Friday, February 20, 2009

Or Why Councilors and Lawyers Don't Mix

Disappointed is an understatement for my opinion on County Councilor McCullough's fraud case. He allegedly spent tens of thousands of dollars of a 91 year old woman with dementia to use for his own political causes. This accusation was from April 2007 and the case was before a grand jury in October. Mr McCullough was actually elected to Council after this case was revealed.

This is pretty messed up. First, why did this case take so long to come to fruition? We're talking more than 18 months from the accusation to the arrest. Second, does this mean yet another special election? At what point will he be forced to resign in spite of being elected while the case was on-going?

Third, why did I have to like this potential crook? This is the only man who responded to my drink tax emails. This is the man who helped fight the legal battle that the drink tax collections are actually used for Port Authority. He is also the man who initially recommended lowering the drink tax to a reasonable percentage.

As 2 Political Junkies (and American law) says though, innocent until proven guilty. And at this rate, McCullough will be up for re-election before the case is finished.

1 comment:

Mark Rauterkus said...

Second, does this mean yet another special election?

A: No. Others on council get to appoint a person to fill the term to the next major election I think. No specials however.

But, he isn't off yet is he?