You may not know Richard Rorex, but he likes you enough to spend his own money to entertain and educate you.
If you attend town events, council meetings or community gatherings, you will run in to Richard.
When his beloved wife passed a few years ago he decided he would spend his money and time on things he thought improved our community. He has donated to help fund the musicals in the park and several other events. He is active in local and county Republican politics — don’t get him started on President Barry — and he is even paying for a series of ads in the Daily Press and its special Voters Guide urging folks to get involved, do their homework and vote. Not a partisan message, just a teaching message.
Richard is one of those people who can’t stand to sit by and watch idly when he could be involved in making things better. He is engaged, active, informed and generous.
Richard is what the whole “Better Way of Life” slogan is all about.
We could use seven or eight thousand more just like him around here.
We have the answer
A few weeks ago, I wondered in print where Town Council candidate Richard Bunck was getting his money and we now have the answer.
Candidates must file a form 460 campaign spending report which can tell you a lot about who is funding their campaign. In Mr. Bunck’s case, except for a small contribution from Hesperia, the single donor was Bunck himself who put in $35,260 into his run for office. Why would someone with virtually no local ties or community involvement invest that kind of dough to get elected to our Town Council?
We will see if the aggressive and excessive advertising campaign works for him or not. It is quite obvious he is aware that influencing the absentee and early voters are the keys to victory in Apple Valley. Expect the battle of the attack mailers now as the release of the absentee ballot is around the corner.
The Big Kahuna
In last week’s recitation of state ballot propositions I left off the biggie. Yes, Prop. 1 — the Water Bond.
This is a $7.12 billion debt we are incurring to fix our water system. Opponents say it does nothing to provide any new sustainable increased water supply, further harms the fisheries and rivers by overdrawing the Sacramento Delta and adds new debt that will certainly mean reductions in schools and public safety. Hey, we’re in California — who cares about debt?
Proponents say it provides new storage and infrastructure to capture more water and relieve the pressure on California’s farm lands, provides hundreds of millions for grants, new dams and water “clean-up” projects.
With a severe drought as the backdrop for this election, there is zero chance this won’t pass. Most people will just hear “money for water” and vote yes. There is also an outside chance that the billions set aside for water storage could actually be leveraged in a way to significantly benefit the High Desert since we have a huge underground aquifer that could store water — for a handsome fee.
Pat Orr is a local business owner, community volunteer and political junkie