We aren’t yet presuming to pass judgment on whether Smith threw his support to the right candidates with his endorsements of newcomer council candidates Doug Lapins and Lorraine Tweed. We haven’t made up our mind on that yet. We’ll weigh in on that question in a couple of weeks, when we offer our own editorial endorsements in municipal elections in Pinehurst, Southern Pines, Aberdeen, Carthage and Whispering Pines.
But Smith has every right to make known his feelings about who should and should not be elected to join him on the Village Council. The First Amendment pretty plainly gives him that right. And if he feels strongly enough about a candidate’s fitness to serve — or lack thereof — his position as a community leader gives him that responsibility.
In a letter to the editor that appeared in Friday’s edition of The Pilot, Smith endorsed Lapins and Tweed over Jack Glynn, an incumbent councilman seeking re-election, and first-time candidate Nancy Smith (no relation to Steve Smith). Mayor Smith made no bones about his reason for wanting Lapins and Tweed elected. He said their positions on issues affecting the village are consistent with his own.
Glynn took particular exception to the mayoral endorsements. “It’s unfortunate that Steve feels he needs to get involved in the politics of this election,” Glynn told The Pilot. “It’s unfortunate that he chose not to stay above the fray and act as mayor rather rather than as a political advocate.”
Above the fray? The mayor is supposed to be non-political? News flash: Mayor Smith, Glynn, Nancy Smith, Doug Lapins, Lorraine Tweed and all other mayors, council members and council candidates in every town in America are political animals, whether they care to admit it or not. And there’s nothing unsavory about that. Politics is the fuel that powers the machinery of democracy.
While its fashionable for candidates for nonpartisan municipal offices to declare that they are running independently of each other, the reality is that local politics is replete with competing political coalitions. Take Pinehurst, for example. Four years ago, Glynn ran for the Village Council as part of an informal ticket with two other candidates. Two years ago, Smith ran for the council in tandem with two allied candidates. Lapins and Tweed are backed by the same political action committee and make joint campaign appearances. In Aberdeen this year, Mayor Betsy Mofield is seeking re-election as part of “ticket” with town commissioner candidates Teresa Marquez and Donna Shannon. Aberdeen mayoral candidate Tim Helms is running in tandem with Commissioners John Hawthorne and John Davenport, who are seeking re-election.
The formation of such alliances is perfectly defensible — every bit as defensible as Mayor Smith’s decision to openly back the two council candidates he favors. That, folks, is politics.
The mayor is simply letting his constituents know what’s on his mind as the Pinehurst election approaches. That’s something voters have a right to know. Smith has a policy agenda for Pinehurst. The formulation of such an agenda and an aggressive effort to advance it are the most important parts of his job. That agenda cannot be advanced without the help of like-minded Village Council members. Smith is saying to Pinehurst voters that Lapins and Tweed are the two candidates who can be counted on to help convert his priorities into village policy, that he needs them to translate his agenda into ordinances.
Does Mayor Smith’s agenda best serve the interests of Pinehurst, a town that is faced with critical challenges posed by rapid growth and its implications for transportation, land-use policy and infrastructure management? Did Smith endorse the two candidates best qualified to help Pinehurst meet those challenges?
The voters of Pinehurst will render their verdict on those questions on Nov. 7.
