To the editor:
I am a former Gloucester resident currently living out of state. I’ve been in town to oversee work on my mother’s house and have been reading the Times lately.
I was surprised at the mayor’s response to Mr. Bell showing up at her fund-raiser. I was also surprised at Theresa Issid’s view on the issue (letters, the Times, Friday, Oct. . This incident is wrong on so many levels. One of the tenants of American Democracy is that it be public and transparent. Public meetings are supposed to be for the public. I assume Mr. Bell is still considered part of that group. So why is he not allowed to attend a public event for an elected official? And why would anyone defend her actions? Had this event occurred where I currently live, there may have been investigations for violations to the Brown Act.
Had Mr. Bell been disruptive or perhaps been recording the event, I may have sided with the mayor. However, he appears to have been conducting himself in a socially acceptable manner. Mr. Bell was more transparent than the mayor since he showed up personally and everyone in the room would know someone from the Bell camp was there. The mayor sent aides to Bell’s campaign kick-off.
And why is it alright for the mayor to send people to Bell’s meeting but not for Bell to be at the mayor’s?
I completely agree with Editor Ray Lamont’s point regarding why you covered this story (“Why Did My Newspaper Do That?” Saturday, Oct. 5).
It states something about the candidates personally. It certainly gave me some insight into Carolyn Kirk.