Home > Uncategorized > Why I Can’t Belong To A Party

Why I Can’t Belong To A Party

Post on June 19, 2009 by 4 Comments »

It’s not just because I couldn’t be part of one that would have me as a member. Although, like Groucho Marx, I’m enough of a contrarian that that is a factor. No, it’s because party politics inevitably includes moments like this. “The Wake County Democratic Party has nominated three people to potentially oversee local elections, including a former state official convicted in a criminal coverup.” You’re thinking, “Obviously Alexander Killens is the only person who wants this job. Why else would the party nominate someone who pleaded guilty to obstructing justice?” But you’re wrong. The long-serving chairman of the Wake County Board of Elections was not renominated, despite his experience – which doesn’t involve any guilty pleas or bans from seeking office – and despite the fact that he’d like to continue serving.

Killens said something that happened more than 13 years ago shouldn’t disqualify him for public service.

‘That’s history,’ Killens said Thursday. ‘All that is past. I’m not going to rehash it.’”

Okay, I’ll do it: Killens pleaded guilty to covering up why a large payment was made to Algie Toomer, his subordinate and sometime driver at the DMV. In fact, the purpose of the settlement remains unclear today. So, no. Just, no. This is not an acceptable candidate for overseeing the most important democratic function in the county. The state party may disregard Killens’ nomination and choose a candidate more suitable to the task. Is that reason to hope? Could the state party improve that much on the county party? It better.

Possibly related posts:

  1. Elections Director worries about budget cuts ahead of 2012 (video)
  2. Democracy NC: The Big Lie About Voter ID
  3. Party of Pollution
  4. Update: Raleigh man guilty of impersonating ICE agent
  5. Interesting memo, survey results on Wake County from PPP

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments (Closed):4

  1. George Entenman
    June 19, 2009 at 11:35 am

    I think you mis-titled your article. It sounds to me as if you meant to say “Why I have to belong to a party”.

  2. EyesWideOpen
    June 19, 2009 at 4:03 pm

    Killens might actually be the better candidate. At least his wrong-doing is public and his debt paid. The same can’t be said for Aida Doss Havel.

    Havel, who I believe was the one-time partner of the current Wake Dem. Party chair, lost her election for district court judge–for good reason–but thinks losing makes her qualified to run.

    Unfortunately, unlike plumbers, vets and morticians, we can’t check her record of performance in her profession, because unlike those other fields, NC does not have a state agency that oversees, or receives complaints about, private lawyers. Those go to the State Bar Association, who keeps such complaints under lock and key. The proverbial hen guarding the hen house.

    We the people are blind to the records of those who could hold Justice–or our Board of Elections–in their hands. While we should all work to change that process to be more open and accountable, in the meantime, we MUST listen to those dissent a nominee, and give THEM a benefit of doubt.

    According to an inside source at the Bar Association itself, there have been an extraordinaary number of complaints against Ms Havel over the yearsn and anyone who spends a little time in Wake legal cilrces will get an earful from lawyers, judges, opposing parties, even clients. (There’s a good reason she lost her election bid).

    She has a reputation as a vile, unethical and incompetent lawyer sought out by nasty divorcees to make their divorces even nastier. Instead of encouraging dead-beat dads to pay support she helps them drag the victims through the courts, knowing the whole time they will lose, just to inflict pain–and wasting taxpayer dollars that support court services. There are many stories of her inability, or wanton disregard, for follow basic legal procedures, from serving subpoenas properly, to filing court papers to keep her own clients from being arrested. When she can get away with it, she’ll disregard a judge’s instructions, sometimes endangering women and children in the process. She’s had complaints for trying to intimidate witnesses and who knows what else. And then there was that inconvenient office fire that destroyed records…

    If none of these rumors and opinions are true, Ms Havel could easily clear her name by giving the Bar Association (and whomever else) persmission to release her records–ALL her records–to the public? (There’d have to be an impartial witness to make sure the records complete and untampered).

    Therefore, as it stands, the difference between Killen and Havel is that Killens’ issues are known, and debt paid, and Havels are not, yet under a county-wide cloud of suspicion and concern, at least among many who know her.

    Beyond the case of Ms Havel, we should all be concerned by our lack of state oversight of lawyers, and our lack of access to information about a lawyer’s record before appointing or voting for them. We are essentially blind to those to whom we’d hand the scales of justice, the third arm of government and now, our elections!

    And once she gets into this position, she’ll use it as a stepping stone to another, then another. (Just as she’s trying to justify this one by her lost election bid.) A ticking time-bomb.

    More than any other position the board of elections needs to be led by people of pristine integrity and widely-admired character. Someone who understands the ins and outs of campaign finance, express advocacy and other BoE related issues would be better than a bad domestic attorney. Couldn’t the Dems have recruited a candidate among the many party members who have worked for clean elections, such as members of democracy south, NC center for voter education, or half a dozen other organizations that work for transparent and accountable government?

    Please contact the Dem Party and ask them to withdraw BOTH Killens and Havel and find someone above reproach, who actually has some experience with the issues (and not as a candidate).

  3. Venita Peyton
    June 22, 2009 at 5:50 am

    I don’t know how these decisions are made, however, having served with the Democrats for 2 yrs, I learned enough to return to the Republican Party of which I’ve been a member for around 30 yrs..

    It’s scary that the second writer can make allegations without proof, which leads me to believe that s/he has someone else in mind. I know Aida, though not well enough to say whether any of these allegations are true or false.

    But, I feel this sort of mudslinging should be curtailed somehow or, this post be hidden until she’s given a chance to speak for herself.

    Any of us involved in politics know to expect some damaging words. However, just like you can’t ‘un-ring a bell’, its difficult to get anything done as long as negativity sells better than truth.

  4. Aida Havel
    June 22, 2009 at 8:08 am

    I scarcely even know where to begin to respond to such a misinformed comment, but let’s give it a try:

    1. I am not, and have never been, partners with Jack Nichols, and we barely even knew each other until six months ago.

    2. People do not seek me out to make their divorces nastier; people seek me out for more peaceful resolutions. For at least the last five years, I’ve been committed to collaborative law, mediation, and arbitration, and in fact, that was a substantial chunk of the platform that I ran on when I ran for judge.

    3. Speaking of when I ran, I had the support of many, many colleagues, as well as retired judges and judges on the bench.

    4. I have never encouraged a deadbeat parent (and by the way, there are deadbeat moms, too) to drag a case through court, and in fact, have encouraged my non-custodial clients to step up to the plate and find a way to meet their moral and legal obligation. Can “EyesWideOpen” give me the name of a case where I’ve done what he/she is alleging?

    5. I do follow civil procedure (I’m actually a stickler for it!), and I’ve never filed a pleading to keep a client from being arrested. Again, I request that “EyesWideOpen” give me the name of a case where I’ve done what he/she is alleging.

    6. I have never disregarding a judge’s instructions (why would I, as an officer of the court and someone who would like to continue practicing law?) nor have I ever endangered a client or child. Once again, I request that “EyesWideOpen” give me the name of a case where I’ve done what he/she is alleging.

    7. I have never had a complaint for trying to intimidate a witness, and again, I have never tried to do such a thing. Again, I request that “EyesWideOpen” give me the name of a case where I’ve done what he/she is alleging.

    8. I’VE NEVER HAD AN OFFICE FIRE!

    9. I have no record of public discipline by the State Bar in 25 years of practicing family law, which is something not all of my colleagues can say. This is an area of the law that is fraught with ill feelings, hurt, betrayal, desire for revenge, and much more. The people I represent, as well as the opposing spouses, are going through an extremely difficult time, and I always try to make it better, not worse.

    10. Finally, to the subject at hand: my nomination to be on the Wake County Board of Elections: I have served as a Wake County Board of Elections Precinct Official since 1994, and have been Chief Judge in my precinct for the last three years. I gave up serving as the Wake County Democratic Party Secretary because there was a statutory conflict between my serving as an elected party official and working as a precinct official, and I love my work as a precinct official, and thought I could be of better use there. (And by the way, I was the one that discovered the conflict and immediately brought it to the County Party’s attention. Someone else might have tried to ignore it, but I knew it was important to follow the law, and I did….just as I will if I am privileged to serve on the Board of Elections.)