Herald endorses Taylor for Sanford Council

Again posting today’s endorsement editorial, this time for the Sanford City Council Ward 2 race. Coming tomorrow; City Council Ward 5.


The Sanford City Council Ward 2 race comes down to who will be a leader and who will be a follower. Any city would be in great shape if it had a full council of vocal leaders, regardless of whether they always agreed or not.
We feel about half of the current council routinely brings thought and discussion to the table, but in Dan Harrington’s two years since being appointed to his Ward 2 seat, we don’t feel he has been a strong presence — either in council meetings, working behind the scenes or while interacting with the public.
These are qualities newcomer Charles Taylor has pledged to bring to the council, and it’s just one of the reasons Taylor has The Herald’s endorsement heading into Tuesday’s election.

Charles Taylor
Being outspoken for the sake of being outspoken doesn’t make a solid public servant. But during the course of Taylor’s campaign, we like what he’s had to say.
From his performances in two recent political forums and his answers in The Herald’s recent Q&A, we feel Taylor is studious and knows the issues. He feels Sanford’s taxpayers are frustrated with the lack of diligence in saving money and keeping taxes down — and he says a prime example is the recently passed business privilege tax, which was opposed by the Sanford Area Chamber of Commerce and several people in the business community.
“The wishes of the people should be reflected in the actions of the council,” Taylor told The Herald. “We need to respond to the everyday needs of citizens.”
Another promise Taylor has made to voters is accessibility. We like that Taylor was the only candidate in this election to be present at a recent public forum hosted by developers who are planning to build homes in the Deep River community, an area recently annexed by the Sanford City Council. He recently made an appearance at a public hearing on a minor zoning issue in Sanford’s Historic District.
Sure, these appearances are coming at a time when he’s seeking votes. We hope this accessibility and open ear doesn’t go away if he’s picked by the voters to join the council.
“I am committed to listening and responding,” Taylor said. “I am committed to reaching out to the citizens, communicating with them daily, weekly and monthly. We have to have open government; we have to engage our citizens to restore trust back into our local government. Keeping the public in the loop is critical and something we need to start doing more of in Sanford.”
We do have concerns. No candidate is perfect. Taylor had an unsuccessful stint as a member of the Chamber board, and his lack of experience in public office is a drawback, especially considering Harrington’s partial term on the board was preceded by nine years of service on the city’s planning board. Taylor was also a lobbyist in Raleigh for two years, and while not all lobbyists are “evil,” the title does carry negative connatations for some.
But we feel Taylor’s desire to be a voice on the council, his vow to come to meetings prepared and ready to discuss and his stance on several issues that affect Sanford’s taxpayers are all admirable qualities, and they’re all reasons for this endorsement.

Dan Harrington
When it came time to discuss endorsements for this race, the term “inactive” was mentioned more than once when referring to Harrington. It’s a perception that’s come about not because we feel Harrington hasn’t been involved, it’s just that he hasn’t brought any ideas or creativity to the table.
Much has been made of “no” votes made by some councilmen during this campaign season, and it’s true that a “no” vote for the sake of being the lone dissending voice (and a “no” vote that doesn’t contain any new ideas) does nothing to help the city. That being said, a councilman who is a constant follower of the majority — and who doesn’t have a lot of input during meetings or other public gatherings — also does little to help move the city forward.
We’re not saying Harrington isn’t up on the issues. We liked several of his answers from recent forums and questionnaires regarding topics like growth.
Having served previously on the city’s planning board, Harrington understands what the city needs to do to manage Sanford’s ever-growing residential and business population.
“The Unified Development Ordinance is an excellent tool to insure that future development has minimal impact on adjacent neighborhoods,” Harrington told The Herald. “A tenet of smart growth is to insure the viability of existing neighborhoods in an effort to reduce urban sprawl. I am proud of the city’s accomplishments with our code enforcement efforts, but we must do more.”
But while Harrington claims to be a fiscal conservative, his voting record on the business privilege tax and the city’s budget — which did not include efforts to make the city’s golf course more financially sound — prove otherwise, as both continue to cost the city’s taxpayers.
We commend Harrington for his two years of service since his appointment to the board.


In all of the local municipal elections, we want candidates who will excel at the juggling act of answering to voters, making wise votes, bringing sound policies to the table for discussion and being accessible to the public and the media. All of these factors have gone into all of the endorsements we are making this week.
Good luck to both candidates on voting day, and we hope for good turnout in this important election.

• Coming Saturday: The Herald will discuss and give its vote on the Sanford City Council Ward 5 seat.
• Coming Sunday: The Herald will endorse its candidate in perhaps Sanford’s most talked-about race, the at-large seat currently held by Mike Stone and challenged by Lora Wright.


3 thoughts on “Herald endorses Taylor for Sanford Council

  1. Mr. Taylor said “The wishes of the people should be reflected in the actions of the council.” If this was always true then where would our city be today? The water bond persented to the voters 35 or so years ago failed. We should be thankful that 4 out of 7 council members made the hard decision to look forward and secure our water supply for future generations.

    To say that council members do not listen to the people is rediculous. Many people call members or go by their place of work to discuss issues. They speak to us and feel we will make the best decision when all the facts are presented. You don’t have a clue what it takes to sift thru all the pros and cons and make a GOOD decision. A great example of that would be your endorsement of Charles Taylor.

    You mention that Mr. Taylor went to a community meeting. One meeting on an issue that had many. He did not attend the public hearing or any of the meetings held earlier concerning the new development.

    Mr Taylor did quit the Chamber. Stopped attending Downtown Sanford Meetings. Resigned from Community & Schools Committee just to name a few more.

    Concerning the privilege tax…31 members out of about 380 votes against this issue in the Chamber poll. The Chamber will be glad to confirm this. Many industrial members were for the tax versus a property tax increase. There are many pros to this issue that the Herald just can’t see or won’t admit. If you’ll take a good look at the people making the most noise you’ll find that most do not even live in the city and have no vote. They want the city property owner to continue to foot the bill. This includes the majority of the editorial board at the paper.

  2. What a topsy-turvy world we live in. It’s OK for Steve Brewer to chime in on every post here and have an opinion on every race, but it’s not okay for the mayor to do so. It’s OK for him to engage in all sorts of funny business and it’s OK for Lora Wright to stretch the truth like silly putty, but it’s not OK for Mike Stone to be cited for a minor violation in a rental property. It’s OK for Steve Brewer to fill the airwaves with misleading e-mail messages and lies, but it’s not OK for Mike Stone to vote “no” once in awhile. Steve Brewer is ruining Sanford. We should all hope and pray that one-term Brewer doesn’t get any more help than he’s already getting on this board.

  3. A minor violation! Not hardly! there were 2 in 16 months. They were for failing to meet MINIMUM housing code. In Feb it was for NO heat> The last was for the substandard condition of the house. I guess you think it “minor” since you weren’t the one living in it. As for the silly putty. I don’t have to stretch what is a FACT. Try watching the herald forum. Do you even know the total of the General Contribution fund, Clip 556,000 out of it and there’s hardly even a fund left! He said himself the 2 specific items (the ones his people keep bringing up that I’m stretching on) are the TEMPLE and THE ARTS. He says at the same forum,they should be funded by tourism. WELL, that pot doesn’t yet exist! Oh, make sure to thank him for voting to increase our property taxes too. Just because the truth isn’t what you want to hear,doesn’t mean it’s been stretched.
    I would also reccomend Mike join the chamber,since he loves to throw their name around so much,he should at least respect the fine group and join it. or maybe he’s cutting back there too!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s