I got an e-mail today from a Republican who had spotted my Soil & Water post and wanted to correct my statement that (a) they had endorsed Haefs, and (b) they had more information on Haefs than I did.
The SD-48 Sample Ballot (which is what I'd found, when searching for info) is divided into two sections (and I totally failed to notice this) -- there are endorsements (Mitt Romney and on down) but also a section of "recommendations," which were the result of researching information on the candidates and picking the one that seemed like the best fit for their constituency.
You know how I said, "I know nothing about Brian Peterson, but Marjorie Holsten is a Tea Partier. So I'll take my chances on Brian"? Apparently they had exercised pretty much the exact same thought process in reverse regarding Wesserle vs Haefs. They knew nothing about Haefs, but Wesserle was clearly not their cup of (organic fair trade) tea, so they recommended Haefs.
And fair enough! I will withdraw my ENDORSED BY REPUBLICANS strike against Haefs. Which leaves me with two candidates, one of whom is the incumbent but has no contact information anywhere, and one of whom is running for office and does have contact information but doesn't respond to her e-mail messages.
I'm probably going to vote for Wesserle, although I will note again that this race really doesn't seem to matter as hardly anyone seems to serve on this board for more than about six months, anyway. My suspicion at this point is that they really don't do much and ought to be abolished.
Update: this race was covered in the Star Tribune voter's guide and also Wesserle e-mailed me back.