Jack Smith Filed July 5th

[Rono]

Why is it that it has been a week now since Jack filed and no one here announced it?

Rono

[Rono]

..and why is this a signed in members only area? Several people that read this site as guests but are not interested in being members want to know.

Rono

[Karen]

Guest

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:51 pm Post subject: Board of Elections Filings as of 7/8/05

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LIST OF CANDIDATES

ELECTION: 10/11/2005 - MUNICIPAL


ROBISON JULIE ABERG JULIE ABERG ROBISON CARY TOWN OF CARY COUNCIL MEMBER AT-LARGE 112 BRANT POINT PL CARY NC 27513 919-345-4392 919-677-9752 7/5/2005 Active


SMITH JACK W. JACK W. SMITH CAR TOWN OF CARY DISTRICT C 104 CRICKET LN CARY NC 27511 919-816-0999 7/1/2005 Active

Rono,

Guest posted this on July 6th...

Karen

[Rono]

There are people, even from around the country, that read on this site but are not registered. Hyatt can attest to that by IP addresses. I know SEVERAL and yes they have / had an interest in this area and the people who are apart of the political arena here.

There are also several other UA people that I know read this as well but are not registered. While I have encouraged them to speak out, they decline to do so. (sometimes I don't blame them...and even I was corrected myself several weeks ago when Hyatt rightfully pointed out to me the way I handled a "guest")

My point being if this becomes an exclusive and not an inclusive board, it is against the principles I stand for in openness involving government issues.

Just like me who can not vote, remember that they are interested in the banter here.

...just my 2 cents

Rono

...just my 2 cnet

[Rono]

Guest

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:51 pm Post subject: Board of Elections Filings as of 7/8/05

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LIST OF CANDIDATES

ELECTION: 10/11/2005 - MUNICIPAL


ROBISON JULIE ABERG JULIE ABERG ROBISON CARY TOWN OF CARY COUNCIL MEMBER AT-LARGE 112 BRANT POINT PL CARY NC 27513 919-345-4392 919-677-9752 7/5/2005 Active


SMITH JACK W. JACK W. SMITH CAR TOWN OF CARY DISTRICT C 104 CRICKET LN CARY NC 27511 919-816-0999 7/1/2005 Active

Rono,

Guest posted this on July 6th...

Karen

Sorry Karen and all, I missed it.

Rono

[Rono]

and as a further correction to my post, it was July 1st (a Friday and the first day of filing I believe ) that Jack filed, not July 5th

Rono

[washere]

Ron-
Your "guest" pals from the UA dropping in to do a drive by smear of Cary and candidates isn't open by your definition.

In the spirit of openess, why can't they have the courage to sign their own posts?

[Rono]

sorry Char, but I can not control, (nor do I want to) what they say or do. Is censorship what you endorse in light of this? I know you had a bad experience and I fully understand your position, but I opt for openness, although I like you, wish they would identify themselfs. But in lew of everyone doing so, I still opt first for the openness. And why are anonymous postings exclusively a problem from the UA areas?

Rono

[dhyatt]

..and why is this a signed in members only area? Several people that read this site as guests but are not interested in being members want to know.

Rono

Sorry Ron, but my board, my rules. Candidates are going to be attacked and that's fine - it's often deserved (as Jennifer's recent fuax paux shows) but I don't believe in doing it from behind a veil of anonymity. Issues / candidate info can still be posted/read by anybody in the general area but I'm *hoping* that this registered user's area can focus on hard edged facts, based in having at least some idea where the information came from. It's also designed to keep the candidate's themselves from manipulating the comments - unless of course they wish to identify themselves :-)

[johnb]

What? These guys-> :o) $-) ~:> =:) b-( :^o :-/

[Brent]

What? These guys-> :o) $-) ~:> =:) b-( :^o :-/

Oh, John, that begs the question!!

Captions to go with the faces? :lol:

[Rono]

Oh, John, that begs the question!!

I second the question!

Rono

[johnb]

Brent,

I'm afraid to put names with faces. It might make the critters or staffers angry at me and that would damage my self-esteem.

John

[Rono]

Sorry Ron, but my board, my rules. Candidates are going to be attacked and that's fine - it's often deserved (as Jennifer's recent fuax paux shows) but I don't believe in doing it from behind a veil of anonymity. Issues / candidate info can still be posted/read by anybody in the general area but I'm *hoping* that this registered user's area can focus on hard edged facts, based in having at least some idea where the information came from. It's also designed to keep the candidate's themselves from manipulating the comments - unless of course they wish to identify themselves

Two comments. One is the area could be "read only" for guests, and two while I understand this is your board and your rules, I hope your future considerations, (political and otherwise) reconsider censorship as a form of control.

I know it can get ugly Don and I know it can be a lot of work, but if this place is what I think you intended it to be, limiting access is, IMHO lessoning its credibility for free and open debate.

Once again, just my 2 cents.

And for the record, I desire everyone to register and participate. But as one who knows that there is sometime consequences for taking an open stand, I understand also those reluctant to do so.

Just like being a Town Councilor Don, sometimes up to halve of thhe people may not agree with you. It of course once again is your decision.

Rono

[johnb]

:o) $-) ~:> =:) b-( :^o :-/

1-Nels 2-Ernie 3-Jack 4-JULIEFORCARY! 5-Mike 6-Jennifer 7-Marla

1-Don't expense your Rockports for gods sake, you look like a buffoon.

2-There are people in the city aside from the Chamber, the rest of us aren't cash cows for your public art projects.

3-At times you can be a budget hawk, but not nearly enough times. Get a backbone.

4-Don't ever let anyone convince you to put a goofy pic and logo on campaign signs ever again. You seem to be a serious and decent person, but your campaign materials cannot be as goofy as your politics.

5-Staff beats the hell outa you because they hate you with a passion and everything you stand for, I hope you stock up on icy-hot.

6-If the public is not allowed to speak out at public meetings in your world you're a totalitarian. Welcome to a free republic, if you cannot stand the heat how dare you use your position as a means to threaten revenge against people that anger you! If that's the best you can do, spare us your presence on the council and resign. You're not providing "Open space" to a rural area like New Hill, they have that already, you're taking open space and putting a feces treatment plant in their neighborhood. You were laughed at because you DESERVED to be laughed at. Your comment was idiotic.

7-Anecdotal evidence that the academic standards for an education degree really are in the same league as Physical Education, Basket Weaving, and ethnic studies.

[dhyatt]

[snip]

Two comments. One is the area could be "read only" for guests, and two while I understand this is your board and your rules, I hope your future considerations, (political and otherwise) reconsider censorship as a form of control.

[snip]
Rono

Understood, and it's actually a little surprising to me the amount of heat I've taken (almost all of it behind my back) over this board. BTW - If political considerations turn up in the near future, the first thing I'll do is post my position on forced annexation in the 2005 Candidates Forum. I've learned quite a bit over the last 4 years and the tepid position I took on it then needs to be udpated.

[Rono]

Understood, and it's actually a little surprising to me the amount of heat I've taken (almost all of it behind my back) over this board. BTW - If political considerations turn up in the near future, the first thing I'll do is post my position on forced annexation in the 2005 Candidates Forum. I've learned quite a bit over the last 4 years and the tepid position I took on it then needs to be udpated.

Don, I have great respect for what you have done with this board. It is a wonderful public service. I am convinced you want to keep it that way. I also know that no matter what someone does, someone else is always applying some heat somewhere. I think that you actions speak load and clear that your intent is nothing but fair.

Thanks for opening up the campaign to "read only" and most of all, Thank You again for providing this service.

Rono

[johnb]

Understood, and it's actually a little surprising to me the amount of heat I've taken (almost all of it behind my back) over this board.

I hate to ask Don, mainly because I like you, but also because it's somewhat of a blunt/rude question (borrowed from Forrest Gump):

Are you stupid or something?

You provide a platform to people like me, Stan, Brent, DonF, Cathy, and others that has as much if not more immediate public visibility than the one the Critters have. Because of this web site their emails are getting read, documents are being reviewed, and their actions scrutinized like never before. You provide the juice and the rest of us have turned on the spotlights and the roaches are running. If they don't have the cajones to say to your face what they say behind your back it demonstrates a level of cowardice common in the species.

Politics isn't about lasting friendships, it's about lasting interests. That old saw, it's business not personal applies here as well and in the negative.

John's word of the day:

When these people profess to be friends, it ain't personal, it's politics.

Did you think Jennifer and her allies would like you for posting that video of her little totalitarian rant? Do you think the Critters are unaware of the fact that their emails are now scrutinized because of the commentary and coordination going on on this board? There are probably a number of people who'd love to have you run out of town on a rail and have this web site shut down. As popular as it has become it only throws more gas on the fire.

[Cathy]

Amen.

[Brent]

Hear, hear!

This is genuine democracy in action. I suppose if you're not used to that, you might not like it. Too bad.

Way to go Hyatt!

[StanN]

Amen JohnB!

stan

[dhyatt]

[snip]
Understood, and it's actually a little surprising to me the amount of heat I've taken (almost all of it behind my back) over this board.

[snip]

John's word of the day:

When these people profess to be friends, it ain't personal, it's politics.

[snip]


You may have a point :-( The following scans document who voted for which board members during last Fall's appointments cycle. I must admit I find it a bit disturbing that the documents don't match what I was told face-to-face by a couple of CTC members...

http://carypolitics.org/images/boards_pg1.gif
http://carypolitics.org/images/boards_pg2.gif
http://carypolitics.org/images/boards_pg3.gif

[washere]

You may have a point The following scans document who voted for which board members during last Fall's appointments cycle. I must admit I find it a bit disturbing that the documents don't match what I was told face-to-face by a couple of CTC members...
Mind telling us what they told you?

[dhyatt]

You may have a point The following scans document who voted for which board members during last Fall's appointments cycle. I must admit I find it a bit disturbing that the documents don't match what I was told face-to-face by a couple of CTC members...
Mind telling us what they told you?

I was told by more than one council member that various people (myself included) were supported by specific council members when, in fact, that wasn't the case - or at least it's not reflected in the final tally.

[Brent]

I was told by more than one council member that various people (myself included) were supported by specific council members when, in fact, that wasn't the case - or at least it's not reflected in the final tally.

Given the process that was used to arrive at these tallies (which also is public record), I can see no other reasonable conclusion except "that wasn't the case". In other words, you weren't told the truth, Hyatt (but you knew that).

[Brent]

And speaking of the process, it's interesting that this year's appointments included:

- one appointment to a board of an individual who still had an unexpired term to serve on another board
- one appointment of an individual who applied SEVERAL WEEKS LATE
- one appointment that required a waiver of term limits for an individual who had previously been granted a waiver of attendance policy (a second candidate for the same board was not granted the same waiver)
- one re-appointment that required a waiver of attendance policy

Why all the exceptions? Plenty of qualified people applied for all the boards and commissions.

[StanN]

What's interesting to me is the identitity of Cary's own "Deep Throat" and its implications. After all this was priveledged information, not meant to be available to the public so that no CTC member could be embarassed.

If Deep Throat was a member of staff, they ought to be canned. But this is highly unlikely - too much to lose and too little to gain.

But much more likely it was a CTC member. Consider that this was an act of disrespect to the other members of the CTC. I have a pretty good idea who that would be but since I don't know I'm not airing my suspicions. Probably deep throat wnated to highight what he/she considered the ridculous posturing of the others.

The other members of the CTC will quickly come to their own conclusions. The atmosphere of disrespect and distrust that already clouds this CTC will inevitably increase. Who will want to confide with deep throat in the future?

Looked at collectively as a team, this CTC is a failure. Forget about who is right or wrong - they have just been going throught the motions, doing what has to be done, but not having the willingness to compromise, to trust one another to impliment the big, new policies that would get Cary out of its malaise.

New faces, along with the opportunity to forge new alliances and coalitions, and create new ideas, are needed on this worn-out council.

And I am the only one biased against those who have received the most votes from the existing CTC, especially politically sensitive P&Z and EDC? For example, I don't know Wally Dawson from a hole in the wall, but if he runs as has been rumoured, he has a strike against him in my book.

Watch out Cathy - you might be getting too well accepted :wink:

stan

[dhyatt]

[snip]

Looked at collectively as a team, this CTC is a failure. Forget about who is right or wrong - they have just been going throught the motions, doing what has to be done, but not having the willingness to compromise, to trust one another to impliment the big, new policies that would get Cary out of its malaise.

[snip]

stan

Stan,
An interesting observation and one I concur with. Individually, current council members are fine people, all of whom I generally get along with. Collectively, they are somewhat disfunctional with personal vendettas and competing agendas. I find it fascinating that with the old council "the problem is Lang, we need to get rid of him and everything will be fine". New council, new leader - same problems just different results. Instead of (Marla + Nels + Julie + Jennifer) vs. Glen, it's (Marla + Nels + Julie) vs. (Ernie + Jennifer) vs. Mike. Jack is Jack, wasn't a problem before, not a problem now. (at least as far as council disfunction etc...)

[johnb]

Politically speaking Ernie should have and should be spending political capital within the Wake Republican establishment cutting Marla off at the knees. Isolate her and prime her seat for a real Republican challenger. He should also have moved to pull Jack and Mike in closer to him or move closer to them. Since Jennifer is bondo'd to him politically she'd go wherever. Nels he should not worry about, just be prepared to help his opponent in the next election cycle. Beyond that his primary threat is JULIEFORCARY!.

I remember writing at the end of the last election cycle that he should bust his rear to isolate her. Since she has a day job and he doesn't he should have scheduled as much as he could (community group visits, speaking engagements, etc...) during her work hours and presented himself as the accessible critter out there with the people doing the people's work, reaching out to diverse segments of the community, blah, blah, blah. Then fight like hell for her GOP opponent this election. He should have been mobilizing the county and state GOP apparatus to assist. Cary is a large and growing city with a Republican majority. He should be working to solidify that and the state party would be stoopid to not see that. The more GOP office holders you have at the local level the better the prospects are for getting statewide office holders. Add it up and it erodes the Donkeycrats power. Of course, that isn't the way the GOP'ers think. They want to play nice guy politics while the Donkeys are bar room brawlers using brass knuckles

Keep in mind none of this is personal, just political.

[Laurie]

After all this was priveledged information, not meant to be available to the public so that no CTC member could be embarassed.

I don't understand why you keep saying this. Board and commission appointment votes are public record. I've seen this information before it was posted here. It wasn't "leaked" to me. And if a CTC member is afraid of being embarrassed by his/her vote, then he/she shouldn't be voting that way.

[washere]

I'm confused Stan. How is it that someone should be canned for leaking a record that's covered under the FIA?

And another question: I think it's pretty obvious that they all met to discuss this. That makes it a public meeting, right? Did this happen in a closed session meeting?

[StanN]

The final, net results of the CTC's votes for boards and commission members are public information available in the minutes. The incividual selections have always been shrouded in secrecy as well as the process for making the selections. I called the town clerk to get whatever information that was public. I was referred to the minutes of the CTC as noted above.

How this procedure is compatible with the FIA I have no idea. However, there was no need for the CTC to meet to make these decisions. Each of the council members could have sent their ballot to the town clerk.

stan

DonH said that Jack Smith was not part of the problem of dissension on the CTC.

You must be kidding! Or we travel in widely different circles. I don't intend to repeat gossip and private conversations here, but your statement is simply untrue.

Also my read of all the psychological mumbo-jumbo going on at the retreat was that it was a message from the staff to the council - "get your act together, respect your differences".

JohnB,

Ernie is behaving like a classical political boss - not much difference than the former dem. mayor of Chicago (whats his name?) or Tammany Hall.
But power is one thing - he has got it - leadership is another. Leadership is the ability to influence people because of the strength of your ideas and/or your salesmanship. Glen Lang had it - whether you agree with his policies or ethics or not. Ernie desn't come close. What Ernie has is the power of money, the power of the Chamber, the power of big developers to influence elections. Take those away and what do you have?

stan

[HW]

Sorry to come in late in this discussion...



I'm confused Stan. How is it that someone should be canned for leaking a record that's covered under the FIA?

And another question: I think it's pretty obvious that they all met to discuss this. That makes it a public meeting, right? Did this happen in a closed session meeting?


It is my understanding that if you discuss any business of the town with staff or council then it is public record. If you discuss business with 3 other council members it is a meeting.

So based on that, I believe all individual votes for boards and commissions are public record (or should be). When I was on council the individual council members sent there votes to the town clerk. I broadcast all my votes to make sure it was public record.

HW

[johnb]

Stan,

That would be His Imperial Majesty Richard M Daley. Today his son, the Crown Prince Richard M Daley rules Chicago in the same fashion as his father did.

[dhyatt]

[snip]

DonH said that Jack Smith was not part of the problem of dissension on the CTC.

You must be kidding! Or we travel in widely different circles. I don't intend to repeat gossip and private conversations here, but your statement is simply untrue.

[snip]
stan

Dissent - yes. Dysfunction - no. Jack usually states his opinion (if he happens to have one, many times he doesn't), casts his vote and goes on about his business. He doesn't sit there and calculate who's going to vote which way in an effort to make sure he's properly alligned. And - most importantly - he makes his case briefly and doesn't go on and on trying to explain why he's right and everybody else is wrong. Maybe it's because he's been there so long, maybe he's just bored. Either way, I don't see him as a reason for the dysfunctional behavior. That lands squarely on the heads of Julie & Ernie and not getting past the mayoral election of 2 years ago!

[Brent]

What's interesting to me is the identitity of Cary's own "Deep Throat" and its implications. After all this was priveledged information, not meant to be available to the public so that no CTC member could be embarassed.

What in the world are you talking about, Stan?

I know of multiple people who requested and received this public information.

[Brent]

Cary is a large and growing city with a Republican majority.

I don't believe this is true. Cary might have a GOP plurality, but there is a VERY large bloc of unaffiliated voters.

[Brent]

And if a CTC member is afraid of being embarrassed by his/her vote, then he/she shouldn't be voting that way.

HEAR, HEAR!

[Brent]

The incividual selections have always been shrouded in secrecy as well as the process for making the selections.

No, they're not. They're public record.

How this procedure is compatible with the FIA I have no idea. However, there was no need for the CTC to meet to make these decisions. Each of the council members could have sent their ballot to the town clerk.

And I believe that is precisely what they did. And those transmittals are public record.

[Brent]

So based on that, I believe all individual votes for boards and commissions are public record (or should be). When I was on council the individual council members sent there votes to the town clerk. I broadcast all my votes to make sure it was public record.

Agreed, and good for you, Harold. Nevertheless, those individual transmittals of votes are public record anyway.

[Brent]

DonH said that Jack Smith was not part of the problem of dissension on the CTC.

You must be kidding! Or we travel in widely different circles. I don't intend to repeat gossip and private conversations here, but your statement is simply untrue.

If one believes that the council is dysfunctional, I hardly see how one can single out ANY one council member as not being part of the problem.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Who is working on the solution?

the former dem. mayor of Chicago (whats his name?)

Richard Daley. [edited to add: oops, I now see that JohnB beat me to it. :oops: ]

[johnb]

If you are speaking of party affiliation you are probably correct. But I would lump together registered Republicans with unaffiliated voters who share Republican interests. Not too many home schoolers, 2nd Amendment activitists, small business owners, etc... can afford to vote in a fashion that is inimical to their own best interests by pulling for the Donkey.

While I am a registered Libertarian I'd consider myself in the GOP majority simply because I may vote for Republicans in some races but I'd vote for a dead guy (Nixon) long before I vote for a Donkeycrat.

[Brent]

He doesn't sit there and calculate who's going to vote which way in an effort to make sure he's properly alligned.

Sorry, I beg to differ. Please review the tape of the recent council meeting with the quasi-judicial hearing vote on the special use permit for the home day care.

[Brent]

If you are speaking of party affiliation you are probably correct. But I would lump together registered Republicans with unaffiliated voters who share Republican interests.

I don't believe that this is true, either. The UNAs in Cary, by and large. serve as a swing bloc. Neither party has a stable majority, although the GOP in Cary has, to date, done a much better job of getting people to swing their way [dreading JohnB's comeback on the double entendre of that last phrase :-D ]

While I am a registered Libertarian I'd consider myself in the GOP majority simply because I may vote for Republicans in some races but I'd vote for a dead guy (Nixon) long before I vote for a Donkeycrat.

I vote for people and positions on issues, not party.

[Don]

Sorry, I beg to differ. Please review the tape of the recent council meeting with the quasi-judicial hearing vote on the special use permit for the home day care.

Oh ya! the one where all the residents who were running businesses out of their home were trying to keep that sweet lil' old lady from running a business out of her home. I remember!

To date the WORST case of NIMBYism I have ever seen.

[Brent]

Sorry, I beg to differ. Please review the tape of the recent council meeting with the quasi-judicial hearing vote on the special use permit for the home day care.

Oh ya! the one where all the residents who were running businesses out of their home were trying to keep that sweet lil' old lady from running a business out of her home. I remember!

To date the WORST case of NIMBYism I have ever seen.

That would be the one.

Jack asked the attorney if a supermajority vote was required for the permit to be granted. He was told no. The vote was 6-1, with Jack against.

In a quasi-judicial hearing, council members can consider only facts and testimony. I would be very surprised if "whether a supermajority vote is required or not" is one of the facts that is supposed to be considered. :roll:

[johnb]

the GOP in Cary has, to date, done a much better job of getting people to swing their way

Of course they have, they have a much easier time getting the una's to swing their way than the donkeys have. Voting Donkeycratic is by and large not in the best interests of the majority of the people in Cary. Most of us aren't drawing a government check either as staffers or from public assistance, not that those two conditions need be differentiated.

I vote for people and positions on issues, not party.

I wouldn't vote for someone because of their party, but I will refrain from voting for them because of it. Right now, in 2005, anyone who would register and run as a Donkeycrat does not deserve my vote. I'm in the military. My daughter is. My son will be in the Corps in 11 months. Voting for anyone at any level in that Party is a direct stab in my own back and my children's back. Never. I know which party hates the military. Whether any individual donkeycrats aren't like their national leadership is irrelevant. They choose to affiliate with a party that nominated a traitor as their last presidential candidate. The only GI the Donkeys like to see are dead American ones.

[dhyatt]

Sorry, I beg to differ. Please review the tape of the recent council meeting with the quasi-judicial hearing vote on the special use permit for the home day care.

Oh ya! the one where all the residents who were running businesses out of their home were trying to keep that sweet lil' old lady from running a business out of her home. I remember!

To date the WORST case of NIMBYism I have ever seen.

That would be the one.

Jack asked the attorney if a supermajority vote was required for the permit to be granted. He was told no. The vote was 6-1, with Jack against.

In a quasi-judicial hearing, council members can consider only facts and testimony. I would be very surprised if "whether a supermajority vote is required or not" is one of the facts that is supposed to be considered. :roll:

OK - I'll give you that one [-(

[Cathy]

Johnb. Astute. Once again. :)

And Brent ain't doin' too shabby IMHO.


And Stan_ Whatever are you talking about :roll: "too liked"?

I expect my "like-abilty" to ebb and flow like the tides of the ocean.

Cathy

[Brent]

Sorry, I beg to differ. Please review the tape of the recent council meeting with the quasi-judicial hearing vote on the special use permit for the home day care.

Oh ya! the one where all the residents who were running businesses out of their home were trying to keep that sweet lil' old lady from running a business out of her home. I remember!

To date the WORST case of NIMBYism I have ever seen.

That would be the one.

Jack asked the attorney if a supermajority vote was required for the permit to be granted. He was told no. The vote was 6-1, with Jack against.

In a quasi-judicial hearing, council members can consider only facts and testimony. I would be very surprised if "whether a supermajority vote is required or not" is one of the facts that is supposed to be considered. :roll:

OK - I'll give you that one [-(

As they say on those infomercials:

BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE!

Where to begin? Let's see, there's the infamous quote uttered during the "downtown lighted signs" debate/vote justification, and there's...

Oh, wait a minute. No sense to go into all of that here and now. [-(

[Brent]

I expect my "like-abilty" to ebb and flow like the tides of the ocean.

Not me. I expect mine to maintain its continuing ebb. :lol:

Say, maybe we should come up with some kind of CP awards, you know, like the Oscars or something (maybe we could call them "The Donnies". Perhaps we should have a poll about the name?). Anyway, the idea would be that the winners could stand up and say "You LIKE me! You LIKE me!" :lol:

[StanN]

DonH said: (re Jack Smith)

Dissent - yes. Dysfunction - no. Jack usually states his opinion (if he happens to have one, many times he doesn't), casts his vote and goes on about his business

How about "distrust".

On a one-on-one basis Jack has opinions, often astutely drawn. He is highly intelligent and has a good sense of the electorates mood and the TOC's history.

But in a nano-second, Jack will turn all of that off and say contradictory things to support the party line. Regardless of his inner opinion, he will vote so as to support Ernie and the Chamber. As CTC liason on the EDC, I have seen him take one position on day one and another on day two and switch again on day three. He can be perfectly candid one day and the next tell you a half truth designed to deceive. Jack responsibilities to the TOC take second place to being mayor pro-tem, and getting re-elected.

One small example. Jack has been a booster (rightfully so) of sister city Markham as a model for Cary's ED efforts. But when I supported that position and made and promoted specific reccommendations in that direction, with the support of the EDC, Jack's support evaporated in favor of the Chamber's contrary position. And will Jack ever admit in public that "we have a small town Chamber" or that Cary has to "grow-up" and wear "long pants" regarding forming its own ED efort. Not while Howard Johnson and Ernie McAlister disagree.

If success is defined as winning elections, I have to admit Jack is successful.
Now, back to dysfunction. Do you think I am the only one to observe that behavior pattern?

stan