Login | Register

• Beachbook
• Coastal Review Online
• Dare County
• Duck
• Island Free Press
• Kill Devil Hills
• Kitty Hawk
• Manteo
• Nags Head
• Nighthawk News
• Southern Shores

• Bill's OBX Beach Life
• N.E.S.T Online
• Natural Outer Banks
• Red Headed Beach Girl
• Rosie Hawthorne
• See more local blogs »

See what people are saying:

• Roger says:

  What do we do with the petitions once they’re signed?

on June 16, 2012 @ 10:39 am

---

• Sandy Semans Ross says:

  I have to turn them in before noon on Friday, June 29. Please mail to 133 Bayview Drive, Stumpy Point, NC 27978. I will be retiring from the Sentinel on July 2 and until then I am swamped trying to clear my desk for its next occupant so appreciate all the help I can get. If I can get on the ballot, I may not win in November but I promise that the issues will be discussed before then.

on June 16, 2012 @ 2:41 pm

---

• KDHgal says:

  I think it is a shame that the two party system has made it so hard for Independents or other parties to get themselves on a ballot. It seems unfair that a potential candidate must gather so many signatures at involving so much effort and expense. It’s even more disgraceful when a candidate is ignored by the press or not invited to debates or voter forums.
  A couple of days ago it was without hesitation when an Independent came to my door requesting my signature on his petition to run for a commissioner’s seat. Indeed, I may not vote for him, but the fact that he was making such an effort to be put on the ballot certainly garnered my respect and consideration.
  I wish him, Ms. Semans and any others making this effort much success.

on June 16, 2012 @ 3:27 pm

---

• Russ Lay says:

  Thanks Roger, Sandy posted above and I fixed the article ending.

on June 16, 2012 @ 4:58 pm

---

• Fresh Idea says:

  Anything to break up the duopoly stranglehold.

on June 16, 2012 @ 10:52 pm

---

• K. says:

  Mailed my signed petition this morning.

on June 18, 2012 @ 1:13 pm

---

• Francis D'Ambra says:

  I am sure that Ms. Semens is a good journalist. To say that the system for Independent Candidates is unfair is clearly and grossly an overstatement. Unlike partisan candidates, who also have to garner support, funds and votes, they must do this by February 28. That is the closing time for candidate filing. Partisan candidates have to put their names, reputations energy and family life on the line for public scrutiny. Independent candidates do not have to do this until June.

  Candidates who hold a public trust, like newspaper editors who intend to run for office should in my view have the ethical obligation to give equal time and editorial discretion to the partisan candidates that they intend to run against. Their position dictates that they should be neutral and detached from the primary fray if they are not participating in it in all respects. Anything less in my view may give the Independent Candidate a distinct advantage

  Being a partisan candidate immediately sends a message to the at large public that the candidate identifies with a set of principles and ideas for which they are held accountable. This is not so for the Independent Candidate until far into election cycle. They are at liberty to speak, advertise via other concerned organizations and be heard simply by saying “it’s only a petition to get on the ballot, you do not have to vote for the candidate.” The hard truth is this is exactly what political parties and political action committees in fact do for the candidates they support for office. The truth is that independent candidates are in fact candidates for office and should be held to the same election requirements as partisan candidates.

  I do wish Ms. Semens well but I do subscribe to a public political party and in fact make no apology for believing in stated written and documented platforms on issues that effect all of our lives. Therefore I cannot in good conscience sign, nor endorse her candidacy under the current rules governing Independent Candidates for public office,

on June 19, 2012 @ 11:42 pm

---

• Sandy Semans Ross says:

  Francis wrote: “Candidates who hold a public trust, like newspaper editors who intend to run for office should in my view have the ethical obligation to give equal time and editorial discretion to the partisan candidates that they intend to run against. Their position dictates that they should be neutral and detached from the primary fray if they are not participating in it in all respects. Anything less in my view may give the Independent Candidate a distinct advantage.”

  Francis, I absolutely agree with the above statement that you made which is why my seeking to get on the ballot has not been reported in our newspaper or website – and because until or if the Board of Elections approves the signatures, I’m not a legal candidate. For primaries, the Sentinel relies on the League of Women Voters to provide information about and by the primary candidates. All of those responses were printed even though I couldn’t fill out the questionaire because… I’m not yet an official candidate. I have printed anything submitted by candidates that was appropriate and met our guidelines – ranting doesn’t – it has to be something with news value.

  If you really think that trying to get more than a thousand people to sign a petition that says you have a right to be a candidate is easier than sinply filing at BOE, you should try it sometime!

  And your comments on party affiliation are exactly why I am running – politics have changed to the point that candidates are representing parties instead of the people because they feel like they have to have party support. I both agree and disagree with portions of the platforms of both parties so I would be dishonest in claiming to staunchly represent either.

on June 20, 2012 @ 10:21 am

---

• Francis D'Ambra says:

  With all due respect Sandy, In my view my support for a party platform and position is a direct representation of the will of the people. I unabashedly am Republican n my political positions. That does not mean I agree with or support every minor point the greater Party upholds. When you are in public service, you met represent all of the people. Being a Republican most of my adult life and conservative all of my life never swayed my service to the public as a professional Police Chief. My service was guided by my own commitment to professional and moral excellence both in public and in private. You make it sound as though if you subscribe to a set of political principles that you must ardently uphold every tenant that the Party dictates. That notion is neither true nor responsible to the many citizens Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green and alike. No one in my campaign ever stated or upheld the notion that being a Republican means that you check your brain at the door to the meeting hall or the public square.

  I do wish you well in your efforts. I just cannot support nor endorse any individual from whom I have no frame of reference to identify with politically. Saying “I’m Independent” cam mean a myriad of beliefs and standards. That is not enough for me as a thinking and intelligent voter. When one files for office it is far more than just going in and signing up to run. It means endless meetings, discussions, inputs and vetting from constituents as you work towards a primary. It also means publishing specific plans for what you intend to do if elected. I did not see that from anyone else’s campaign except mine be they Democrat, Republican,or Independent.

  Additionally, if you think it is easy to merely go to the BOE and file as a candidate, I would also suggest that you try it sometime. You may find the task of running as a defined candidate quite a daunting challenge.

  As to your assertion about newspapers covering candidacy, I do recall the Sentinel publishing your intent to run back in either December or January. That is the only coverage that the affiliated candidates received from the newspaper. It is quite clear that through this editorial string at least this on-line media outlet appears to have endorsed your un-official candidacy. Frankly though, it is the clear and unequivocal right of the press to endorse a candidate at their choosing or not, it would appear that the journalistic bond has certainly worked to your favor as a non-affiliated candidate. Both this source and the Eye on Dare has been working hard on your behalf.

  My point was that whether one is an affiliated candidate or not the rules should be the same because both candidates have to work hard to get their message out to the public. Please do not merely dismiss or discount the difficulty of the task for Party affiliated candidates. You will still need their support if you intend to win in November.

on June 20, 2012 @ 3:39 pm

---

• Kevin says:

  Their is a bill in the NC Senate that would lower that requirement! It passed the house last year easily but the NC Senate is refusing to hear it. Please contact Senator Phil Berger and let him know we want House Bill 32 heard before they adjourn. http://ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2011&BillID=h32&submitButton=Go

on June 20, 2012 @ 5:46 pm

---

• Sandy Semans Ross says:

  Francis, you and I agree that the rules for both party and independent candidates should be the same which if I read this commentary correctly is exactly what Russ wrote. I welcome endorsement but don’t consider this one since it is not encouraging anyone to vote for me – it simply asks folks to help me get on the ballot by signing my petition.

  I don’t dismiss the efforts of any candidates – just saying that it is not a level playing field.

  And I agree that just stating that I’m an independent doesn’t give voters enough information to make a decision about whether to give me their votes. To try to ensure that they do know where I stand on issues, I’ve created a blog so that they can ask questions and I can provide answers. I want voters to know about me and there are going to be some that don’t like my answers which will be honest and straightforward – not an attempt to pander to any one group or voting block. Check it out at http://www.sandrasemansross@blogspot.com – and ask me some questions if you’ve a mind to!

on June 20, 2012 @ 5:56 pm

---

• Russ Lay says:

  Francis: I think some clarification is due here. This commentary is in no way an endorsement of Sandy Seamans Ross’ candidacy. For those who know me, I was a long time Republican, now registered unaffiliated. I pay dues to one U.S. political party-the Libertarian Party, and two in Canada-the Conservative Party and the Libertarian Party.

  I have had a fascination with political parties ever since I took up the discipline in college. My senior thesis was on third party movements and I have written many term papers on unfair ballott access.

  So here’s a history lesson. Third parties were common until the Civil War. There were virtually NO ballot access laws in this country until the 1880′s. Many of these third parties were formed by independents who found common interests and then formed new parties–Free Soil, Farmer’s, etc.

  The last third party to gain national prominence was yours-the Republican party. Formed in 1854 it sent more governors and congressmen to office than any other party–because there were no ballot access laws. At that time the GOP really was a loose coalition of abolitionists and free soil supporters. Six years later it replaced and absorbed the Whigs.

on June 20, 2012 @ 6:34 pm

---

• Francis D'Ambra says:

  Thanks Russ for the clarification but please remember also the Bull-Moose Party at the turn of the 20th Century, which did gain national prominence by a former Republican but then progressive Teddy Roosevelt. And the much acclaimed independent run of Ross Perot. Precisely my point, I believe much of the reason for their losses was due to the fact that they neither had definitive platforms or guidelines that the at large public could identify with. It certainly was not a case of popularity or money in Ross Perot’s case no less a former President.

  As a former candidate for this same office I do wish that the Dare County Board of Commissioners were a non-partisan office. Most all of the issues we face in Dare County are not partisan issues or at least not to the national partisan level. One could argue that fiscal policy in Dare County does lend itself more to a traditional partisan platform. The reality however is the fact is that it is a partisan office. That being the case, until or if it is ever changed, the seat has been traditionally structured to be represented by people with particular ideologies to provide balance of viewpoints. Again, my point is that as the system now stands I see no fair vetting of independent candidate’s positions by traditional means other than to say “I’m Independent. I will check out Sandy’s Blog as I do hope to be well informed before I vote. But to say its no endorsement is somewhat an understatement. When I was a primary candidate my site was visited. I accepted input from citizens and their voice was heard at the primary. So we will see if this is the direction that Dare County voters want to move towards. Based upon my experience and independent voters whom I have spoken with, the primary reason for their independent status is because they are frustrated primarily with a largely Democrat lock on the electorate in Dare County for so many years. Most of the independents that I know are vastly conservative but have been afraid to vote their conscience out of fear of Democrat retribution or the fact that in times past their vote would be wasted. Times have now changed and many of those people have become active in groups like the Tea Party and Liberty Caucus. I have not noticed a vast untapped progressive independent ideological voter base in Dare County. For that matter most Democrat folks I know are more conservative in their political ideologies than progressive so we will see how well Sandy does with her voter drive.

  Your comment,
  “Instead, in my opinion, it is a statement that you support a viable democratic system of government. And if you are truly tired of the two-party gridlock in this country, an independent choice should be welcome.

  You can find a petition for Seamans at this web site.

  Remember these rules: The signer must be a registered Dare County voter, the address listed must be the voter’s physical street address (no P.O. boxes), it must be signed and all information must be legible.

  The deadline for petitions is June 29 at noon. You can mail them to: Sandy Semans Ross, 133 Bayview Dr., Stumpy Point, NC 27978. Make sure they arrive on or before June 27 to be sure they are in time for the deadline.”

  Where was your directional guidance for support of the efforts of either the 2 Republican candidates or the 2 Democrat candidates for this office?

  You do a great job in keeping me informed of issues on the Outer Banks. I appreciate that and this site. You certainly have the editorial right to direct anyone’s attention to any candidates running for office. But your assertion that it is merely as simple as going to the BOE and signing up, is a bit dismissive of what it takes to run for public office by anyone. I was also hoping to find at least one media outlet that was absent traditional media bias. Please maintain the high road of ethical media balance and fairness in reporting events and stories.

on June 20, 2012 @ 9:58 pm

---

• Russ Lay says:

  Francis: Great points. When I refer to the ease of gaining ballot access, it has occurred more than once in many places–one person declares for office in one party and there is no opposition. They get on the ballot automatically, sometimes without party “endorsement”.

  You prove my point with your examples of 20th century third parties. In the 19th century parties emerged from issues, some narrow (Greenback, Free Soil), some broad (Republican). The examples you cite–Bull Moose, Reform, were personality based, which has pretty much been the case in the U.S. since 1900 with the exception of the Socialist Party in the 30′s and 40′s. You can add to that the American Independent Party of George Wallace. None of them were ideology based and all were dependent upon one individual with either a fat wallet, national name recognition, or both.

  If the Republican Party had tried to form in the 20th century, rather than the 1850′s, it would stand no chance today. I understand your desire for ideological based parties (but I don’t believe they really exist to any great extent–take away the rhetoric and the writings in left and right leaning media and at the end of the day neither party makes much difference beyond judicial appointments), but it is impossible for such to occur today. In almost all of the past four presidential elections, the Green and Libertarian parties, which are ideology based, have been on the ballot in 40+ states, but their candidates do not participate in mass media debates nor are they eligible for public funding. Democrats worked hard in 2004 filing suits to challenge the Green Party and Nader (whom they blamed for draining votes in 2000 in Florida from Gore) petitions in battleground states, and did the same to Nader in 2008 when he ran as an independent. Republicans performed the same dance in ’04 and ’08 in selective states with the Libertarian Party.

  That leaves us with occasional independents, usually those with significant financial resources. Seamans is a different independent. As an editor, there are a slew of opinion pieces she has written, many of which I oppose (beach nourishment, for example) that are well known to the voting public. Our two media sites have taken entirely different takes on many other issues editorially. But people know where she stands editorially and to some extent based on her news coverage.

  So let’s be realistic in District 1. Frankly, no one knows anything much about the Democratic Party candidate. The voters know Richard Johnson. And unless you lived under a rock, they know much about what Seamans’ thinks. Under your system, she has to either join a party or get 1100 signatures on her own. On the other hand, the Democratic Party held a primary that no one paid attention to, little money or advertising dollars were spent, and the “winner” is automatically on the ballot. Unless you dug deep, the only information on the candidates was from poorly attended forums and generic questionnaires. In fact, I would submit your own candidacy is an example of how difficult it is for new voices to be heard, even in their own parties. If the decks are stacked so much within each of the two parties, imagine what we are missing from the rest of the potential candidate pool. Ray Midgett, whom I seldom agree with on anything, discovered the same thing when he tried to run as a Democrat in a primary against the “party favorite.” He was overwhelmed and as a result, his message was lost.

  I don’t care much for how Midgett conducts his politics or his opinions, but his ideas do resonate with many and they deserve a place in the democratic marketplace.

  As to the District 1 intra-party competition, what guidance should we provide? All four of you got on a primary ballot by merely filing some paperwork and paying a fee. Then you duked it out in the marketplace and two winners emerged. Did you need to gather signatures to appear on the Republican Party primary ballot? I didn’t think so…

  I think that does democracy a disservice and prevents exactly the kind of ideology based new parties we might desire from becoming a reality.

on June 21, 2012 @ 12:17 am

---

• Francis D'Ambra says:

  Thanks Russ but I can assure you that winning favor within the party structure itself be it Democrat or Republican with their many factions and ideological constructs is as hard to break into as is obtaining signatures, I will cite Kevin Connor’s race in Hatteras. He is a Republican candidate having to garner the required signatures because of a deadline issue. He has had to endure the same difficulty with the added difficulty of building coalition credibility within the party.

  My point is that is no easy task either way. One solution would be to eliminate the signature process all together or do away with the primary and let all registered candidates run equally in a November election. Another possibility would be to have a later primary and require that all persons filing for office have their necessary organizational requirements be submitted at the end of the filing period. Certainly there still remains an ideological difference in between both the Democrat and Republican candidates that the voting public will never benefit from an honest discourse. Face it, because of voter apathy, how many of our electorate pay attention to the true platform positions at the primary level? For intents and purposes it is a popularity contest with signatures being the votes at the primary.

  Additionally, please know the committee organizational process required, Ie: Naming a Treasurer, Campaign Manager, obtaining the necessary financial certifications, opening campaign accounts, and alike is far more involved than simply going to the BOE and filing. Please do not forget that while all this stuff is going on between February 28 and the May 8th Primary, the candidate has to get out his or her message to the public, raise funding on their own, and make the requisite public appearances at events. Remember at the primary level candidates do not get any financial support, endorsement or otherwise from the local party so in reality until a candidate is selected all are equally independent. That sir is why I say what the non-declared candidate has until late June to accomplish the partisan candidate must do this between February 28 and May 8th.

  Granted obtaining signatures is not easy but it is only one part of the election process. All the independent candidate has to do is get the signatures. That’s it. None of the other requirements apply until after that point. They do not have to organize media, have a web site, blog, email, meetings, raise and earn over $700.00 for signage, and get their message out by May 8th. It is not as easy as you project in your comments. It does take dedication, hard work and commitment to the citizens you hope to serve.

on June 21, 2012 @ 7:35 am

---

• Francis D'Ambra says:

  I sincerely hope that the citizens will put all this political rhetoric behind us and wake up to the real problems we face here in Dare County. I have offered my candidacy and accept the outcome for what it is. I do hope the best for all of the newcomers to the political arena. For the Republican, Democrat, Independent and alike it is a challenge to get the real message out in the public arena It is a challenge to get the real message out in the public arena.

  I would hope that our elected representatives at the county level would recognize the error of their discretionary spending of taxpayer money. I hope they would please follow appropriate and transparent methods of determining the public will through the referendum process when appropriate.

  I would plea with them to take the time to ask the necessary and appropriate questions to entities who ask for our tax money both departmentally and non-departmentally. Please be mindful if the request is for the greater public good and also of real, apparent and perceived conflict of interest. It truly hurts our county’s credibility when we stand by while there is clear conflict of interest in personnel and nothing is said about it publicly.

  We must fix the disparity that exists in salaries between top-level officials and the rank and file faithful county employees. We must ask if expenditures are reasonable and what serves best the public interest?

  If you do not have the time, will, energy, or ethical commitment to serve us, as citizens then please do not run for office. It’s about servant oriented leadership. Frankly, the sudden interest in previously non-contested races should indicate to anyone that the electorate in Dare County is weary of cronyism, overspending, and irresponsible leadership.

  In my view the privilege you have of service in governance is all about good service that you provide to those you govern. I am yearning to look to people who will truly be good representatives of our will not their own. As a current elected official or candidate seeking office, you are seeking to serve not be served. If you will do that and exercise good leadership, not only will you earn my vote but my respect and the results will be faithful follow ship by your constituency.

on June 21, 2012 @ 8:30 am

---

• Russ Lay says:

  Francis: Let’s end on this note. I started out at 18 as a member of the Virginia Beach Republican City Committee, precinct chair of Windsor Woods. I was president of the Old Dominion Univ. Young Republicans. I was floor organizer at the state GOP convention when state senator Joe Canada sought the nomination for Lt. Governor. I worked for Rep. G. William Whitehurst in Washington, DC and he, in fact, graded what amounted to my master’s thesis.

  The point is, I’ve been working in politics since 1974 and have been around candidates and campaigns longer than almost anyone I know other than actual elected officials. I am well aware of how the system works, so I know what’s involved. This is not a case of a journalist or ex-banker spouting rhetorical flourishes. I’ve been involved in more primary and caucus battles than I can remember (I go back THAT far in Virginia) so I understand exactly the challenges faced by independents and partisans.

  The article was an opinion on finding a better way to increase the dialog and choice on ballots. The current system produces candidates who frankly differ by only shades of being left or right of center and at the local level, I can’t see any reason to have partisan elections at all. Truly, what is the difference between a Democrat and a Republican, ideology-wise on this county commission?

  I don’t disagree with you on how hard it is to break in, but you still miss my point. If one person from both parties pay a fee, they WILL be on the ballot in November–period. What happens within the party is subject to variance–the candidate may slog through a multi-candidate primary or cake-walk to the ballot with no opposition. If I had filed as a Libertarian, since this year they are an approved NC party, I suspect I would have had ballot status in November with no opposition and I could have spent the time it’s taking an independent to gather signatures doing what Obama and Romney are already doing before either has the official nomination of their party–campaigning against one another and for themselves.

  All of this aside, at the start of this you were convinced we were endorsing a candidate rather than a candidacy, and you downplayed the concept of “independent” as inferior to that of someone who throws in with a party that has a platform we can “point to” as some kind of vague, ideological guide in which to hang your hat. Now we’ve moved on to how hard it is to get on the ballot and how easy it is for independents.

  I’ll believe you when I see three or more choices on the November ballot for every office up for grabs. Until then, like I said, if ballot access laws were around in 1854, you’d have been running as a Whig.

  I believe we are the only two reading or debating this by now!

on June 21, 2012 @ 8:43 am

---

• Francis D'Ambra says:

  You’re probably right. I do enjoy the civil dialogue please do not misunderstand my conversation it was in no way meant as an attack on your journalistic integrity. I appreciate all that you do!

on June 21, 2012 @ 9:51 am

---

• Russ Lay says:

  Agree..enjoyed the discourse. I needed some stimulus before I return to the classroom in August!

on June 21, 2012 @ 9:39 pm

---

Join the discussion: