While one Scott County election is making headlines over missing ballots, another election was quietly laid to rest with minimal attention given to the disruption over slanderous remarks on social media.
Andrew Ganfield and Rick Stidger ran for Elko New Market mayor’s seat being vacated by Joe Julius. Both Ganfield and Stidger ran as opponents to Elko New Market’s recent $125 million investment in the California company Niagara Bottling plant that would draw from the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer, city’s water supply, a partnership Mayor Julius was eager to invest in despite overwhelming opposition by the residents.
Stidger, who has lived most of his life in Scott County, was the grassroots fighter that challenged RINO incumbent Jon Koznick for the 57A House of Representative seat earlier this year. This fall he pivoted to run for Elko New Market mayor.
In the lead up to Election Day, Elko New Market resident Dillon Forst fired last minute smear of Rick Stidger with wild claims of child trafficking on a community Facebook group. Forst’s posts were posted late at night before election day for maximum impact before the page moderator could remove it and just hours before the polls opened.
The slander came out of nowhere as Stidger had not interacted with Forst before this election season.
Stidger’s objective was essentially the same as his opponent, Andrew Ganfield. Neither sought the position of mayor to further political or business interests; they simply wanted to represent the community they live in, offering a voice for the citizens who pay their taxes and chose Elko New Market as the community they want to raise a family and reside in.
According to Section 609.765, Minnesota Statute states that whoever knowingly states false or defamatory matter against one’s character orally, in writing or by any other means to a third person without the consent of the person defamed is guilty or criminal defamation - a crime that may carry imprisonment for up to 364 days and/or payment up to $3,000.
Certainly Dillon Forst could have queried privately about Stidger’s accusations. Did Forst have a grievance, unbeknownst to Stidger and use this as an opportunity to thwart the mayoral race?
In a race between two candidates with an objectively similar platform, a race that was decided by 90 votes, it’s hard to surmise that this last-minute social media slander didn’t make its mark, perhaps even deciding the race.
Sign in with
Facebook