By Carol Pelosi
Since 2000 I have closely followed the nonpartisan Wake Forest town government elections, for three years as the editor of The Wake Weekly and after that as the editor and publisher of The Wake Forest Gazette.
The candidates through the years have focused on positive messages emphasizing their qualifications for mayor or commissioner. Never have any candidates in their public words or messages said anything negative about the current mayor or commissioners or the town government – until this year.
Michael Molinaro posted the following on Nextdoor recently:
(For some reason, the thread will not reproduce as it has been seen. I am trying to correct that.)
Jeremy Simard who lives in Bowling Green asked Molinaro:
“how many realtors are currently commissioners? I’d like to know if they are lining their pockets with these approvals?”
That was noted as 9 hours ago.
Michael Molinaro from the Mews at Legacy Green:
“I don’t think any of them are realtors, that I’m aware of, I’ll find out.”
Also noted as posted 9 hours ago.
Michael Molinaro from the Mews at Legacy Green:
“Keith Shackleford is an attorney that deals primarily in real estate.”
Noted as posted one minute ago.
Molinaro’s statement about Shackleford is a lie, and I want to know who told him to say it. The answer may be in the final paragraph.
Keith Shackleford, a commissioner candidate, is a fine man with deep roots in Wake Forest. He practices law as a partner in the firm of Warren Shackleford Thomas Attorneys PLLC, and his practice covers drafting wills and trusts, administering probate, guardianship, caveat proceedings, property disputes, contract drafting, review and disputes and general civil litigation, according to the firm’s website.
Molinaro’s statement may not sink to slander but it has the same odor, and it has no place in the Wake Forest elections.
But he has not stopped there.
This is from the statement he sent to the Gazette in answer to the question, “What is your opinion of town government?” that will appear in this issue of the Gazette.
Molinaro wrote: “My view of the current town government is simply we need a different vision and skill set in the mix on the Board of Commissioners. I think the current BOC has an overly amicable relationship with one another and there isn’t enough respectful challenging happening, especially when it comes to growth planning, economic understanding, and money management.”
What is he implying when he says “overly amicable relationship with each other?” Is that a veiled way of saying they are in cahoots with each other in some suspicious way?
The current board, in my opinion, is collegial, a group sharing the same responsibilities and probably sharing concerns and problems. They are very different people but they know the best way to solve the problems is to have respect and a friendly feeling toward each other.
And when he mentions money and the town budget, Molinaro wrote: “Eliminate ineffective spending and reallocate monies to the necessary needs of infrastructure.”
“Ineffective?” Synonyms are unproductive, futile, fruitless, etc.
What “ineffective spending” is there in the town’s budget? Money for the police department, the fire department, the inspections department, the greenways, the parks, the recreation programs? If Molinaro is going to attack the town government for its spending, he had better have some specific items to mention instead of a broad swipe.
Speaking of budgets, Molinaro also told a candidate forum crowd that the town’s budget is $60 million and that translated into spending $1.2 million on every resident. He was using a population of 50,000 – but he apparently cannot use a calculator. Sixty million divided by 50,000 equals $1,200. But why is he looking at the town budget in those terms? Is that useful to anyone? Just so you know, the present general budget is just under $60 million but there is also the debt service budget of just over $7 million and the Wake Forest Power budget of about $23 million. Town Manager Kip Padgett oversees a large entity.
Finally, Molinaro apparently has a skewed understanding of how state law, town ordinances and town government work. He wants five top priorities, saying, “. . . and if new projects arise but they don’t fit into the top priorities, they are postponed until we have a better handle on what we have today.”
Really? No, not in reality. If a current town landowner has reached an agreement with a developer to purchase X number of acres for a residential subdivision but the acreage must be rezoned for residential use, the landowner applies to the Wake Forest Planning Department and that application must be reviewed. After the application meets all the statutory requirements, it is then put on the planning board’s agenda after which, depending on that board’s recommendation, it is sent to the town board. The same process must be followed to get permission to build the subdivision.
That process cannot be halted by any town board decision; the commissioners cannot just say “You’ll have to wait while we do this other thing.” Try it and see how many law suits are filed the next day.
He can say “pump the brakes” all he wants, but there are no brakes to pump unless the town government makes all its requirements for additional subdivisions so restrictive no one can meet them – but then you would have other lawsuits.
The really damaging part of those two Molinaro statements is that uninformed town residents (for uninformed, see question way above about the town commissioners) may believe what he says is true and then be disappointed and angry when it cannot happen. And we have to ask why a town resident would even think that the town commissioners would be “lining their pockets.” That is prohibited by law; it is unthinkable to all the town officials I have known.
One of the few written statements Molinaro has provided during the campaign says that he is “just getting started in the political arena,” meaning he is already looking forward to higher office.
Unlike most town candidates, he has a campaign manager, Dennis Berwyn. If you were here in 2018 you may remember that Chris Malone was running as a Republican for his fourth term in the North Carolina House. And you also may remember that during early voting both he and his campaign manager, Dennis Berwyn, were accused by several Wake Forest voters of asking voters if they were voting twice and sometimes even accusing the voters of voting twice.
So I guess that means Molinaro is being groomed during this first election campaign so that he can then run as a Republican for the North Carolina House.
#
24 Responses
This was copied from the web site of Mr Shacklefords web page
The law office of Warren, Shackleford & Thomas devotes the majority of its’ practice to real estate matters. We help our clients, both corporate and private individuals, review legal paperwork, contracts, and zoning laws. Our experienced attorneys are at your side every step of the way to help ensure a successful transaction while protecting your rights and looking out for your interests throughout the entire process.
I would say this states the fact that Mr Shackleford’s practice “devotes the majority of it’s practice to real estate” is a true statement by Mr. Molinaro. Mr. Shackleford has a vested interest in the real estate growth in Wake Forest and as a town commissioner has no interest in managing or slowing growth. If the people of Wake Forest are concerned about the rapid growth in population and traffic vote for Michael Molinaro and Nick Sliwinski.
Molinaro’s statement about Shackleford is a lie, and I want to know who told him to say it. The answer may be in the final paragraph.
This is the lie— Go to Shackleford’s web site before he changes it.
Did you look at Keith Shackleford’s statement about his practice in the law firm? He clearly states that he has a wide-ranging areas in which he practices.
Carol Pelosi
He owns the law firm. What part of that do you not understand?
I enjoy when WFG ignites debate. And I enjoy that WFG remains a relevant voice of *all* members of our community. Wake Forest Weekly has mostly evaporated, NandO cannot be bothered to deliver my paper twice a week, yet WFG arrives regularly with engaging information about our local government.
Thanks, Carol, for your perseverance and continued performance as a much needed Town Crier.
Hi Spank,
The secret to getting good delivery of the N&O is to complain and send your emails to not just customer service but to all the executives. Tell them how long you have been a subscriber, say you want your paper every day and you want it in your paper box, not thrown indiscriminately wherever. Ours was out by the box and then in the driveway behind our house. Be a pest and they will listen.
Carol
Great advice! I have done something similar more than once and it almost always nets some results in the end.
I am unsure if this will even be published as it is a viewpoint which differs from the writer.
However I will try.
There are a few important things in this article that should be addressed. First, As I noted Ms. Pelosi speaking as news organization referring to Brian as a coward is an abuse of power, not unlike a man who who use his position to make a woman in his presence feel unsafe by using his access to a public forum to denigrate her if she says something he doesn’t like. I am personally a little nervous to post this as I am wondering if she’ll be coming after me with personal insults after this is posted. I have been a resident of Wake Forest for over 7 years and have been involved with local issues to a limited degree during that time. I am a former lifelong Liberal Democrat who in the last several years has left the party and is now a registered unaffiliated voter. I have no huge love for Republicans as my Republican friends will tell you. I tend to assess people based on who they are as people and what behaviors I see rather than character generalizations. As hard as it might be for some to hear, there are really decent people whose party affiliation is Republican. And of course there are some who give me serious pause based on what I’ve heard them say. But no Republican yet has come close to the vitriol that I have seen come from Democrats the last few years. I have endured some eyebrow raising verbal abuse from “open minded” Liberals in the area when, after assessing the candidates positions I decided that Chris Malone was the best fit for District 35. But that wasn’t even the worst of it. one morning while I was participating in early voting in the last election cycle I was speaking with Chris Malone outside of the Wake County Northern Regional Center. What I loved about him and also winced at sometimes was his focus on trying to help people and forgetting to be a good and proper “politician”. I watched as a friend of his was going inside on unrelated business after she had voted. (I saw her come out a few minutes earlier and say hi to Chris.) As she was going in he made an obviously sarcastic comment about was she there to vote again. She laughed, we laughed and everyone went about their day. When I saw that the News and Observer had run a story about Chris intimidating voters using some very distorted version of that exchange I saw firsthand what a “hit piece” was. I realized none of my “friends” wanted to know anything else. My attempts at setting the record straight were met with nasty comments or removing comments on social media that challenged that false narrative where it was in response to a post. When I hear news outlets refer to “The Big Lie” I often think of what happened with Chris as a more localized version of it in that it was absolutely untrue; that several people knew and tried to correct the record but it went nowhere. It purposely cast doubts on the legitimacy of Chris’s numbers and the integrity of the election. It is one of the things I hated the most about Trump and one of things I can’t stand about the news outlet that was supposed to want to report the truth. Now why am I bringing this up? Well, it appears that Ms. Pelosi is colluding with those who spread those lies to try and cast a doubt on the Integrity of Mr. Molinaro. She throws out Chris being accused as though it was fact and tries to create a false association of Dennis Berwyn’s assistance in Mike’s campaign to doing something shady. I’ve heard Mr. Molinaro speak and have actually looked at his positions. His reference to just getting started in the political arena is twisted into he doesn’t really care about Wake Forest residents and is only looking for power. If you listen he is actually trying to help and seeing whether or not this avenue (political) will work. If you speak to him and let him speak his own words you’ll know this. Now I can’t speak to her comments on the budget and she could be right on some or even all of it. If he isn’t elected because he isn’t right for the job or has made errors in his assumptions let her take him to task for that. Hold him (and anyone else) accountable for positions on the ISSUES, rather than what I describe as a ham-handed hit piece which looks as though it’s designed to assassinate his character. Trying to hold out her assumptions about what she thinks he means is irresponsible to put it mildly.
But Ms. Pelosi goes even further. She not only makes statements that are personal in nature, she is attempting to hold out as fact something which she should reasonably know is untrue. If she doesn’t know, this kind of behavior is an actual basis for a defamation lawsuit. On top of that, she went so far as to title her piece “One Candidate Lied About Another”. The very statement she claims he lied about is actually verifiably true. And unlike her attempts to hold unsubstantiated conjecture as fact or making any comments about what I think Ms. Pelosi’s motivations might be, I am including a link to the page on Mr. Shackeford’s own company website (I presume the very same one she says she looked at) where he states—plain as day—he is a lawyer who mostly deals with real estate. https://wakeforestattorneys.com/services/real-estate/
I think most readers without an agenda can see the difference between what Mr. Molinaro is doing vs Ms. Pelosi—he is stating a fact that may have a bearing on the doing of the job—nothing personal is included.
So I’m sure this is more than enough on this. I just want to end saying I do not know Ms. Pelosi and am only commenting on her behavior in her article. It would be inappropriate of me to try and add my own conjecture as though it were true. I wish she could take a cue from a non journalist on how to properly and appropriately report to something online.
I certainly hope a retraction is coming soon. We all make mistakes but real character comes from owning up them and correcting them when appropriate.
You seem to do as much research as Mr. Molinaro does before spouting off.
Here is Keith’s personal profile on that same web site you referenced. Only one more click shows you that Keith is not involved in the real estate transactions except on a very minimal basis.
https://wakeforestattorneys.com/team/keith-shackleford/
You say, “The very statement she claims he lied about is actually verifiably true.” is actually incorrect with one more click. The firm may do real estate but that is not Keith’s focus.
Everything Carol has said in this OPINION piece is accurate. Yet some people don’t like facts getting in the way of their argument.
What she said about the poster going by, “Brian,” is also fair since he didn’t give his actual name or a real email address. It is easy to be a keyboard warrior when it is anonymous.
The great thing about an opinion piece is you can disagree. What you can’t contest is facts and her facts are accurate. She even quoted him. Not sure how you consider that to be attacking anyone personally.
Welcome to the election process. If you make mistakes, they will get pointed out. There is nobody to blame but himself.
Dear Mr. Pate,
I request that if someone believes I’m wrong correct my facts but please refrain from hurling further invectives at my person, thank you. I have cast personal aspersions on no-one, instead critiquing what i see as inaccurate information. There is no need to use phrases like “spouting off”.
In some places Carol cast aspersions and at other points she did not. To point at a piece of factual information I am questioning and then try and characterize my comments on her inappropriate personal aspersions as though they were directed at those statements is misleading to say the least.
I would like suggest looking up logical fallacies online. You’ll find what you’re attempting here listed there.
I’m not sure how big your business is but in businesses the size of Mr. Shackleford’s practice where he has other attorneys and associates there, the way it works is the practice gets a cut of any business that comes through or they pay the attorneys a salary and keep the rest. Given he literally is an owner owns the business he, like business owners do, reap the benefits of the income generated in that business. What means is even if he is not personally doing the work he is receiving benefits of that work. If you follow your logic that means that the heads of companies like Enron should have not been held accountable for their company’s actions because they personally did not do all of the work themselves that generated their gains.
I also fail to see whether or not the gentleman who did not necessarily leave his real name would have bearing on whether or not his views have validity. You’ve neglected to remember to include what I said about Ms. Pelosi being in a position of power that makes her ability to malign his character should she wish without a commensurate ability to fight back on equal footing. As I stated the first time, were she a man and he a woman people would likely be yelling bloody murder over her behavior.
Again, I would like suggest looking up logical fallacies online. You’ll find what you’re attempting here listed there as well.
Also, TBH I’m confused. Aren’t you a Real Estate Agent who ran for Commissioner in 2018? (If I have that wrong please do correct my information.)
I’m fine having a differences of opinion but I do request there being basic some decorum and personal respect in the process. Thank you.
I am actually a real estate agent that served as a commissioner from 2015-2019. Not sure what that has to do with it, but as a result of my time on the board, I am probably more informed about the processes than most other people commenting about the growth in town.
My biggest problem is that you are criticizing an OPINION piece. If you don’t like the opinion, you are more than welcome to disagree.
The post was made by Mr. Molinaro on Next Door. I am familiar with the conversation as I am the one that initially called him out and we went back and forth. Yet he never answered my question to, “What do you mean by ‘controlled growth?'”
His intent was to disparage Mr. Shackleford to try to get an advantage in the campaign. He was attempting to imply that Mr. Shackleford would somehow benefit from being in the real estate business by voting for any development.
Needless to say, when I called him out, he immediately backpedaled. He tried to use the same argument you are using and that is fine. I don’t disagree that Mr. Shackleford may have an interest in real estate, however the post characterized him as real estate being his “bread and butter,” the way it was delivered.
Having been a commissioner, I know for a fact that no commissioner in the last 10 years has taken an incentive from any developer. Developers and elected officials both know the ramifications of something like that happening and we are trained on it immediately after the election so we understand the rules completely.
I also pointed out on that post that I find it interesting that Mr. Molinaro says he can pick and choose which developments get approved. The fact is, commissioners cannot do that. If a development meets criteria required, then the commissioners risk a lawsuit voting against the development. It happened with the Sienna townhouse project near the corner of Hwy 98 bypass and South Main Street. A judge forced the town to allow it after the developer took the town to court and won.
What Mr. Molinaro is promising cannot be delivered without changes to state law. A couple of others who are new to the race are saying the same things and they have no idea what the job entails.
Commissioners don’t get to dictate what happens on state roads beyond the town patching a pothole here or there. Any major adjustments to a state road go through NCDOT. Anyone telling you, “We need to have the ear of NCDOT,” has no clue about the past commissioners because we have all had the ear of the District 5 Engineer who heads our area. The FACT is that NCDOT chooses projects that affect the most people to decide which ones are prioritized. Widening a secondary road is way down the list.
This is also why we (the Town) pass on construction of some roads, turn lanes, etc. to developers. Under state law, developers can only be required to make road improvements based on the Transportation Study that is provided in the public hearing. The method used by the transportation study (which is required by Standards of Practice for engineers and used by the state) is flawed. I have yet to see one that properly predicted the growth around neighborhoods in our area. Therefore, we are always behind. In other words, these changes would have to occur at the state level.
Based on this, it seems Mr. Molinaro doesn’t understand that. He also has made inaccurate statements of basic math (claiming the town spend $1.2 million per person) and not doing his research.
For me, if someone doesn’t do his research during the campaign, how am I supposed to trust him to do his research once elected? He has proven that he doesn’t deliver factual information on multiple occasions. He doesn’t understand what a commissioner has the power to do and what one doesn’t have the power to do.
That disqualifies him in my eyes because he is interviewing for a job that he doesn’t know how to do. Trying to “fake it til you make it” doesn’t work when you represent 50,000 citizens.
Why is a journalist hurling personal invectives at a commenter?
Those who don’t have the power to publish to a news source are on unequal footing when trying to comment on her article.
I would ask Ms. Pelosi to please hold herself to a professional standard of remaining focused on issues especially when speaking for a news outlet; refraining from personal opinions.
To Mark Daniels:
You probably noted there was a gap in the opinion I wrote. It was because a screen shot of the thread on Nextdoor between a town resident and Molinaro for some reason did not reproduce online. I have written out the thread and it is in the article now. I hope to be able to add the screen shot tomorrow once I’ve figured out the technical problem.
Carol Pelosi
Wow. Historically I have read and appreciated the local information published in the Wake Forest Gazette (WFG) that was not available from other publications. The opinion expressed above, related comments by Candidate Molinaro, seems out of character for the WFG. It is entirely unfair to publish an opinion characterizing someone of making a false statement and not showing the statement that is alleged to be false. The statement posted by candidate Molinaro on Nextdoor should have been shown so readers would have some perspective on the degree of the statement’s inaccuracy. Characterizing a statement as a lie without showing the statement is prejudicial to basic journalistic integrity. In the past, I have relied on this publication for the unvarnished facts. What happened? I am disappointed and concerned that I can no longer rely on the WFG for the facts. Please publish the statement and an apology to your readers for the omission.
I have updated the article. I did not understand that the screen shot of the thread for some reason would not come through so I have written out the question and answers Molinaro gave. Please note that it took him nine hours to come up with an answer to that question about commissioners “lining their pockets” and he chose to malign the only lawyer who is a candidate for a commissioner seat.
Carol Pelosi
Thanks for providing an update on this post that included the missing statements made by candidate Molinaro related to candidate Shackleford that were allegedly false. I don’t know either of these fellows and I appreciate their interest in serving on the WFBOC. My concern now is the allegation of a lie seems unsupported by Mr. Molinaro’s comments. Your characterization that his comments constituted a “lining their pockets” accusation seems to be an inference of your creation not his statement. Also the reference to his statement that Mr. Shackleford practices real estate law seems accurate according to his law firm website. So where is the lie? The citizens of Wake Forest have a legitimate interest in evaluating if a candidate’s profession or livelihood is potentially in conflict their duties on the WFBOC. Portraying this question as a “lining their pockets” accusation is a disservice to your readers and unfair to candidate Molinaro. As indicated in my prior comment, I have come to rely on the WFG for unbiased facts related to local news. Please don’t let the WFG degenerate into a biased N&O publication.
Good for you, Carol! You go girl!
At this moment I am picturing Carol in a Supergirl Costume & you, Kenille in a Batgirl costume taking on a barrage of word salad one dangling modifier at a time.
Carol should consider it a badge of honor that her site is still relevant 15 plus years since she first started it. She has outlasted most of us. I am sure her explanation will be accepted.
1. Technology can be frustrating
2. She has corrected the problem
3. She could reject opinions she doesn’t like but she doesn’t ❤️
I was with you on points #1 and #2 at the end of your post. 🙂 But is the point of comment number 3 to say we should give extra accolades to journalists who don’t censor dissenting opinions? I certainly hope in the United States of all places that is to be expected. Conflict helps opinions and ideas become more sturdy, something that can’t happen if everyone is always in agreement over everything.
It speaks to the old saying which goes “I may not agree with what you are saying but I will fight like hell for your right to say it.” Now, in that regard I appreciate Carol’s service to the community in helping that happen.
Under all this back and forth I would think we all agree we’re all residents who want the best for everyone living here. We are just in disagreement over how to do it.
Mark – You got me on point 3. But maybe our didagreement on number 3 is one of semantics or even the deginition of journalist, reporter or blogger. What I meant is that to avoid criticism Carol could have turned off comments on her blog. ?
Thank you, Carol, for your astute observations. This is clearly marked “opinion,” so the criticism is misplaced.
Well I for one think he makes a lot of good points and the fact that you disagree is more evidence that there needs to be a mind shift. The town is overcrowded, WAY overpoliced (there’s some savings for you), and so far removed from the “small town charm” it once had. Glad you gave him the publicity. I hope it helps get him more attention and votes so he can bring some real change.
Shame on you as a journalist for a post such as this.
Brian may not be Brian and he is such a coward that he gave a fake email address and no last name. From now on I will insist on a last name and a working email address.
Carol Pelosi
Just for the record, that is not me.