Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 11:53:02 -0400
From: Phillip Spangler
Subject: Election For SheriffDear Eleanor Smith,
My observation is both candidates have violated said “ordinance” in signs size and I do
believe Roberson had his up much earlier than the 90 days, before anyone was opposing him.I wish PEOPLE would post positive comments about their candidates vs posting negative
perceptions. This would give the community more to go on when they step up to the polls. So here
is your chance post a positive impact that your candidate has done for the community, and then
maybe someone will post a positive impact from the other candidate, and we might start a revolution
of pointing out all the good to cast our votes on what good will become for our community versus the
lesser of the two they did this wrong…….
Ordinarily, I’d certainly agree, however, we’re not talking about the typical Chatham County Muck Raking of generally made up moral offenses that makes election time so enjoyable. We’re talking about two candidates running for the office of Chief Law Enforcement Officer for the county. Law Enforcement. If they ARE in violation of local laws, no matter how petty you may feel the violation is, that should be called out. Law Enforcement officers SHOULD be held to, at minimum, the same standards we hold every other citizen to, and in reality, to a much HIGHER standard. Someone whose job is to enforce the laws should represent the utmost respect for the laws of their jurisdiction.
As for Positive impact, I’m sure either would do a fine job as the Sheriff, Mr. Roberson has done well in the period since he took the position, Mr.Crutchfield is more of an unknown but he seems to have a good background for the position. But again, their willingness to adhere to the law is directly related to their ability to do the job, and violations of that law should be considered when weighing their merits during an election cycle.
I think I agree with you that both candidates have violated the signage laws but to be fair I don’t recall which one I saw first or how long ago it was when the signs appeared. However, two wrongs don’t make it right, it just means there are two people who have violated local ordinances, either willfully or unintentionally. Both Candidates, if true, should be taken to task for that and should have the opportunity to correct this, but it certainly should NOT be ignored in favor of “positive comments”. It should be presented alongside the positive comments.
Consider this, when anyone applies to be a Deputy, the undergo a very thorough background and criminal history and psychological exam. ANYTHING uncovered is examined and questioned, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant, and that is done exactly because Law Enforcement should be held to a higher standard as they are the physical representation of law and order. Now, ultimately, some minor transgression may or may not result in an applicant for a Deputy position to be disqualified, but that’s up to the interviewers and decision makers. IN this case, these two are applying for the job of Sheriff, and WE are the interviewers and decision makers, and their backgrounds and criminal history, no matter how seemingly small, should be available to ensure the best candidate is ultimately hired.