Wednesday, March 29, 2006

More Rakes fallout...

Yesterday I brought up the complications the Howard County Democratic Central Committee may face in appointing a successor to District 2 councilman David Rakes, who just resigned for health reasons. Basically, my point is that since the central committee stays out of primaries, appointing a current candidate for the seat might run afoul of its policies. The Sun has more today.

Heading the list of those who could be appointed to serve out the rest of Rakes' term is Calvin Ball, a 30-year old Democrat who lost the party nomination for the District 2 seat to Rakes four years ago. Ball and one other Democrat, former Sun reporter Adam Sachs, 42, are running for the District 2 seat.

...Ball said he is interested in the appointment, and he said it could "provide continuity to the next council." County party Chairman Tony McGuffin said, "We're going to follow the rules," but he added that Ball is "very popular. He's obviously the front-runner in the campaign."

Sounds like they're setting the table for a Ball appointment, no? It's good to see McGuffin at least throw rules-sticklers like me a bone, but we'll have to wait and see what the ultimate decision is and what justifications are used to support it.

My rules obsession aside, the bigger issue is obviously how this affects the council. With David Rakes' help, the Republicans seized control a few months ago and votes started going their way. However, now that Rakes is gone, so is his reliable vote. Here's what Sun reporter Larry Carson had to say:

Rakes' support was crucial in [councilman Chris] Merdon's December selection as chairman, and Rakes also provided key support for the Republicans in defeating County Executive James N. Robey's proposal for a smoking ban in all county bars and restaurants after two years. A Merdon-backed bill with a four-year enforcement delay was vetoed by an angry Robey.

If Ball or another anti-smoking Democrat is selected to fill out the term, Robey could resubmit his smoking-ban bill, though neither the executive nor Ball would speculate on that yesterday.

The resignation also weakens Merdon's hand in coming deliberations on Robey's last annual budget, starting next month. Robey, a Democrat, has proposed a 3-cent property tax cut, while Merdon favors cutting the local income tax.

I can't imagine there is any way the Democrats will appoint somebody who will not strictly adhere to the party's wishes, which almost certainly means voting with councilmen Ken Ulman and Guy Guzzone on everything. Merdon can't be happy about this.

Further down, the article gets into the muddy territory of why Rakes really left.

But several Republicans speculated that tension with fellow Democrats is why Rakes is leaving.

"My own personal observance is that the administration and his colleagues made life a living hell for him while he was here," said western county Republican Charles C. Feaga. "I have never observed someone so hurt as he was in the State of the County address. I thought they really went after him badly."

...Brian Harlin, chairman of the county Republicans and Rakes' opponent in 2002, focused his ire at west Columbia Democrat Ken Ulman, who is Merdon's rival this year for county executive.

"I think it's absurd the way Ulman treated Rakes," Harlin said, referring to comments Ulman made last summer after Rakes reversed course and opposed a housing bill he had supported. Ulman said at that time that Rakes did not understand the bill and that "his constituents should be embarrassed for him."

"He can't take it anymore," Harlin said of Rakes. He said the Democrats' credo is, "If you don't do what the Democratic Party tells you, we'll get rid of you."

I don't share the Republican's feigned sympthathy for David Rakes the Politician. I, however, have no doubt that we share honest sympathy for David Rakes the Individual.

But the point is Rakes was making decisions that ran counter to promises he made in his campaign and the desires of his constituents. Further, he barely escaped ethics violations and ran into trouble with the state Board of Elections. And Ulman called him out, as he should.

Nobody ever said politics is friendly.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your insensitive comments about redevelopment of Route 40 indicates that you live in a different part of the county. We citizens in the area of Route 40 in older neighborhoods of 40-50 years old do not appreciate your disparaging efforts to "enhance" the vital economic area of Ellicott City. Mr. Merdon was right on in stating that he wished there were other uses for the vacant site. I do not expect Mr. Ulman to have an opinion about it as his only interest during his term has been Columbia!

Anonymous said...

Your insensitive comments about redevelopment of Route 40 indicates that you live in a different part of the county. We citizens in the area of Route 40 in older neighborhoods of 40-50 years old do not appreciate your disparaging efforts to "enhance" the vital economic area of Ellicott City. Mr. Merdon was right on in stating that he wished there were other uses for the vacant site. I do not expect Mr. Ulman to have an opinion about it as his only interest during his term has been Columbia!

Hayduke said...

I wouldn't say that I was being insensitive about Route 40 redevelopment. I was just trying to say that Route 40, as currently construed, is not really prime real estate for the types of establishments Chris Merdon would like to see.

Furthermore, I made no comments about enhancing the corridor, dispariging or otherwise. But I can.

If Merdon or Ellicott City residents want businesses other than car dealerships and strip malls on Route 40, then something to make it more attractive to high-end retailers must be done. This could include inducements, redesigning the entire corridor, new zoning, a better master plan, etc. Simply wishing for something will not make it happen.

As for Ulman, I'm not sure why he's even being brought up here. Of course his interests as a councilman primarily involve Columbia. His district is, after all, almost entirely made up of west Columbia.

And, yes, I do not live in Ellicott City, and I have freely admitted on this blog that I have a Columbia bias. I know there used to be a pretty sharp divide between Columbia and Ellicott City, but to my knowledge, the hostility is pretty much gone. However, I have some friends who live in Ellicott City and we share a friendly, intra-county rivalry. Basically, I make fun of Ellicott City for being home to the county's only "adult bookstore," and they make fun of Columbia for being, well, Columbia. But it's all in good fun, so please don't misconstrue my statements.

We should be focusing on the whole, not just the indivdual parts.

Thanks for the comment(s)!