Last night, the Council approved a controversial 11th-hour measure to fund a redevelopment study involving multiple properties. Much like the surprise hike to the cost of the Municipal Building under the Woodruff Administration, this information occurred immediately after an election was decided. Why would such important matters be kept from the public and candidates? Wouldn’t bringing this up during the election have given the public an ideal context to learn about the purpose of these studies and candidates’ positions?
Ms. Poage was the only Council Member to vote against the redevelopment study. She was the only council member to bring up alternatives (like ADUs) when the community discovered it had not met its affordable housing obligation. She was the only council member to call out the illegality of the sign ordinance during a council meeting. Ms. Poage also does not use operatives to question residents’ intentions when they present concerns during town council meetings. In fact, she is quite effective at validating positions she disagrees with – a key skill in arriving at compromise and a sign of critical thinking skills. This might be an odd thing to celebrate given it’s an expectation most people would have of any council member but it’s worth noting given the current context.
I’m sure I will disagree with Ms. Poage at some point – I have before. Still, it was clear that this year, at least one council member used her reasoning to decide on essential issues versus abiding by group-think and tired theatre to push bad ideas or unclear proposals through.