George,

The Daily Progress editorial on February 10th ("City may lose bright leader") accuses the 530 citizens who participated in the Democratic convention of "denying" Meredith Richards the nomination and speculates that the single issue of the Meadowcreek Parkway was her "undoing".

This assumes, first of all, that a great many of the 530 citizens who came to the convention did so to vote AGAINST Mrs. Richards, rather than to vote FOR the candidates they most favored. People do not give up hours of their time on a Saturday afternoon to engage in a negative activity. The Democratic party was fortunate enough to have four outstanding candidates. Unfortunately, only three could be nominated. The editor of the The Daily Progress should not impugn the motives of 530 convention goers because they did not come up with the choice the editor would have made.

Why Meredith Richards was the candidate who ended up with the least votes is impossible to say. No exit poll was taken; no survey of convention goers was made. Therefore, there is no way to tell how important the Meadowcreek Parkway was in the multitude of decisions being made by 530 people choosing among four candidates. We do know that the Meadowcreek Parkway was NOT a high priority issue for Kendra Hamilton, and therefore she did not pass the "litmus test" of avid anti-Parkway voters. Yet she won an overwhelming vote at the convention. If there were a lot of single issue anti-Parkway people there, how could Kendra Hamilton have done so well?

I agree with the editor of The Daily Progress that Meredith Richards has been of tremendous service to her party and to the community. But she was up against equally high quality competition at the convention. Excellent people do not always win elections, yet they often go on to make significant contributions. I'm sure Meredith Richards will do so.

David E. RePass (electronic mail, February 12, 2004)

Editor's Note: David RePass' letter has also been sent to the Daily Progress.

While I agree with David RePass that individuals chose candidates at the recent Democratic convention for a multitude of reasons and that the Meadowcreek Parkway was not a high priority issue for Kendra Hamilton, it is conceivable that one might have voted for Kendra Hamilton as an anti-Parkway voter and that there was some anti-Parkway sentiment in the crowd.

In a recent Council Candidate Forum on Social Issues, Kendra Hamilton is reported to have said "that party members on both sides of the issue have made strong efforts to let her know why they hold their positions. The parkway, she said, should be seriously rethought and she sees no rush in building it." (Elizabeth Nelson, The Daily Progress, February 6, 2004).

And, on February 7, 2004, the day of the Convention, WINA reported: "Three of the four Democrats running for city council don't want voters to have a say on the Meadowcreek Parkway. Vice-mayor Meredith Richards wants to hold a referendum because she says the issue has gone on long enough. Parkway opponent Kevin Lynch says the city does not have the authority to hold a referendum, but Richards says the city can get the authority through enabling legislation from the General Assembly. Candidates Kendra Hamilton and David Brown are opposed to a referendum. Hamilton says it would be a waste of money and Brown says city council, and not city residents, should decide the issue."