the time and in the location of the call, I would expect law enforcement to respond as quickly as possible.  I can't give you a set time over the internet for a hypothetical call in a general area of the county.

QuoteThese roads are barely maintained and passable in dry weather much less wet weather like we have had the last month. 

That is definitely a concern for the county commissioners and I do agree there are problems with the roads in Elk County.  I don't know the solution to that but I imagine there is one.  Perhaps it comes down to funding.  I don't know.

QuoteSeriously folks live out here because they want isolation and its not to make drugs and do illegal activities either, and don't care about the conveniences of having a sheriff show up 5 min after your call to 911.

In my defense I never said people live here to make drugs or do illegal activities.  I said rural areas are often the victim of these activities.  I was suggesting rural residents of Elk County were more likely to be the victims of property crimes as a result of rural drug use and manufacturing than in the past.  This is through my own observation as a deputy working a rural area where property crime is not uncommon and often these cases are linked back to suspects who are involved in the use and distribution of drugs. 

QuoteI come from a area of the US where the LEO's are the problem and I don't trust cops.  OF the handful i do, Hanks is one i would trust.  Why?  I've seen him personally in action responding to the death of my friends baby on memorial day a few years ago.   While i was performing cpr on her, he was assisting me when he arrived and that man must have drove like a bat out of hell to get there because the ambulance was 1 hour getting there he was there in 15 min.

This is not meant to be adversarial so please don't take it that way, but I find irony in the fact you state you don't trust law enforcement and you don't care about how quickly law enforcement responds to calls for assistance in the county, but you do trust Doug Hanks because he responded quickly to your call for assistance.  I'm truly sorry you had to go through what you did and I'm certain any officer in his position would have done everything they could to assist in the same way he did.  I'm glad he was there when you needed him, but that alone does not set him apart from all the other officers I have worked with who would have done no different.

Quote from: srkruzich on May 28, 2016, 07:39:57 AM
What crime rate?  Seriously is Elk County the new chicago?

I don't think my general statement about crime rate and law enforcement staffing equates to me calling Elk County "the new Chicago".  I said nothing of the specific crime stats for Elk County.  My statement was about increased law enforcement staffing having an inverse correlative affect on crime rates in general.

Quote from: srkruzich on May 28, 2016, 07:41:41 AM
In other words its a excellent money generating scam

My post specifically stated the funding was not to be used as a means to generate money for any other purpose other than to pay the wages to field officers for occupant safety enforcement for the duration of the campaign.  In no way is that generating money for the agency or the county. 

Quote from: srkruzich on May 28, 2016, 08:06:24 AM
I think one of the biggest questions that redcliff, ross and others on here are wanting to know is, are you going to be a constitutional sheriff.  By that I mean, the sheriffs office is the highest position In a state. Feds have no authority over a Sheriff in his county whatsoever as he is elected by the people of the county not appointed by a central government.  The question i have are you going to STAND with the citizens if the feds come in and start enforcing obama executive orders and any law that violates the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th and 10th amendment.   As it is our country is falling apart due to the irresponsibility of our central government and it will be upon the sheriff's of each state to stand with and defend the states against a federal tyrannical overtake. 

I see you dismiss redcliffs beliefs easily about tyranny.  I don't.  I see your point but i also see his and see the tyranny growing every day.  Our freedom is PARAMOUNT over and above any law that may be passed and i personally will defend my freedom.

If you are asking if I would be a constitutional sheriff in the sense that I would support and defend the constitution then yes.  I would never allow anyone to violate the constitutional rights of the citizens of the county I am sworn to protect.  I didn't dismiss redcliff's beliefs about tyranny, I dismissed his accusation that I have no problem with tyranny because I don't have a problem with officers partaking in a campaign to enforce occupant safety laws for a short time each year. 

Quote from: Bullwinkle on May 28, 2016, 11:12:37 AM
       I may be wrong, but it my understanding that the Highway Patrol is the top of the ladder as far as law enforcement.     

He is actually correct that the Sheriff is the chief law enforcement officer in the county, regardless of what other agency asserts jurisdiction in the county.  This is because the Sheriff is the only law enforcement officer elected by the people of the county.  Troopers and KBI agents are not elected and do not carry the same authority.  That being said (and I'm not going to quote it because I don't want to post 50 follow up posts at once) KBI does not have to ask permission from the sheriff in order to work within the county.  They have statewide jurisdiction.  They simply cannot override the Sheriff because they do not have the higher authority.

Quote from: Wilma on May 28, 2016, 11:32:51 AM
This is one where we need Janet's expertise.  I do know that there are situations where the KBI has to be called in but I think that the local sheriff still has jurisdiction.  It is simply the law that for certain things, the KBI takes over.  Mike, what can you tell us about this?

It's not the law that KBI takes over and they will not typically come for an investigation unless requested.  These requests are not made because the law requires it but because KBI has significantly more resources to adequately investigate some serious crimes considering they have their own forensic crime lab and technicians, among other things.  Also, in officer involved shootings KBI comes to investigate to avoid the appearance of impropriety.  It would be considered improper for the sheriff to investigate an officer involved shooting involving a deputy.

Quote from: ROSS on May 28, 2016, 07:35:39 PM
It's not just kids driving ATV on the streets and highways.
An employee of Moline drives on one the highway through Moline and that is illegal by state law.
And there are other adults doing the same thing. Speeding or not it is illegal.
What an example to provide to the kids and then condemn them for doing the same thing.

Just saying.

As far as fining the parents I don't believe a LEO has that privilege but he can ticket the person
violating the law. Isn't that correct Mr. Cordell? And will you ticket these adults that drive vehicles
that are not licensed for the roads?

Thank you.

You are correct that it is illegal to operate an ATV on a state highway unless the ATV is in operation for noxious weed control in which case it may be operated along the right of way.  No, LEOs cannot fine the parents of children who operate an ATV on the road, at least not for the traffic violation and any other charge against the parents would be a stretch that I'm not interested in making. 

As for whether I will cite the individuals who are operating ATVs within the city, to be honest, no.  Unless the operation of the ATV is in a dangerous or reckless manner, or in the event they caused a collision or property damage, I have no intention of citing someone for safely operating an ATV any more than I want to arrest someone and take them to jail for not having current proof of insurance in their car.  There are a lot of laws that we can enforce, but we utilize officer discretion and common sense in the application of statute.  I have no intention of taking office and cracking down on people for minor violations.  If highway patrol wants to come through and write tickets for operation of ATVs on the highway, they can choose to do that.  My deputies and I will not do that. 

I think if you understood all the laws and how they applied you would most likely understand why it is we don't strictly enforce every aspect of statute under blanket circumstances.  If you have a suspended driver's license because you were unable to pay a speeding ticket, and you are mowing lawns to try to raise money through hard work in order to pay the fines and get your license back, and you are driving a riding lawn mower from house to house in the roadway, technically you could be arrested and charged with driving while suspended.  This is one example where I have personally seen and disagreed with the actions of another officer.  I would much rather work with the community than against the community.  It is not my job to strictly control the populace, but rather to protect the populace.  When I have trained officers in the past as a field training officer, one of the things I always relayed to my trainee was "just because you can, doesn't mean you should".  It is entirely possible to abuse a position and the authority of the position while technically enforcing laws by the book.  That's not the kind of Sheriff's Office I want and I would think it's not the kind of Sheriff's Office you would want either.

Looks like you've been busy on here. 

You seem to have a little bend except I think you continue to demonstrate that'll you seek outside money to enforce another party's desires to make citizens comply with their desires.
You seem to want be a part of them too, instead of being totally committed to the local county.  If you will accept money for click it or ticket, there's no end to what else you'll accept.  In other words, you're not intent upon guarding the county from their influence by taking "their" money.  It's a safety issue that tyrants like to impose upon citizens by and through government (Fed's in this case) and the sheriff ought to be able to see through that in favor of the people.   The Founders never intended for the government to force obediance from the people.

Redcliffsw,

You may be interested to know click-it-or-ticket is a state budget line item. If the majority don't like the law as it is, there's a process to change it. I think you will find the majority of citizens agree with the seatbelt law.

As for the repeated accusation, though I have already addressed it, seatbelt campaigns have nothing to do with accepting outside money from other sources. Again, it's not a fund raiser. That money, $650,000 for the entire state program, is used for officer wages in order to participate in occupant safety enforcement without straining the agency budget through overtime. There is no profit and there is no hidden agenda. 

We aren't going to agree on everything. That's just the way life is. I certainly plan to act on behalf of the citizens of the county and to defend the rights of the citizens but that doesn't mean everyone is always going to agree 100% with me on everything. I'm willing to accept that fact and my goal is to do a job that at the end of the day we can all be proud of.  Current administration supports click-it-or-ticket. I don't have a problem with it. Perhaps it's time to focus on other issues.

Mike, I can see that you have very good knowledge of the law and how it works.

Thank you ma'am. I have always been very interested in reading and researching statutes and current case law.

Mr. Cordell,

Our country is not in good shape for sure including Kansas.  Most of us have been conditioned to accept that anything from government.  You're no different.  It appears that you have no problem whatsoever with this government program so can we assum that you'll be on board with all government programs?

Only $650,000?  That's hard to imagine.  There's media advertising from the KDOT and National Highway Traffic Safety Adminstration and maybe some more of 'em.   Media loves government advertising and there's becoming more of it as our overseers shape our minds with their socialist's doctrine.  Or perhaps we could call it part of the stimulus program for the media.  Or better yet, call it tyranny. 

And I like what former Sheriff Richard Mack says:
http://sheriffmack.com/index.php/seat-belts

That's like saying you have no problem with this website so I can assume you must also enjoy websites that recruit people to join Isis. The two have nothing to do with one another. I'm not fond of the assumption that I lack the intelligence to evaluate these programs individually and form an opinion of each. As for the dollar amount, that is straight from the documentation detailing budget line items.

Red, your argument is not with Mr. Cordell.  Rather it is with a different power.  One that makes the rules that Mr. Cordell must enforce.  Why are you arguing with him?  What can he do to change these laws that you don't like?  His provence will be Elk County, not the nation.

Quote from: Wilma on May 30, 2016, 08:35:15 AM
Red, your argument is not with Mr. Cordell.  Rather it is with a different power.  One that makes the rules that Mr. Cordell must enforce.  Why are you arguing with him?  What can he do to change these laws that you don't like?  His provence will be Elk County, not the nation.

Wilma are you the Politically Correct police for this thread and forum?

Is it you can't handle a conversation without trying to shut a person up.

I don't see where Red is arguing or attacking Cordell, but simply addressing his concerns and opinions.

We still do have the right to free speech, don't we.

Beyond that. What is wrong with an argument?
Arguments can bring forth better answers and communications?

As I am sure you are aware, I am presently running an argument, I'm going door to door with an Opposition Petition to the West Elk USD-282 attempt to raise our property taxes by as much as 8 mill. They recently raised them 6 mills and my opinion and argument is basically enough is enough.

Arguments come in many fashions and ways. And can be very productive.

Mr. Cordell started this thread for the purpose of answering questions about how he sees the position of sheriff, not for the purpose of arguing about unrelated pet peeves.  I and everybody else would appreciate it being kept for that purpose.  As I have said before, please take your pet projects to your own threads.

Quote from: Wilma on May 30, 2016, 10:08:40 AM
Mr. Cordell started this thread for the purpose of answering questions about how he sees the position of sheriff, not for the purpose of arguing about unrelated pet peeves.  I and everybody else would appreciate it being kept for that purpose.  As I have said before, please take your pet projects to your own threads.

Perhaps you should start a new thread as the Political Correct Police Offocer?
Red was not out of line in my opinion, but you are in trying to censor him.
Please show some restraint in censorship of a political thread.

         Red and Ross, this thread is one started by Mr. Cordell for the purpose of making clear his position and intentions concerning becoming the sheriff of Elk County. He has politely answered all questions put to him.

        It seems both of you want to make it about your own politics. You have your own threads to do that. Perhaps you aren't getting the attention you desire from those threads and feel you must invade a thread that people are commenting in. It would behoove both of you to keep this thread informational about the sheriff election, not your gripes with the government. :police:

Quote from: Bullwinkle on May 30, 2016, 12:05:43 PM
         Red and Ross, this thread is one started by Mr. Cordell for the purpose of making clear his position and intentions concerning becoming the sheriff of Elk County. He has politely answered all questions put to him.

        It seems both of you want to make it about your own politics. You have your own threads to do that. Perhaps you aren't getting the attention you desire from those threads and feel you must invade a thread that people are commenting in. It would behoove both of you to keep this thread informational about the sheriff election, not your gripes with the government. :police:

It seems some people always want to censor free speech that's all I said.
I do believe if a man is ready to run for sheriff he is quite capable of speaking for himself
and does not need you or anyone else censoring for him.
You really have a problem carrying on and stretching this type of conversation on censorship.
So why don't you let the thread continue.

Bull,
Mr. Cordell should have known that Red would be coming after him after Mike's first post said he was a Republican. Don't you know,all us Repubs are what is wrong with the country---I mean the world. Maybe if Mr. Cordell said he was a "closet" KKK member---his pappy was the Grand Wizard and his great,great gran-pappy wore grey and rode beside General Robert E. Lee----then maybe them campaign dollars would start flowing in from out west. :angel:

absolutely on the nail head

If or anyone interested in meeting with me I will be at the hotdog cookout tomorrow evening in Grenola. Hope to see you there!

Mike,
I watched the you tube video of you parachuting into Moline's Crazy Days. Quite impressive I must say. I was amazed at how flat the surrounding area  looked from high in the air. Looked like western Kansas.
As an infantryman you should know your place is on the ground with the mud, blood and beer----not jumping out of a perfectly good airplane. :)
I'm also way overdue in thanking you for your service to our country---Thank you.

Well based on your name I think I should thank you! Funny thing is when I was at Ft Benning I got a 300 on my PT test and as a result was offered airborne. The holding battalion was short on airborne personnel and couldn't start until they had enough soldiers. I turned it down because I didn't want to be at ft Benning any longer than I already had been. I've always been very interested in jumping and I've been doing so for 8 years now.

Just a reminder of the candidate forum in howard tomorrow (Thursday) at 7 pm.  ALL sheriff candidates were invited, along with candidates for other elected positions.  This is not just a forum for one party.  Please come and ask any questions you have, either during the forum or in person after the forum.  I will be there to speak with everyone and answer any questions you may have.

Most of the posts have been great. I have enjoyed reading them. The posts have also made me glad I am no longer in public office. There is just no winning with a few of you. All I can say is this, make sure you get out and vote in November.

Officer Cordell would you please post copies of recommendations from your previous and present employer.
I'd really appreciate that! Also a few of your Certificates of completion of police training would be helpful.

I think that would attest to your professionalism.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate the suggestion, however I do not plan to contact my former employers for recommendation letters.  The fact of the matter is, getting the recommendation of appointed chiefs in other jurisdictions really means nothing here.  I have a letter of good standing from Kansas CPOST and somewhere I have reference letters from previous chiefs that have been included with resumes.  If I can find them then perhaps I can post those for you.  My current employer is Sheriff Figgins from Wilson County.  He has given numerous recommendations in person to several voters from Elk County that have asked him about me.  He has been supportive of my bid for sheriff for the entire time I have worked for him and we have a very good working relationship.  I'm sure he would visit with you if you wished to ask about me.

In regards to training certificates, I have a binder full of training certificates.  As certified law enforcement officers we are required by statute to attend a minimum of 40 hours of continuing education training.  I have always exceeded the minimum 40 hour requirement by a large margin.  It would be unreasonable to post every training certificate I have as that would be over 1000 hours of training.  Is there something specific you are looking for that I could post for you?

I'm happy to try to get you the information you are looking for. 

I wasnt asking for everything!
But thanks for the response.

I have a nephew in a large Florida Sheriff's Department who is 28 years old.
He has maintained employment  with that same department for 8 years. He really studies for the tests
H has earned every advancement up the chain of command by passing some very tough written tests.
And each time he was able to surpass numerous other LEO's. He really studies for the tests by reviewing
what he has learned in college.

In those short eight years he has acquired a Masters Degree in Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice and is still continuing his advanced education. He has advanced to Lieutenant and as I understand his next promotion won't happen until his Captain retirees, which is in the near future.

My brother informed me his so is making a very, very good income. I'm guessing 6 figures.

I have no idea what our sheriff earns, I could ask at the court house because it is public information.
Perhaps you can enlighten us as tothe salary of our Sheriff and if that is where you Spend the rest of your career?

I really have no idea how many Sheriff's Elk County has had over the last twenty years. Do you?
I think there have been at least 3 different Sheriff's which makes it apparent that they don't always get re-elected. Making it a iffy situation.

I also understand why the turn over of deputies. Some come here to build a resume and then choose to move on to better paying Departments, which only makes good sense.

We have the same problem as recognized by the Kansas State Highway Department. I also have a great nephew working for them. He stays because he wants to stay close to family. However many Troopers after training and builds a resume move to Oklahoma where they get paid as much as twice as a Kansas Trooper.
We are fortunate if we have a Trooper for each county as I understand it.

I guess where I am going is to ask if you have any college degrees and I do understand your wife has plenty of family here which may anchor you here and you explained to me that family figured working as Sheriff in Elk County would be much safer than working in the city.

The last part about safer working here could be a very dangerous thought to have in this crazy world we live in. I never thought of the possibly of a drive by shooting in Elk County, but it did happen. Take nothing for granted.

We need Constitutional Sheriff's through out our country. And attitude means everything!
And I mean that, above and before so called professionalism. I learned that in the military in connection with leadership. As a leader if you are only doing for yourself at the expense of those you lead, it makes you a failure. In my way of thinking the words leadership and leader are too freely used.

I admire anyone who takes on the job of policing and protecting the public, because it is a very, very tough job. And you can not please everyone. So, what ever happens for you, I wish you the very best and, as for my nephew and great nephew I pray for all law enforcement officers safety.

I'm through rambling now@
Good night Everyone.

Why does being a Sheriff become a career these days?  And why all the "education" these days as qualifiers? 

The cause of socialism has a lot of support for enforcement.

i do have a degree. I have a bachelors of science in forensic psychology which is a degree in the criminal justice degree track. I also advanced quickly early in my career. As for my long term goals, I will not be moving again. I have moved plenty in my life and have no intention of continuing to do so. I did not choose to run for sheriff because it is safer in some way. In fact it has the potential to be much more dangerous. In larger agencies there are more opportunities to encounter someone who wishes to harm you, however there are also more officers to provide assistance in those cases. In a rural area backup could be 30 minutes away when you need help. That's not to say I think working here is overly dangerous, but rural areas do present different challenges and risks.

As for the salary, the sheriff's base salary is not extremely high here. I don't have the exact number as I never started this process to make money, but I believe the sheriff's salary is around $35,000 per year. Certainly not something you seek out to get rich. Again I don't have the exact figure. I've not asked for it. If I am elected, of course my goal would be to continue serving this county for the foreseeable future and ultimately retiring from here, however that is up to the voters both this time and every 4 years after. I can only do the best job I can and hope.

Ross, Sheriff elections happen every four years just like the Presidential elections. Elk County has had many, many Sheriffs. I held that office for 17 years.  I would love to tell you exactly how many have held that office in Elk County, but that would require me to dig around in file boxes I have put away. You could step into the entryway at the sheriff's office and there should be pictures of person who has held the office of Elk County Sheriff.

Thanks Janet !

17 years is very impressive.

The seniors at West Elk, as a project for their government class, are attempting to host a public debate between myself and Doug hanks. It would take place October 12 at 2 pm at the school. I have accepted their invitation and they are contacting Mr Hanks to see if he is willing to debate me. It is my understanding they will not proceed with any event unless both candidates accept so we will see what he chooses to do. I've been asked if there would be another public forum and wanted to let everyone know the status.

Thanks for the information on a possible debate. How much room is available for non-students? Will recording devices be allowed?

I know it's a public event and I assume it will be in the auditorium. I don't see why recording devices would not be allowed but I'm not organizing it. Of course this all hinges on Mr Hanks agreeing to do the debate

Quote from: Mcordell on September 28, 2016, 02:56:16 PM
I know it's a public event and I assume it will be in the auditorium. I don't see why recording devices would not be allowed but I'm not organizing it. Of course this all hinges on Mr Hanks agreeing to do the debate

Isn't that Sheriff Hanks, I believe he still deserves that respect as it is his proper title.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 28, 2016, 10:19:44 AM
The seniors at West Elk, as a project for their government class, are attempting to host a public debate between myself and Doug hanks. It would take place October 12 at 2 pm at the school. I have accepted their invitation and they are contacting Mr Hanks to see if he is willing to debate me. It is my understanding they will not proceed with any event unless both candidates accept so we will see what he chooses to do. I've been asked if there would be another public forum and wanted to let everyone know the status.

A school project?  Looks to be out of place for a government school sponsor a political debate for candidates for sheriff. 

Wonder whose idea that is? 

Maybe the Sheriff will decline.

Quote from: ROSS on September 28, 2016, 09:27:34 PM
Isn't that Sheriff Hanks, I believe he still deserves that respect as it is his proper title.

Mr. Hanks is a perfectly respectful way to address another person. If I'm elected feel Free to call me Mr Cordell. I won't find it disrespectful since my title doesn't make me any better than anyone else.

Quote from: redcliffsw on September 29, 2016, 05:01:22 AM

A school project?  Looks to be out of place for a government school sponsor a political debate for candidates for sheriff. 

Wonder whose idea that is? 

Maybe the Sheriff will decline.

It's absolutely reasonable for a government class to be a part of the political process so long as the school isn't favoring one candidate over another. The purpose of a government class is to learn about government. That includes the political process. Maybe if you disagree you just choose not to attend. For someone who espouses a strong desire for individual liberties you have an ironic tendency to tell other people what they should or shouldn't be doing.

Wouldn't denying the seniors the right to partake in the local political process be the definition of oppression and tyranny?  If I said a group of people in the county had no right to be involved in politics wouldn't you diligently log on here to anonymously lambast me as a tyrant?

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 06:24:47 AM
It's absolutely reasonable for a government class to be a part of the political process so long as the school isn't favoring one candidate over another. The purpose of a government class is to learn about government. That includes the political process. Maybe if you disagree you just choose not to attend. For someone who espouses a strong desire for individual liberties you have an ironic tendency to tell other people what they should or shouldn't be doing.

West Elk requires senior students to attend school board meetings for class room points.
If you have ever attended there board meeting you would know, that they fail terribly at using Roberts Rules of Order as required in the boards policy's. What the students are learning is it's okay to fail as an elected official and to be sloppy and rude to the public. The teacher surely  has better resources for teaching proper protocol for a school board.  So what do they learn? Just asking. I would hope the students would learn all of their responsibilities involved in this debate endeavor.

I will attend if possible, and if it happens.

I must ask how come you are announcing this insrtead of the student's ?

This announcement should have been left to part of their education, don't you think?
After all, all projects have procedures to follow, right?

If the students have not yet acquired consent of both candidates to attend such a debate they would not proceed to announce the debate, especially the date.
Suppose the Sheriff is unavailable for that, but available on another date and you are unavailable on the new date?

Don't you reckon it would be best to leave the business of the debate in the hands of the students and their teacher for educational purposes instead of turning it into a political situation?

I asked Mr. Cordell on this forum if he and Mr. Hanks would debate before the election. Mr. Cordell is responding to my query. You can be sure the public education morass will proudly announce such a debate, if it is scheduled. And just as proudly claim full responsibility for its inception.

The interesting point is Mr. Hanks apparent silence on the matter. The rumor around my corner of the County is that Mr. Hanks saw the primary election numbers, and sees the writing on the wall. Is his silence his way of retiring?

Yes, I hopefully just prodded Mr. Hanks. Gently. See, I want him to break silence. I want the debate to occur. And I think a second debate should follow.

But I want debates to have the public ask the majority of questions, not a bought and paid for moderator. Wouldn't you relish the opportunity to ask both candidates how they will address fraud and corruption in local government? Whether or not they would support a marijuana initiative similar to the one in Wichita that the State Attorney General just claimed to be illegal? Whether Mr. Hanks also supports the tenants of the Oathkeepers? Those three questions top my list.

I posted that I was invited to the event and the date I was given. I doubt the students utilize this forum and some people follow this forum closely so posting here helps to ensure their event is successful by getting the word out.

As to the availability of the sheriff, it's a Wednesday during the day. His employment is here. There are very few scheduling conflicts that could legitimately interfere with this event. If it is scheduled for a different date because of a scheduling conflict them I will be there because my commitment is to the people of this county and to this election. If I have a schedule conflict then I will rearrange to ensure I am in attendance.

Ultimately this event is on the hands of the students and their teacher but it is a political situation so I'm not sure what you are getting at. It's a political debate. If the Sheriff chooses not to attend and the debate does not proceed, I think the voters deserve to know that. Many people have asked for another forum since he chose not to attend the last one. His attendance or lack thereof to this debate is an indication of how much he respects the citizens and their vote.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 08:25:19 AM
I posted that I was invited to the event and the date I was given. I doubt the students utilize this forum and some people follow this forum closely so posting here helps to ensure their event is successful by getting the word out.

You can only assume. there by possibly steeping on there toes. Assuring the debate has two people to debate and successfully promoting would all be part of the educational process. wouldn't promoting somefullything that is not fully set up a bit to assuming.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 08:25:19 AM
As to the availability of the sheriff, it's a Wednesday during the day. His employment is here. There are very few scheduling conflicts that could legitimately interfere with this event. If it is scheduled for a different date because of a scheduling conflict them I will be there because my commitment is to the people of this county and to this election. If I have a schedule conflict then I will rearrange to ensure I am in attendance. 

Once again you are assuming. You are assuming to have all the answers in someone Else's life. There far to many variables in each and every persons life. Suppose you  do have that day off and something happens that requires your boss change your or extend your hours at the last minute, what then?

Do you know every aspect of the Sheriff's life do you?
Do you know if he has a doctor appointment on that date?
Do you know if his wife has a doctor appointment on that date which might require hi presence?
Do you simply make decisions based on assumptions?
Like assuming the students don't use this forum, and assuming they don't know anyone that does or assume that they can not sign onto the forum when they are ready.

-

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 08:25:19 AM
Ultimately this event is on the hands of the students and their teacher but it is a political situation so I'm not sure what you are getting at. It's a political debate. 

I believe, I made that quite clear above. The class students and their teacher and their learning process should be left to them including announcing their plans.  I doubt you asked for their consent to inject yourself into their business or you would have said so.

-

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 08:25:19 AM
If the Sheriff chooses not to attend and the debate does not proceed, I think the voters deserve to know that. Many people have asked for another forum since he chose not to attend the last one. His attendance or lack thereof to this debate is an indication of how much he respects the citizens and their vote.

Why is that?
Just because you say so?
Based only on assumptions?
Isn't this post of yours only for political reasons.

If elected Sheriff of Elk County will you deal with people based on assumptions
such as the ones I have pointed out in this post?

Ross, shut up and sit down.  You aren't making sense again.

Ross your unsolicited opinion of my post is duly noted. It may be their project but it's my career and if I can get the word out about the event then I will. Have a great day sir

Quote from: Wilma on September 29, 2016, 01:36:52 PM
Ross, shut up and sit down.  You aren't making sense again.

Sorry Wilma apparently I am making a great deal of sens and once again it exceeds your comprehension.
So you might follow your own advise, " shut up and sit down."

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 01:50:09 PM
Ross your unsolicited opinion of my post is duly noted. It may be their project but it's my career and if I can get the word out about the event then I will. Have a great day sir

Is there some reason you believe responses, opinions and questions concerning politics on an open and pubic forum require solicitation by you before a  citizen  voter can post ?

I do believe you are simply making a political statement b your actin and disrespecting our present Sharif and could care less our about the educational process between teacher and students.

UNSOLICITED          UNSOLICITED          UNSOLICITED           UNSOLICITED             UNSOLICITED

Apparently you are assuming that responses must be solicited.
Well, I assume since this is a pubic forum solicitation is no require!

Didn't you start this thread    UNSOLICITED   ?

Anyway being a good politician you avoided my question. So, I ask once again.

If elected Sheriff of Elk County will you deal with people based on assumptions
such as the ones I have pointed out in an earlier post?

And may you have a great evening sir.

Quote from: ROSS on September 29, 2016, 04:17:42 PM

I do believe you are simply making a political statement b your actin and disrespecting our present Sharif and could care less our about the educational process between teacher and students.


Well, I assume since this is a pubic forum solicitation is no require!


Wilma, you are correct. He is blubbering senseless all over the place. I wonder why he is talking about Omar?
Are there any night schools in the area this guy could take advantage of?

Ross,

No, I do not work based on assumptions. You however are assuming the school has some issue with me posting as I did. Have you spoken with anyone involved or are you simply arguing?  If anyone involved with this event has an issue with anything I have posted I'm certain they will tell me. They have my phone number.

What exactly is your issue with me? Is it that I won't sign the plethora of petitions you circulate around? Is it perhaps your friendship with John Walker that has you so worked up about my candidacy? 

I know exactly where you stand when it comes to this campaign. if my post about a possible debate is what you have to complain about then I suppose I'm doing ok.  I suppose I will find a way to sleep tonight while digesting the idea that you don't approve of me.

Anyway, there may be a forum...there may not. If you are in attendance and would like to ask a question given the opportunity, please try to be more articulate than "what are you doing" which was your strongest argument at the commission meeting and if, by some chance, you formulate a specific question, I will happily answer.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 05:17:47 PM
Ross,

No, I do not work based on assumptions.

That was the answer I was looking for to my question. But it was like pulling teeth to get it.
However, like good politician you assumed a whole lot about the possible debate and made it sound as if the Sheriff could not have a legitimate reason not to accept the invitation on the said date and that the voters should know as if that would be a bad thing.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 05:17:47 PM
You however are assuming the school has some issue with me posting as I did. Have you spoken with anyone involved or are you simply arguing?  If anyone involved with this event has an issue with anything I have posted I'm certain they will tell me. They have my phone number.

No I am not assuming the school has some issue with you. But it is a school project and I wonder if they asked for your involvement in their project.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 05:17:47 PM
What exactly is your issue with me?   

I have no issues with you, I don't know you pesonally beyond the time I was friendly and welcomed you to Elk  County.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 05:17:47 PM
Is it that I won't sign the plethora of petitions you circulate around?   

There is no plethora of petitions. There have only been two petitions and I believe one was before you moved here and I never saw you to ask you to sign the second one. There were other people running for office or in public positions I would not ask to sign for obvious reasons.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 05:17:47 PM
Is it perhaps your friendship with John Walker that has you so worked up about my candidacy?
 

What friendship are you talking about. I am as much a friend of his a I am of yours. Neither one of you have invited me to your home to watch a foot ball game or to enjoy a BBQ dinner or anything else friends do together. So this political move is moot and extremely disgraceful. Apology accepted.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 05:17:47 PM
I know exactly where you stand when it comes to this campaign. if my post about a possible debate is what you have to complain about then I suppose I'm doing ok.  I suppose I will find a way to sleep tonight while digesting the idea that you don't approve of me.

Certainly, sleep well ! Thee is no reason not to!

I certainly wish I could. I worked these ancient old bones to hard all my life and the pains wake me every few hours and say roll over or move around. Fer real. LOL

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 05:17:47 PM
Anyway, there may be a forum...there may not. If you are in attendance and would like to ask a question given the opportunity, please try to be more articulate than "what are you doing" which was your strongest argument at the commission meeting and if, by some chance, you formulate a specific question, I will happily answer.

More articulate you say? I believe I was too articulate and upset you to the point of attacking me with false accusations. And I have been far more truthful in my posts than you have. Please accept my apology for being honest and not being offended.

Good night !

Mike, I am sorry that I became so rude on your thread, but------enough is enough.  When someone starts repeating himself and blabbering, at my age, I don't have the time to read through all the nonsense.

Quote from: Wilma on September 29, 2016, 07:55:06 PM
Mike, I am sorry that I became so rude on your thread, but------enough is enough.  When someone starts repeating himself and blabbering, at my age, I don't have the time to read through all the nonsense.

So, Wilma i s that say a person should not articulate?

Or is that some form of censorship because of your friendship with with Mike?
I'm just asking because Mike accused me of a false friendship.
I ask, because I don't want to make false accusations.

No need to apologize Wilma.

Thank you for your input Ross.

It's my observation and mine only that Sheriff's Hanks is taken care of business doing and performing what the voters have elected him to office to do. I listen to Deputy and the Sheriff on the scanner and see Deputy's out patrolling all hours days and nights. I have always been treated with professionalism and respect from Sheriff Hanks and any of the Deputy's.  I have not seen anything on social media posted by Sheriff's Hanks one way or the other. I do not know if Sheriff Hanks may just not choose to participate in rumors and accusations that end up on social media. "WE ALL NO IF IT IS ON SOCIAL MEDIA IT HAS TO BE TRUE RIGHT" I know the social media is a tool "right" great place to get information out to everyone if it was only that easy it would be a great tool. Just saying if you do not know the answer go to the source and just ask speculating and making accusation on social media is bulling. I have to wonder if you Mr. Cordell is elected Sheriff if you are going to continue with bashing and bulling of people that does not share your views on social media. Are you going to be this way if you are elected as Sheriff when someone does not agree with you or have the same views as you do when you're on duty? My understanding is a Sheriff is on duty all the time so I have to ask myself do I really want a Sheriff that wants to argue and post his or her laundry on social media when he does not share the same views as you. I have also noted in a lots of your post that you keep bring Deputy's into your discussions even posting their names witch I thank is very unprofessionalism. I did not realize that they were also candidates for the Sheriff position or that it mattered who they were friends with. I thank everyone understand politicians and the media who throw accusations and rumors out hopping to influence voters for a vote. I thank the voters that have any questions they would like to ask should be asking the candidates face to face. I can tell more about the person I am talking to by watching them. In a small community I would a lot rather talk with that candidate and asked my questions face to face and not have it asked by some moderator that is not going to ask the exact question that a person give them. I may have a question after the response from the candidate that I may need some clarification or a follow up question. I do encourage everyone to get out and vote best of luck to all candidates and I pray for all men and woman in Law Enforcement to always make it home.

When have I posted about the deputies or posted their names?

I'm unclear what you are referring to and I'd love to address what you are saying but you'll have to point me to what post you are talking about. I don't post about the deputies and I don't post their names.

Are you referring to when I mentioned John Walker? I don't believe mentioning his name in reference to a friendship is unprofessional. That being said, you said in a lot of my posts I bring up the deputies and mention their names so please clarify what post you are referring to so I can discuss that with you. I'm certainly happy to do so.

Excellent post Jojo.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 29, 2016, 06:24:47 AM

For someone who espouses a strong desire for individual liberties you have an ironic tendency to tell other people what they should or shouldn't be doing.

You're trying to say that I am for tyranny while you're on the political side of the government for you to have the local government school sponsor the debate.  Nothing fair about government sponsored debates. 

Don't know you or Hanks.  Perhaps Hanks is smart enough to stay away from such a circus.  Hope others are too.

I don't believe that a class in government taught in a school setting is the same thing as "Government".  It is perfectly reasonable for a teacher of a government class to want his students to participate in a part of the election process.  There is more than just going to the polls and marking a ballot.  Grade schoolers hold mock elections while high schoolers are old enough to learn about how the candidates get elected.  Sponsoring a forum for a couple of candidates seems like a good way to involve the high school crowd and after all, some of them are old enough to vote.  Besides, a public forum held during daylight hours when older folks are more comfortable in being out, might be just the thing to reach some of the more timid voters.

Thank you Wilma. I was just trying to notify people that there was a possibility of a debate. I had been asked by a few people if there would be and when I was informed of the possibility I figured people may like to know. It hadn't occurred to me that simply notifying people of the possibility would set off such a firestorm.

I have tried to keep people updated on the campaign through this thread to keep people involved. I've also tried to answer questions for people as they ask them. Many of you have asked your questions and allowed me to answer. It seems to be the minority that turn everything I say into an argument or twist it into me somehow being a communist or a tyrant. And of course there are the few who created an account and posted only to try to tear me down as a candidate. It's fairly easy to spot when someone has only posted on this entire forum once or twice every post was negatively directed at me.

I understand politics has a tendency to bring out strong opinions. What I will tell you is that in all my time in law enforcement, I have never had a citizen complaint that I was unprofessional. I have always treated people with respect and have done my job to the best of my abilities. Regardless of our differences in opinion on this forum, if anyone calls me for assistance you can expect to be treated with dignity and respect and to have your concerns handled in a professional manner.

I've been a member of several forums online. In addition to this one I have been on forums as an FAA Senior Rigger discussing parachute rigging issues and on several forums for various technical discussions. One thing all forums have in common is that they seem to bring out the worst in people. I don't know if it's the impersonal nature of an Internet forum or if it's the anonymity some choose to hide behind that makes it easier for people to impune one another's character. For this reason I have avoided the use of forums other than this one. I felt the need to continue using this forum to spread information to those who otherwise would not get it.

I will continue to use this forum for that purpose and will continue to answer questions publicly so that others may benefit from one another's questions. I do not plan to debate issues here anymore. I respect each of your rights to your opinions and am happy to discuss and debate issues through private message, email, or phone call, but not on here. It is unproductive.

I have been asked repeatedly by members of the public why I have continued to debate with people who seemingly only want to use what I say against me and who will never be satisfied with an answer on these forums. I have answered each time that I would rather debate and discuss than have someone believe that I simply refuse to address their concern. To that end please understand I am always willing to discuss issues with anyone who would like, but I won't allow those discussions to be used as a public spectacle.   This is no different than if I win the election. I will happily answer anyone's questions and discuss their concerns but those discussions won't be had in a public venue.

I do thank everyone for the support I have received and I would appreciate your continued support in this election.

Also, I will be in Grenola in the morning for the parade.  Unfortunately I will not be able to stay throughout the day as Longton scheduled their fall festival for the same day and I have been asked to be there in the afternoon to speak with people.  I will be staged in Longton and will have materials to hand out for those who are interested in meeting with me.

Thank you all and have a great day.

Quote from: W. Gray on September 29, 2016, 04:37:51 PM
Wilma, you are correct. He is blubbering senseless all over the place. I wonder why he is talking about Omar?
Are there any night schools in the area this guy could take advantage of?

Apparently you ladies lack any respect for other peoples post that don't mirror you narrow thinking.
And therefore resort to the tired old high school method of bullying, it show lack of intelligence on your part.

It was that type of narrow mindedness that gave us Obama.

It was that narrow mindedness that bought Obama's "Rainbow Stew".

So keep up the good work.

My best wishes for both of you ladies and a very pleasant evening.

Hi Ross,

Driving an ATV on state and federal highways is a traffic infraction and not a misdemeanor. It should be noted that it is not unlawful to operate an ATV on city and county roads here which is where I have seen such vehicles being operated. I have never seen anyone operating an ATV along the highways outside city limits. I was asked if I would stop people from operating their ATVs on the roadways and I answered that I would not. If someone is operating an ATV on the highway outside city limits I will speak with them and determine a legal and safe route for them to drive that does not require them to drive on the highway.

Writing bad checks intentionally is theft and is a crime of moral turpitude. I understand we disagree on this issue but I will not allow a deputy to work for the sheriff's office while committing crimes, especially crimes of moral turpitude as those issues can be used to exclude the deputy's testimony as a witness, thereby nullifying their cases.

It is also noteworthy that citizens are routinely charged with writing bad checks in this county and by this sheriff's office. I will not allow deputies and citizens to be held to different standards. Allowing a deputy to commit a crime because they are having financial troubles while simultaneously charging citizens with a crime in the same circumstances would be the definition of corruption. I will not allow corruption in any agency I run.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide clarification

Quote from: Mcordell on September 30, 2016, 10:33:37 PM
Hi Ross,

Driving an ATV on state and federal highways is a traffic infraction and not a misdemeanor. It should be noted that it is not unlawful to operate an ATV on city and county roads here which is where I have seen such vehicles being operated. I have never seen anyone operating an ATV along the highways outside city limits. I was asked if I would stop people from operating their ATVs on the roadways and I answered that I would not. If someone is operating an ATV on the highway outside city limits I will speak with them and determine a legal and safe route for them to drive that does not require them to drive on the highway.

Good morning Mike,

You are correct a traffic violation is mostly an infraction, my goof !
They can only become misdemeanor if the fine is not paid or may be a misdemeanor or felony based on the
seriousness of the violation. I ain't no cop or lawyer, just an old redneck, and proud of being one. LOL

I wish to ask are you saying the State highway ceases being a State highway, when it crosses the Moline or any other city limits? I don't understand that. Why do they cease being State highways at the city limits?

Would you ticket a minor for driving a car or truck or whatever for not having a licenses or insurance?
But not ticket a unlicensed minor driving an ATV on town or county roads?

My son has wanted to run my 4-wheeler on county roads and I will not allow it for safety reasons. I have the machine mainly as a work machine here on my little farm. I do allow him to drive it on my property occasionally. I do remind him frequently of the hazards and safety issues involved in the use of the machine.

State law requires a helmet for minors on ATV's on the streets, and I wonder does that law apply on private  property?

The laws can be very daunting.

Thanks for your response.

State statute does require a valid drivers license to operate an ATV on public roadways. Helmets are also required for juveniles as you point out. The statute governing operation of an ATV on public roadways specifically prohibits operation on state and federal highways but differentiates between those and county/city roads. Considering 160 in moline is a state highway but also has a city street name, I would err on the side of caution and classify that as a city street so long as it is within city limits. I would rather be cautious when it comes to the application of the law.

I am not interested in keeping my thumb on the community and I believe we enjoy slightly more Liberty here than you would find in more metropolitan areas. I would not wish to see traffic enforced with the same enthusiasm here as in Wichita and as such I believe using discretion in charging a minor for driving an ATV is appropriate. As for the unlicensed operation of a vehicle, I do not classify them the same way. A 2000 pound passenger car should not be operated by those who are not qualified and licensed to do so. Allowing such would be a hazard to public safety. Operation of an ATV is inherently risky, but primarily for the operator.

This is one of those areas where on paper they may appear to be the same severity, but in practice I do not believe them to be so. If a juvenile were to be violating the rules of the road and operating an ATV in an unsafe manner then I believe some action is necessary to intervene.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 30, 2016, 10:33:37 PM
Hi Ross,

Driving an ATV on state and federal highways is a traffic infraction and not a misdemeanor. It should be noted that it is not unlawful to operate an ATV on city and county roads here which is where I have seen such vehicles being operated. I have never seen anyone operating an ATV along the highways outside city limits. I was asked if I would stop people from operating their ATVs on the roadways and I answered that I would not. If someone is operating an ATV on the highway outside city limits I will speak with them and determine a legal and safe route for them to drive that does not require them to drive on the highway.

I don't believe for one minute that state highways end at the city limits of any city.
However, if you are opting for discreationary law on traffic issues it should apply equally to all people on the highway inside or outside the city's or leave it to the State Troopers. That is my opinion  on the subject. Because such activity by a sheriff could be construed as favoritism in Elk County because so many people are related one way or another. Except people that are known as outsiders. Can you see the conundrum and how it may play out in a court room?

Quote from: Mcordell on September 30, 2016, 10:33:37 PM
Writing bad checks intentionally is theft and is a crime of moral turpitude. I understand we disagree on this issue but I will not allow a deputy to work for the sheriff's office while committing crimes, especially crimes of moral turpitude as those issues can be used to exclude the deputy's testimony as a witness, thereby nullifying their cases.

I personally wrote a string of bad checks 30 years ago and I'm sure they could have been assumed to have been intentional by someone. I am glad to know today, that they were not assumed to be intentional, because it would hve cost me a very high paying job. Incidentally, it was because, I had transposed some numbers in my check book. I kicked myself all over the place.

Doesn't the law require an offended victim to press charges or can a Sheriff or deputy make an arrest on suspicion and file the charges in their own name?

Isn't a man still innocent until proven guilty in a court by a prosecuting attorney?
And if found innocent wouldn't that blunder create an opportunity for the defendant to sue
Elk County for a great deal of money?

Not too long back an Elk County road department employee was fired and she sued the County and won. I have met the lady but I can't say I know her. I have been told by friends that she was the best and most experienced road grader operator they had. But that aside, is that how we want to spend taxpayer dollars, paying for lawsuits?

It is important to realize that no one is ever charged with something called a "crime of moral turpitude." This is a catch-all (or catch-a-lot) description that can apply to any type of crime if and when appropriate.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 30, 2016, 10:33:37 PM
It is also noteworthy that citizens are routinely charged with writing bad checks in this county and by this sheriff's office. I will not allow deputies and citizens to be held to different standards. Allowing a deputy to commit a crime because they are having financial troubles while simultaneously charging citizens with a crime in the same circumstances would be the definition of corruption. I will not allow corruption in any agency I run.

I don't recall reading of any charges of bad checks in the newspaper under the Sheriffs activity.
Can you provide documentation of this, this falls under public information. Other wise it is just another unsubstantiated rumor like lot of other post on this thread and other thread In fact I frequently call posts on the thread I started rumors to avoid being accused of deception. And I ask people to think for themselves and make their own decisions.

Quote from: Mcordell on September 30, 2016, 10:33:37 PM
Thank you for the opportunity to provide clarification

Thanks for the conversation it's been great. You have made me consider numerous things.

There WILL be a public forum at the Grebola Senior Center October 11th from 6 pm to 7 pm. This one is going to proceed. Both commissioner candidates for the area as well as Mr Hanks and myself are all being invited and the event will proceed regardless of candidate attendance. I will be there. If Mr Hanks chooses not to attend, I will still answer questions from the public.

Ross, we are not going to agree on many things and that's ok. I have explained my view on the application of traffic laws governing ATV use. Thank you for your input in that area.

As for the bad checks, numerous people have been charged in this county for writing bad checks. I am not providing documentation but if you so desire you can request such from the district court. All those records are open records and they have a computer to allow you to search on your own.

As for the deputy that wrote bad checks, it was ongoing for quite a long time and was not due to an error in his checkbook. Yes he is innocent until proven guilty, which he was as soon as he moved to another county where he didn't have the protection of the sheriff to shield him from charges. This is also not an unsubstantiated rumor and if you ask any of the jurors from the most recent jury trial they can probably tell you that giglio (the court rule that excludes untrustworthy testimony) was brought into question due to his criminal charges for bad checks.

I hope I have cleared things up for you.

Good enuff.

Ross,

Why would you just up and throw in the towel without explaining what you were trying to talk about? It is not like you to "refrain from responding."

Besides the Egyptian and the subject of Thanksgiving, you were also apparently talking about an Indian (American type, I think) when you mentioned his or her arrow.

If you are/were immensely enjoying yourself, why are you running away? Where are you going—contacting someone about self-improvement classes, perhaps.

Maybe, if you could do well in Howard or in Longton, you could approach the community college in Independence and enroll there and get yourself an Associate Degree. Anything is possible, particularly with the energy you seem to have.

If I could interrupt your thread here I just want to let everyone know Mr. Hanks refused to respond to the school's request for a debate and as such they are no longer going to host one.  Before anyone gets up in arms to defend this as a scheduling conflict, the professional and respectful thing to have done would have been to decline if that were the case.  In this case he simply refused to respond. 

Thank you all and have a great day.  I'll see you at the Grenola forum on October 11th!

Now the government approved candidates for Sheriff won't be debating in the government sponsored setting. 









 

Red,

The sheriff's office is part of the government. 

You like that don't you?  Government employee covering for the empire.  You're career minded - you're a law enforcement type, not a sheriff - at least not in the sense of what a sheriff used to be.

That's how I'm seeing you.

Ok. Thank you for your input red.

Mr. Cordell, after reading 18 pages on the forum, which by the way is not a read I would recommend to someone who is thinking of settling in Elk County. We all have busy schedules and I'm not special, but am finally going to take the time. I too once had political aspiration, motivated by some of the same people who you would say, have your back.  I worked for your opponent as well for four years, so you might say I have insight. I just give thanks to God for teaching me humility, before I made a complete fool of myself. I have not had the opportunity to speak to you, I have made myself available, but you always seem to be looking the other way, or maybe even up, so I still have it to look forward too. A veteran before attending KLTC, prevented me from falling for their mind games, so I did not return with my head swollen as do so many of our young LEOs. Something I think you should consider, as you go forth in this election. Sheriff Hanks and I butted heads on occasion, but at no time was my employment with him under any jeopardy because we disagreed. We are different people and we approached issues from different angles, but at no time was I ever thrown under the proverbial bus. I respected the fact he was the boss, and he respected the fact I was just as bull headed as him. I left the Sheriff's Department, because of an illness which the Doctors said was going to end my life. The Sheriff remained a great supporter of me through these times, even though I would have run for his position if my health would have allowed. He is and has been a true friend, to me and the citizens of Elk County. I should not tell you of the times I seen him fight to repress tears when working a fatality accident involving a citizen we knew, or not being able to hold those same tears back at scene of an infant's fatality which we will never get to know.  I could tell you of the endless hours, and the toll on his body, which he will never toot his own horn about, but would it do any good. You have drawn a conclusion about the Sheriff from what some of your supporters have told you.  Your experience in law Enforcement should have taught you in your line of work there will always be a disgruntled side. Thanks for taking the time to read this.... Joe Love

I have drawn no conclusions based on any third hand information. I have drawn conclusions largely on my own observations and on first hand information, partly from employees of the sheriff's office. I respect your right to your opinion and I'm sure we will not agree on many things pertaining to the changes that need to be made but I see problems that should not exist in regards to a lack of professionalism, a lack of preparedness, and a failure to provide an environment and the tools necessary for members of that agency to be successful. These are my own observations and not information being fed to me.

Your opinion and perspective are colored by your experiences there and with members of that agency. Sometimes it's not a bad thing to bring in someone with a new perspective and new ideas.

As for you making yourself available to me, you have never reached out to me. I have sent post cards to every registered voter on the list with my phone number, email address, and Facebook page. I have handed out countless business cards bearing the same information. I have gone door to door to over half the residences in this county and handed out personal contact information. When people aren't home, I leave a printed door tag with information about myself, including the aforementioned contact information. Many people have reached out to me through these various mediums. You have not.  I have not contacted you while you are working because that would not be an appropriate time to do so.

I'd be happy to visit with you if you so desire and I have made myself very available to you throughout my campaign. If you wish to reach out, feel free. I will address your concerns.

Thank you.

     In the 18 pages of this thread, leading up to where we are now, there has been considerable negativity regarding the personal nature of the Sheriff. I am not saying all is peaches and cream at the Sheriff's Office, with all of the social unrest going on in this nation, and the fact Law Enforcement Agencies are at the mercy of the public, there is not an agency anywhere in this country that can boast perfection. I know for certain after being in two separate theaters of combat, people react as per their training when hell is raining down on you. In short I am not saying you are wrong about anything you want to do, you are just wrong about the character of Sheriff Hanks.
     In regards to the other part of your reply, I am not a liar, I tried to talk to you at the Moline Caucus, I asked you how you were doing and you turned and walked the other way. Just with in the last couple of weeks you were doing the door to door thing in Moline, I was going to work an auction there, your white vehicle was parked on the street and you were at the door of a house, I stopped in the street near your vehicle and waited, you walked from the house you were at and turned to go on to the next house over, so I drove on. I have been a registered republican in this county the whole of my adult life, and I have received nothing from you in the mail. Last I am not the one who is running for an office, so I don't need to reach out to anyone. You have answered my questions; I appreciate your response and wish you good luck.

very well stated.

Sir I have never walked away from anyone that started a conversation with me. If I didn't respond to you it's because I didn't hear you. As for stopping near my vehicle while I'm going door to door, I don't drive door to door, I walk. I wouldn't have been coming back to my vehicle so my apologies if you felt slighted. That's certainly not my intention. I'm somewhat confused however because I when I went door to door in moline I walked from home and didn't have my vehicle parked anywhere. Also, the weekend of the auction a couple weeks ago I was in Chicago. I have only gone door to door in moline twice so far and both times I was walking with my wife. I'm certainly not calling you a liar but it seems there's some misunderstanding somewhere.

Again if you'd like to speak with me feel free to reach out. I understand you feel it's my responsibility to contact the voters and not the other way around which is exactly why I have gone over 100 miles door to door in this county. I'm making an effort to speak with as many people as possible. If I haven't made it to you yet I apologize. In regards to the post cards, I sent one to every address on the list of registered voters provided to me by the clerks office. I'd be happy to give you one

Ive been reading this forum and watching the elction for a while now and I didn't say anything because I know Doug and John and I don't want them to take it out on me but I have to say something now.  I have worked with both of them and my opnion of mr cordell wasn't very high when this started because of all the bad things john and doug said about him and what he would do.  I never met him but I seen him around and he has always been nice to me and smiled and said hi even though I don't know him.  I did meet him one time when he came to my door going door to door and I was able to ask him some questions and he had good answers to every question I had and didn't talk bad to me one bit even after I told him I was planning to vote for doug.  I have read every one of these posts and it doesn't seem fare that everytime someone says something bad about him mr cordell cant say anything without people making it a bad thing.  I can tell you that everything he has said is true.  doug is not professional and I have heard him cussing at people when they come into talk to him and that's not right for the sheriff to do.  I like doug and I don't think hes a bad person but after talking to mr cordell and asking my questions I think its time for a change.  my family and me will be voting for him and I just pray to god that he wins and can change things like he says he will.  like I said I wasn't gong to say anything because I don't want them to take it out on me but its hard to let joe talk bad about mr cordell and make him look bad when I have herad him and people at the sheriff department talking bad about mr cordell.  joe used to have coffee at the department with them and talk about stuff it seems like a setup for him to post this now.  and I have read enough of john walkers writing to say i'm pretty sure jojo is actually john walker.  if not then they write a lot like each other.  I'm tired of seeing good people come and go from elk county because they cant work with doug and john.

and joe you said he is running and should do all the work of talking to you but he came to my house and he went to a lot of other houses I know to talk to people.  doug said he was going to run one more time but he hasn't talked to anyone or done anything and a lot of people are saying he doesn't want it cause hes not trying.  everyone I know that has his signs were put up by john not doug and he hasn't gone to any of the events or anything to talk to people.  maybe its time for him to retire and let someone take over that wants the job and is working for it

        I am glad to see that this thread is at least, temporarily, back to the topic for which it was started.

       There are , unfortunately, some who can't seem to do so. It seems they can only spew forth their own agenda, yes agenda, for they go far beyond simply giving an opinion, as they say they are doing. They come across, to me, as sad, lonely and hateful, with far too much free time on their hands. My opinion.

      I have not met Mr Cordell, but He comes across as an intelligent man who cares about what he is doing and intends to do if elected. I have great respect for our current officers as well.

If someone actually writes a bad check or breaks a minor law so-to-speak does someone other than the
arresting can that officer file his personal charges or is it required of the person of whom the crime was perpetrated?


We actually had an un-requested credit card come up missing in the mail. I received a bill for the card.
I reported it to the issuer and police. The police were summoned to the store where a lady was caught using the
card. The card was confiscated and the woman released! Why let the woman walk away with out arresting her?

Who would have been responsible for filing charges? Me? The cashier? The store owner? The card issuer?

thankfully the issuer erased previous chargers and removed the card fom the digital system.

Good question. The victim is never the one to "file charges" and law enforcement can file a report requesting charges of place someone under arrest for the commission of a crime even without a cooperating victim. In some cases this is common, such as domestic battery. In other cases the officer will often take into account whether or not there is a cooperating victim.

In your example, there are several crimes and several victims. You would be the victim of identity theft which specifically lists the use of a financial card or the numbers. The store is the victim of theft, and the bank is the victim of criminal use of a financial card. Because you have no monetary loss, you would not be the victim of that crime.

In this case, there are felony charges and as such the suspect should be taken into custody. In the case of misdemeanors, law enforcement is limited on when they may or may not make a custodial arrest. Not everyone who commits a crime can be taken into physical custody immediately.

Quote from: enoughisenough on October 06, 2016, 11:25:56 AM
  and I have read enough of john walkers writing to say i'm pretty sure jojo is actually john walker.  if not then they write a lot like each other.  I'm tired of seeing good people come and go from elk county because they cant work with doug and john.

I can assure you I am NOT John Walker. Doug and John are good people and has always treated me with respect and with professionalism. Nobody is perfect and we ALL make mistakes nor is everyone good just saying.

o I'm sorry then.  you write a lot like him.  no nobody is prefect and not everyone is good but there were some good ones that came and went and told me it was because of them two.  I no what kind of work place they have and its not good.  like I said I like them both but I do think its time to dos omething different and i think that's what we are getting.  i didn't mean to acuse you of anything you just sound like him is all.  I'm real sad to see the one leaving for greenwood county.  he was always so nice to people

I'll never claim to be perfect, nor will I promise not to make mistakes. All I can promise is that I will always do my job to the very best of my abilities and with the utmost professionalism. I can also promise I will expect nothing less from the deputies and will ensure the agency is staffed with qualified professionals who meet only the highest of standards.

I have never said either Doug or John is a terrible person. I have said I don't believe they behave professionally and I base that not only on my own personal observations but also on the accounts of others who have had dealings with them. It's is not my intention to sling mud and I am not trying to impune their character, but as a candidate for office it is my duty to bring to the public's attention the ways in which I believe I can improve the agency.

I appreciate the civil discussion and as I have said, we don't have to agree on everything. I certainly would appreciate everyone's vote on November 8th but I understand some of you will vote for my opponent and that won't affect the way I do my job going forward. Everyone gets one vote and it's your right to cast it as you see fit. For those that are voting for me, I am humbled by your support and faith and I will do the very best I can to provide you with an agency you can be proud of.

I have dealt with both the sheriff and the under-sheriff over the last several years and have never
had a bad experience with either one of them.

I also spoke recently with deputy who said he has no problem with working for our Sheriff Dept.

I can understand a citizen having a personality conflict with a LEO.
But I do not see that as a reason to diss the whole department.

As far as equipment, do we really need a department decked out like NY or even like
Coffeyville with an armored vehicle?

Would we need more deputies for a shrinking population ?

Do we really want higher property taxes for things, that are not necessary in the country?

I am not addressing these remarks to you Cordell,= but to every one else.

While not specifically addressed at me, I'd like to respond to a few things.

I agree we most definitely don't need to have an agency with the equipment you find in larger agencies like NYPD. I would never call for such things. We most certainly don't need an armored vehicle as the use of such a tool is so few and far between that maintenance on a vehicle that sat unused for its entire existence would be cost prohibitive and unreasonable.

I certainly do not want to see property taxes raised and it wouldn't be necessary to do so for more equipment for the sheriff's office. There is a budget in place and I would like to work within the framework of the alotted budget.

I haven't seen or heard of anyone asking for those things so you can rest easy.

The issues of professionalism that have been brought to my attention by members of the community were not people who were upset they got a ticket or got in trouble. In several cases they were the victim or parents of a victim that had these issues. While personality conflicts do arise, one also has to look at the fact that if someone is having personality conflicts with that large a number of people, perhaps they are the reason. The same applies to the administration of the sheriff's office. 

In regards to the deputy you spoke with, it's possible they truly don't have an issue working there and that's great. It's also entirely possible they are unwilling to discuss the internal problems with the sheriff's office with the general public. That's also a good thing.

Just a reminder for everyone to come to the candidate forum/meet & greet in Grenola tomorrow 10/11 at 6 pm at the Grenola senior center.  I'm looking forward to speaking with those that are able to attend and hope to answer your questions and concerns.

All 4 candidates have been invited to attend. This should be a worthwhile event to attend.

I'd like to be there but, my wife is preparing to under go surgery the next morning.
So, I will remain home with her.
I hope everyone has a great evening.

I hope she has a speedy recovery.

Quote from: Mcordell on October 10, 2016, 05:12:55 PM
I hope she has a speedy recovery.

Thank you.

Thank you to everyone that came out to Grenola to the forum. I was the only sheriff candidate in attendance with Mr. Hanks declining earlier in the day but I think it was still quite productive and I got a chance to talk to a lot of people.

Enoughisenough: I don't very often post things on the site, but I did concerning this year's Sheriff Election. Mr. Cordell has spoken with me since my post and I respect him for doing so. I will grant I was wrong about one of the things I posted, and did apologize to Mr. Cordell for this, when we talked. I am at a loss; however, as to how you believe I am part of some kind of a set up as you stated. I don't think you know me, or you would know I arrive at my own opinions (and I have many) and have been known to share them. I do interact with the Sheriff and Deputies, but not over coffee as I never acquired a taste for the stuff. The conversations which take place there rarely are about Mr. Cordell, as this is a subject the Sheriff does not want to talk about. My post was not to degrade Mr. Cordell; it was in defense of the character of Sheriff Hanks, from other post on the forum, not by Mr. Cordell. I don't think you and I would agree on everything but if you choose to identify yourself I would be happy to share my opinions with you.

I do appreciate the support that has been expressed and I value the discussions that have been had on here, however I truly am not concerning myself with the private conversations had about me or the election.  It would be perfectly understandable for some at the Sheriff's Office to have discussed the election or my campaign and I understand if some of those conversations cast me in a negative light.  As I have said before, politics brings out passionate opinions, especially for those with a stake in the outcome.  Change can be a scary thing for some and it would be easier for someone who is afraid of impending change to see that change, or the person bringing it, as the bad guy.  I do not hold that against anyone and one of the great hallmarks of our country is that we have a right to speak out and express our opinions.  I have immense respect for our constitution and those rights it serves to protect.

Joe, none of that is to say I am accusing you of anything and I definitely understand your previous post refuted that claim.  My post is not directed at that accusation in any way, but rather is intended to convey that either way, it doesn't matter.  I am glad to live in a place where people are so intensely involved in the local political process.  Far too many people around this great nation are disinterested in politics and make no effort to ensure they have a voice in who represents their interests.

Thank you to everyone, whether you support me or not, for taking some interest in this election.  Please get out on November 8th and vote and while you are there, I would be honored if you would vote for me.

joe I didn't mean you drink coffee I guess I meant you sit with them and talk to them about stuff and they drink coffee.  id rather not tell you who I am becase I don't want john and doug to know who I am.  but I got a broshur in the mail today with dougs picture and some info about him for his election.  I saw what he put on there and I talked to mike cordell on facebook to tell him hwo its not true and he said he knew but he wasn't going to post about it and I think people should know that what he said wasn't true.  in his acomplishments  It sais he upgraded the 911 system and trained all the dispachers to the newest and best system but they were forced to upgrade it because the state made them do it and doug was mad about it. it really makes me mad that he is trying to make it look like he has worked hard for people and the only things he did he was forced to.  it also sais he made a special account to buy stuff but he didnt say that account is set up becaue the law makes them do that and he didn't pick it. and some of what he sais it paid for wasn't paid with it.  and where he sais he visits children in the schools and taught them to wear their seatbelts and did the identity kit things he didnt even do any of that stuff.  he went to the stuff but he had john do those things and he didnt do anything and it wasn't even his idea.  john told him to do stuff because john is trying to keep his job and he said he is quitting if mike wins.  I just don't think its fair after how hard mike cordell has worked for doug to try to say he did all these great things he didn't even do.  the rumor I have heard is that doug is planning to run this time and then he is going to retire early before 4 years so john can take it over without votes and then he can run next time and he will already be sheriff.  I think if john walker is sheriff things will be even worse and I wish I could tell people about everything that happens in the sheriff department but I can't.  I sure hop mike cordell wins because I think he will make it alot better

I appreciate the support as always. The reason I elected not to make a public statement is because I chose to focus on what I WILL do for the county rather than anything negative about the current administration. I believe the voters to be smart enough to recognize the issues for themselves. Again, thank you for the support and for reaching out to me. I understand your situation.

Well I didn't go into last night with a post prepared for if I lost. It's simply not how I work and, quite honestly it was not what I expected to happen. That being said, the night ended with me only receiving 42% of the vote. I don't know the how or the why, nor do I know what I could have done differently, if anything, to affect the outcome. In the end it really just boils down to the majority of the voters not being ready for change.

I do want to thank all of you who supported me. To those of you who had conversations with me expressing your concerns, and to those who were counting on my campaign's success, I'm sorry to have let you down.

If you see Sheriff Hanks around town, be sure to congratulate him, regardless of which side of the election you were on. Much like our country, our community needs to stand together in moving forward. Politics seems to bring out some very strong feelings in people and it's important when all the turmoil is over that we continue to be neighbors and treat one another with respect.

Thank you again to each and every one of you. I am still here for you if you need anything.