As I have stated in the past…please read the entire article for the full story: Candidate mailers have become a popular topic recently. This one I saw floating around on social media and thought I would see what I could find out about it.
David Yungmann lists “Led opposition to huge school/mosque in the rural west” under experience in a mailer. That got some folks spun up…
The first thing I saw online was this…The Howard County Democratic Central Committee posted the following on Facebook:
This is Howard County’s Republican Party. Notice how Republican Candidate for County Council District 5, David Yungmann, proudly boasts leading the opposition of a proposed mosque in western HoCo on his mailer. A site that was already zoned and operated as a private Catholic school and church site in prior times. This is the sort of islamophobia and xenophobia we are up against in Howard County.
District 5 residents, you have a champion in China Williams for County Council. Vote for her and stop these xenophobes from taking office!
#islamophobia #xenophobia #hocopolitics #hocomd
There are a decent number of comments on that post …I will address some of those soon. But click the link and read through them if interested…it is an interesting read.
Blogger Jason Booms must have seen it as well and posted an article: “Selective First Amendment Support?” Some of the article includes:
Let’s revisit the text, shall we?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
So why is David Yungmann, the Republican nominee in the 5th Councilmanic District, sending out a flier where he is highlighting his role as someone who “led opposition to huge school/mosque in the rural west?” See below…
One would think Mr. Yungmann would be an uncompromising champion of religious freedom, isn’t that what the GOP is running so hard on these days? So from a campaign narrative perspective, even if he had development size concerns, why would he be so quick to tout his opposition to the construction of a school/place of worship in western Howard County?
Mr. Yungmann needs to answer as to why he lists his opposition in this case as one of his top five significant accomplishments in this piece. Presumably, other experience points could have been selected. Why did he choose this one? What message is he trying to send? To whom?
Read the full article here: https://spartanconsiderations.blogspot.com/2018/10/selective-first-amendment-support.html
I promised I would come back to some of the comments on social media…one of the responses I read stated the following:
In all fairness, I am a life long democrat. I live in western Howard county only miles from where I grew up. This mosque was opposed by everyone in the community. They wanted to expand the campus to allow thousands more than it was zoned for as a school. The road could not handle the load nor water because I don’t think city water comes out that far yet. So, yeah, the republican party is out of control nationally right now, this opposition to the mosque has nothing to do with that. Check your facts before getting people riled up over false or limited information. The mosque by the way was welcomed as long as they abided by the initial zoning applied to that site.
David Yungmann did post two comments on the wall of that post…they read:
The project was widely opposed by people of all religions, national origins and political parties because of its overwhelming and precedent-setting size. The former Catholic school was smaller, had requirements for half their students to come by bus to cut down on traffic and had very different overall operations. Our group agreed to support the new project, to the disappointment of many in the community, as long as it stayed within the same size, hours, etc. that were included in the zoning approval for the Catholic school. We spent 6 months and lots of legal fees trying to get that compromise into an agreement, only to have them walk away at the 11th hour stating that they could not live with any limits requested by the community. We then offered to help them find a more suitable site, which offer was rejected. It was only after lots of time and money trying to reach a compromise, that we had no choice but to oppose their application overall. Had the applicant not been politically well-connected, the project never would have gotten through DPZ.
If you are a voter in District 5, think long and hard about the values that this attack post represents. It aims to divide us by religion and spread inaccurate facts all to win an election. This is not the style of representation District 5 has had in the past and, as a resident of Howard Co and our District for over 45 years, I am committed to carrying on the tradition of first class representation.
and the second comment reads:
After posting my comment about the project, I’ve read through the more recent comments. I see people who call our whole community racist, others trying to explain the issue and people who didn’t want the project for their own personal reasons. Please don’t tear each other apart over an ill-informed Facebook post.
I reached out to David for a response for this article and we spoke on the phone for a bit. He said it was fine to use his comments on that post for the article.
I thought it was fair to provide the statements for both sides of this issue…much like I have tried to do in past articles.
Early voting in 13 days. Do you know where to vote?