I have been asked several times today why I didn't file to run for either commissioner or mayor of Oriental.
Short answer: my suits against the Town. Although there is no legal bar to my running for office and serving in office, had I been elected, it would be awkward every time the Town met with its attorneys to discuss the case. As a practical matter, it just wouldn't work, no matter how much I want to see regime change.
On the positive side, now that I no longer serve on the Pamlico County Board of Elections, I am free to talk about any of the candidates. I am free to disclose information to the public without being accused of putting an official thumb on the electoral scales.
Somewhat the same applies to Oriental Town politics. When I was elected to the Town Board in 2007, I knew that I would have to trim my sails to some extent in order to build enough support for actions I thought were needed. Every time a measure was voted on, I had to balance my personal opinion against the knowledge that at the next meeting, I may seek the vote of someone opposed to me on this one.
This isn't necessarily the same as what has derisively been called "log rolling." It is just the common-sense practice of picking your battles. If your object of seeking office is political posturing, it doesn't matter. If your object is to do things - to take action on behalf of the community at large, you need to exercise a bit of restraint.
I still want to accomplish things for the Town, but I am neither mayor nor a member of the Town Board. Nor do I seek those offices.
I admit I was more than a bit annoyed on March 4, when the Town's attorney, Clark Wright, explained to the judge that he should dismiss my complaint because I am "politically disgruntled" and running for mayor. I had never met Clark Wright in my life, had never disclosed any political ambitions with him or discussed anything other than legal procedures associated with the case. Nor will I ever in the future.
I may, however, now feel more free to disclose to the public the vast amount of misinformation they have been fed about the "land swap." I was more than happy for this to play out in the courts. But the Town has made it personal instead of a dispute about law.
I deplore that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
I deplore intentionally inaccurate statements. I am Clark Wright; my statements as legal counsel for the Town on March 4 were clear and simple - no name calling. I simply argued to the Court that the courts are not a proper place for policy or political disagreements to be worked out. Such disagreements are more appropriately worked out at the ballot box. How ironic is it that Mr. Cox would use his blog to make further political and policy arguments and then claim that my argument that such is indeed valid discourse in the political arena, but not in a lawsuit, somehow is a "deplorable" personal attack . . . hmm . . .
I'm not clear exactly where in the above post I accused Mr. Wright of name-calling. He did clearly assert to the judge that I had filed the suit because "[He] doesn't like the policy decision that the Town made." He clearly implied that I am running for mayor or perhaps the town board. If his point was not that the judge should dismiss the case for those reasons, I would like to know what it was. Wright then went on to extol the benefits of the policy decision. He even ridiculed me for believing, in his words: "I don't think the Town should be able to vacate a street and accomplish a public good, because streets are somehow sacrosanct or special or different." I have more to say, which I will post later.
Post a Comment