Thomas Stith
About
Thomas Stith III was on the Durham City Council from 1999 to 2007, and unsuccessfully ran for Mayor against incumbent Bill Bell in the November, 2007 election.
Platform
Stith's campaign literature emphasized his interest in "lead[ing] a crackdown on crime"; the major points of his "plan for a safer Durham" were (from printed campaign mailer):
- A new get-tough stand from city hall to fight crime
- More police officers on our streets
- Strict enforcement policies to curb gang violence
- Intensify specialized police teams focused on gangs
- Prosecute gangs under federal RICO laws
- Gang intervention programs for young teens
- City partnership with schools and community groups to target at-risk children
Another Stith campaign flyer (2007-10-23) accused Bill Bell of mismanaging Mutual Community Savings Bank into failure. My question is, if this is such a big issue, why hasn't it come up before? Like, say, during Bell's initial run for mayor? And exactly how bad was the "failure", given that the bank still seems to be operating? --Woozle 16:59, 24 October 2007 (EDT)
Related Pages
- US/NC/Durham/crime: discussion of the crime problem
- Mutual Community Savings Bank
Comments
from Barry Ragin
| from the DependableErection blog, 2007-09-04: |
|
Thomas Stith's signs have some curious features. First is the timing. Since only Stith and incumbent Mayor Bill Bell have filed for the seat, there will not be a mayoral primary, meaning the mayor's election is still 63 days away. However, the ordinance doesn't say that the candidate has to be on the ballot in the upcoming election, just that the election itself needs to be less than 45 days away. The other factor that catches my eye is the way the sign leaves out the word "Elect." So instead of saying "Elect Thomas Stith Mayor of Durham" it reads "Thomas Stith, Mayor of Durham." Which, at this point at least, he is not. We'll see if this subtle deception has any impact on that segment of the electorate which may not be so fully informed. UPDATE: Via email, an anonymous source tells me that Stith's signs are in fact in violation of the law regarding the 45 day window, but that no action is planned right now. That pisses me off. Two years ago, the Duke Park and Old North Durham neighborhood associations posted a number of signs on utility poles around our neighborhoods, advertising our National Night Out event. The notification we received from the enforcement people at the City/County Planning Department was very clear: fines up to $300 per sign per day, if they were not removed within 48 hours of receipt of the notice. Why are the rules different for citizens than they are for politicians? |
The word "elect" is in the web site's name, posted underneath, but that is in fairly tiny letters likely to go unnoticed by many people. --Woozle 07:41, 5 September 2007 (EDT)