Letters, Sept. 13
To the editor:
I read your editorial from Sept. 4, entitled “Efforts wasted on distractions in Maggie” with a fair amount of incredulity.
First and foremost, an amotion hearing can result in exoneration instead of removal from office. The purpose of a hearing is not to remove an official from office but to conduct a fair and impartial hearing of the facts and evidence at issue.
It can result in removal only if the evidence and the level of misconduct require that action. Stating that Aldermen Wight and Matthews claim otherwise seems to be calling into question their truthfulness with no basis in fact. They stated clearly that the hearing was to get to the bottom of some issues regarding Mayor Ron DeSimone’s conduct, not to remove him from office.
Furthermore, it is a pressing issue when elected officials abuse their power and engage in habitually unethical conduct. Mayor DeSimone has violated every single section of the Maggie Valley Code of Ethics. He has misused town funds by taking a male friend with him on town-funded trips without reimbursing monies under Maggie’s travel policy.
He has illegally entered the town into contracts without board approval.
He has fraudulently represented the board in regard to the Davis letter. He has lied on the record numerous times. He has refused to respond to public information requests. He then proceeded to unethically vote on his own hearing.
Maggie Valley desperately needs open and honest government, not a mayor who violates the law and ethical standards on a routine basis. Maggie does need a fourth alderman, but Mayor DeSimone blocks any appointment because he would lose his board vote. Blame needs to be placed correctly. The main result of the hearing vote was that Mayor DeSimone and SaraLynn Price cast votes against open and honest government. The voters in the upcoming election need to vote for the candidates that support honest and open government. A vote for SaraLynn Price is a vote for business as usual.
To the editor:
It is interesting that calling Mr. Wight’s and Mr. Matthew’s truthfulness into question without facts is to be considered inappropriate, while applying the same standard to the mayor is considered fair.
The two accusing aldermen have aired their accusations at numerous town hall meetings, in the newspapers, and to the Haywood County prosecuting authorities.
Those accusations have been thoroughly discussed, explained and dismissed by the legal system.
Having a pubic hearing presided over by two accusing members asserting themselves as a majority of a four member board is neither fair nor appropriate.
It’s sad that Mr. Blyth’s efforts in drafting and advancing six legislative bills addressing issues of drug and alcohol abuse, at the request and support of local law enforcement, is simply dismissed as the mayor “taking a friend on a town-funded trip.”
No Maggie Valley Town contract was entered into illegally.
The mayor was the only board member in favor of three of the five alderman candidates to fill the vacant board seat.
The Haywood County District Attorney, the Haywood Sherriff’s Office, and the SBI have all ruled that the letter to Senator Davis was not fraudulent.
The two accusing aldermen have not found any legal authority to support any of their allegations, and are now jockeying to create their own court.
The negativity and tug-of-war for control displayed by Wight and Matthews is the “business as usual” in Maggie Valley, and is certainly not the way to Move Maggie Forward.
Maggie Valley mayor