Am I the only person fed up with the rhetoric surrounding the
751 South project? Proponents of the controversial project have made it the
litmus test in qualifying those willing to serve on the Durham Board of County Commissioners. The most recent attack proves that they are
willing to win by any means necessary.
Who made them
Malcolm X?
Steve Bocckino
recently questioned the motives of Omar Beasley after the Durham Committee on
the Affairs of Black people received an $8,000 donation to help the group push
their slate of candidates. The gift came
from Neal and Janet Hunter, backers of the 751 South project. Boockino claims the gift raises a red flag
related to Beasley’s position on development.
“I believe Mr.
Beasley would like to keep his support of 751 South – and vice versa – a secret, but no one is
buying it,” Bocckino told the Herald-Sun.
Bocckino’s
attack of Beasley is based on the presence of paid poll workers distributing
copies of the Durham Committee slate. In
response, Beasley told the Herald-Sun he is using a combination of paid and
volunteer poll workers.
The use of paid
poll workers is a common practice. The
People Alliance and white candidates have employed black poll workers to distribute
literature to give the impression of black support. It’s common for candidates to pass out literature
with an endorsement. Bocckino’s comments
regarding Beasley are speculative.
It’s the type of
low blow political maneuvering that has plagued this election. Sadly, the war between the local political
action committees is a distraction from the most important election – the Presidency.
Bocckino and
members of the People’s Alliance are unfair to expect Beasley to respond to a
decision he did not make. He has promised
to review what is placed before him, and to respond in a way that is best for
the citizens of Durham. That’s all that
can be expected. No candidate should be
forced to have a platform based on a decision they are not forced to make.
What Bocckino
fails to respect is the power of the Durham Committee during a presidential
election. Beasley didn’t need the endorsement
of the People’s Alliance. He gains
nothing in hiding a pro-growth agenda.
There are enough votes to win without the blessing of the People’s
Alliance.
To imply that
Hunter’s contribution to the Durham Committee proves the theory that Beasley is
in the pocket of developers is unfounded.
It’s unfair, malicious and has no place in this election. It’s rooted in speculation and is designed to
prevent Beasley from taking additional votes away from Fred Foster.
No laws have
been broken. A donation was made to
support the slate of the Durham Committee.
Would the conversation be shifted if Foster was on the Durham Committee slate? A more important question involves the
validity of engaging in a deeper discussion about how growth can be done in
Durham.
What is the
relationship between developers and government?
Do we want to become like Chapel Hill, and reject any movement toward
development? Or, do we assume that developers are the anti-Christ and reject
any thought of compromise.
If Beasley
decides to have that discussion, does that make him wrong? Or, does that make him open to new
possibilities. Bocckino and his
anti-development thugs should back off the negative rhetoric long enough to
give the process a chance to play out.
With that being
said, I am opposed to 751 South. More
conversation needs to be had. I think
that will happen, but it can’t when people are holding a pistol at your head
while forcing you to state your claim devoid of any conversation.
Go vote.
