Esselman kicks off mayoral campaign

Jared Esselman wants to be your mayor, Mooresville.

"Being in a position of authority does not make a leader; it just means you're in charge," Esselman said to a crowd of about 100 at his official campaign kick-off on Saturday in the Mooresville High School ampitheatre.

A 1998 graduate of Mooresville High School, Esselman, 31, said, "You have helped make me the man I am today, and I want to give back."

Esselman shakes hands with those who attended his campaign kick-off on Saturday

Esselman joined the U.S. Air Force after 9/11, serving in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. He went on to graduate from the College of Charleston in 2009, earning his BA in political science then received his masters in public policy from Harvard University just this year.

"Mooresville students are receiving the kind of education is takes to get to Harvard," Esselman said Saturday. "Education is the jewel of our city."

Noting Site Selection magazine's naming of Mooresville the past two years as "the best place to build and expand a business," Esselman said: "We have potential; we just have to realize it. We have a wonderful, vibrant, diverse community. 

"Unfortunately, we also have a divided community," he said. "I will work to heal that divide."

Esselman did not expound on what he considers the community's "divide." While his platform covers strengthening education, the economy and the community, he did not mention the town's MI-Connection cable system on Saturday. The struggling system is sure to be a hot topic in local political campaigns leading up to the Nov. 8 election, and Esselman has MI-Connection listed on his website as one of the top issues being reported to him by Mooresville residents.

Esselman did, however, note Mooresville Mayor Chris Montgomery's presence as a special guest at the campaign kick-off on Saturday. Referring to the exposure earlier this year of the mayor's public e-mails to a woman who is not his wife, Esselman said: "I know how you feel about our mayor, and I understand." However, he said people should at least respect Montgomery's courage in facing family, neighbors and himself in the aftermath of the scandal.

"It takes courage and passion to run for mayor," Esselman said. "My passion is serving people and investing in people because you invested in me."

Esselman's friend and former classmate, Lt. Comm. Joe Cousins, caught Esselman supporters' a little off-guard Saturday when he accidentally introduced Esselman as a gubernatorial candidate. Members of the audience chuckled, some of them responding, “Not yet!”

“One thing at a time,” Cousins replied with a smile.

Cousins, who flew to Mooresville from Washington, DC for the mayor-hopeful's official announcement, said while researching Mooresville, he was bothered to see that 'half the (government) meeting notes are closed.' He said government transparency is important to him and to Esselman.

For more on Esselman and his campaign, visit www.jaredesselman.com.

Truth transcends government-friendly loopholes - every time.

It's been said that we learn something new everyday.

That indeed held true recently when I discovered that the N.C. Public Records Law has a little government-friendly “loophole” that some public employees can use - and are using - to their advantage.

N.C. General Statute Chapter 132 states that public records are, in part, documents “made or received ... in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions.”

But as it turns out, government employees' personal business – when conducted on public time and using public equipment – is, in fact, none of our business since it is not conducted “in connection with the transaction of public business.”

This literal interpretation of the law was taken for a spin most recently by the Iredell County Sheriff's Office, which allowed a deputy to mark out hundreds of phone numbers on four months of his county cell-phone bills, because the calls were supposedly “personal.” Adding insult to injury: The deputy, during all four months, was suspended from the sheriff's office after having been indicted by a state grand jury for obstruction of justice.

ICSO Capt. Marty Byers said the deputy, Tommy Adams, was allowed to review the bills, which spanned from December 2010 – the month he was indicted and suspended – to April 21, 2011 and mark through the numbers of personal calls.

Interestingly, about half the numbers on the bills were blacked out, indicating that half the calls were "personal." It would follow, then, that the other half were not personal. So what were they? Professional? While the deputy was suspended? While he awaits trial on obstruction-of-justice charges stemming from an incident that occurred at the sheriff's office?

And why didn't Adams mark out the calls he made to his wife's cell phone or to Sheriff Phil Redmond's personal residence or to Kim Taylor, the attorney representing him against the state's obstruction-of-justice charge?

The public may never see the full picture since government employees can essentially hide certain activities conducted on public time and equipment by suggesting those activities were “personal.”

This should come as a surprise to Mooresville residents, especially after January's troubling revelations that Mayor Chris Montgomery frequently used town e-mail to carry on inappropriate conversations with a woman who is not his wife. What began as a simple attempt to gain information about the town's cable system ended up becoming yet another south-Iredell scandal after a Freedom-of-Information request for the mayor's e-mails revealed dozens of the inappropriate exchanges.

But come to find out, the town could have withheld those particular records from public review since the e-mails were personal and not “made or received in connection with the transaction of public business.” After all, the mayor obviously wasn't conducting town business in the conversations about love and rose petals, even though he was clearly carrying out that personal business using public resources.

Some records, such as personnel records, attorney-client communications, economic incentives and some law-enforcement investigations, are allowed to be kept confidential, per the public records law. Information that could identify confidential police informants is also off-limits, for obvious reasons.

But just because a record contains confidential information does not necessarily mean that the government can withhold the entire record from public inspection. If confidential information is intermingled on a public document, the law states that the government can black out the confidential information while still turning the record over to the public.

Gregory Rodgers, attorney for Smith, Rodgers & Strickland PLLC – a 24-hour legal support line for law enforcement – recently sent a lengthy letter to the Report, justifying the many black marks on the suspended Iredell deputy's phone bill. Rodgers said the hundreds of calls were personal and therefore off-limits for public review. He did not, however, address the fact that all the calls were made while the deputy was suspended.

Frayda Bluestein, professor of public law and government for UNC Chapel Hill's School of Government, also ok'd the actions of the sheriff's office, saying, “records relating to personal, rather than public business, are not subject to access under the public records law.”

Bluestein said North Carolina has no case law to that effect; however, “cases from other states consistently hold that personal communication falls outside the scope of the public records law.”

North Carolina's attorney general has also issued an opinion “which concludes that personal phone calls/numbers can be redacted from a public agency's bill,” Bluestein said.

Similarly, “the state's records retention provisions for email and other records clearly make this distinction, saying that it is the content of the record, not its location or the email system it is made on, that determines whether it is a public record.”

And therein lies the rub, said Amanda Martin, general counsel to the N.C. Press Association: “Because we have always argued it is the content rather than location of a record, we argue that public business conducted on private computers or via private email accounts are public records,” she said. “The flip side of that, though, is this difficulty in getting information about the mis-use of public property, and we are running into that problem left and right lately.

“It has occurred to me that we might need to consider an amendment to the public records law to address this, though I certainly would not want to concede access to truly public business emails that reside on home computers, etc.,” Martin said.

So why did the Town of Mooresville, seemingly without flinching, turn over the mayor's “personal” emails in response to a public records request earlier this year?

Town Attorney Steve Gambill, who released the records, said the decision to do so was made in light of two factors: “First, the town board has made it clear that they are in favor of transparency of records (and certainly within the confines of the law),” Gambill said. “Second, it can be a burdensome task to review each and every e-mail.

“In most cases, I can only review such records to a reasonable point (I do all I can to screen for any matters that are specifically exempted from being made public, for example, personnel records or records pertaining to civil litigation); I then will not release a record that has a specific legal exception from the public records law,” Gambill said. “If it does not have an exception, it is subject to being released.”

Gambill has it right. In addition to granting public access to documents that belong to the public in the first place, the public records law exists to grant the people the power they should have to see how public officials are spending their time on the public's payroll – and how they're using equipment bought and paid for by the people.

Many controversial stories that brought about good, progressive change in Mooresville in the past decade were based first in public documents and could be largely attributed to the press' ability to gain full access to those records. I'm sure, had the government realized nearly a decade ago that it could withhold those documents and be legally justified in doing so, the press would have never been provided many of the records.

Perhaps we would have never been privy to how our former librarian, eventually convicted of embezzlement, used her town credit card to purchase hair color and Slim Fast diet shakes. Because, after all, that Slim Fast wasn't purchased or (I presume) consumed “in connection with the transaction of public business.”

We also may have never been privy to how an engineering firm was taking the town for a ride, having Mooresville taxpayers reimburse company engineers for their purchases of “cowboy cookies,” clothes hangers, chewing gum and expensive Starbucks coffees.

We may have also never been privy to the fact that Mooresville's town manager in 2004, who fired the new librarian supposedly for exceeding a per-diem dinner expense, had repeatedly violated the same town policy himself and had even purchased an alcoholic beverage on the taxpayers' dime.

But surely the public records law cannot be misinterpreted to suggest that public employees can black-out purchases on their town credit-card receipts and justify that by saying the purchases – bought and paid for by tax dollars – were “personal” expenses. Right?

Wrong.

As ridiculous as it sounds, Bluestein called it “an interesting question” and said that while employees may not be able to “successfully hide” those purchases from their public-agency bosses, “it's possible that they could be redacted from a public records request.”

Perhaps the most frightening part of such a scenario is this: Take, for example, the case of the sheriff's deputy. The public-agency boss is the sheriff himself – the same person who clearly allowed the deputy to keep the county-funded phone and use it to call the sheriff himself at his personal residence.

It's like the fox guarding the hen house.

Denying the public the opportunity to see how government officials are spending our money and using our equipment may be legal. But it violates the spirit of the public records law.

Yet, even using the law in such a way, the Iredell County Sheriff's Office walks away with the black eye.

After all, reviewing the phone numbers on Adams' bills may have satisfied a curious craving to see exactly who the deputy didn't want the public to know he was talking to. But the bigger, more interesting story is the fact that the suspended sheriff's deputy was allowed to keep and use his county cell phone in the first place.

This is the same deputy the sheriff hired despite a felony embezzlement charge by a previous employer that was eventually pleaded down to a misdemeanor and then later expunged from Adams' record during an investigation of the deputy's actions by the State Bureau of Investigation (If you enforce the law, are you above the law?).

This is the same deputy the sheriff promoted to detective-sergeant fresh out of rookie school, a practice that is unheard of in the law-enforcement community, according to many police chiefs across the state.

This is the same deputy the sheriff allowed to stay on the job for five years after he took home two weapons that were supposed to be submitted as evidence – the same deputy the sheriff didn't suspend until the eleventh hour when the state handed down its indictment.

This is the same deputy who kept his job at the sheriff's office despite being suspended there five times in four years.

And this is the same deputy the sheriff allowed to rack up hundreds of dollars in cell-phone usage, dumping that cost onto the backs of the many hardworking taxpayers of Iredell County, for four months after the deputy was indicted and suspended. And only after a local resident asked for copies of the deputy's most recent phone bills did the sheriff's office disconnect the phone.

That, indeed, is the bigger story. And there isn't a Sharpie marker big enough in this world to cover it up.

Board asks mayor to resign

Though Mooresville commissioners chose not to seek censure for Mayor Chris Montgomery, they formally asked him to resign in a letter which was read at last night's board meeting. For the full copy posted on Mooresville Weekly, click here: Board asks mayor to resign.

For News 14 Carolina's report, click here: Mooresville mayor gets 'no confidence' vote

WBTV: Mooresville Mayor to stay on, despite plea from commissioners to step down

Mooresville Tribune: Mooresville commissioners ask mayor to step down

Charlotte Observer: Board votes 6-0 for Mooresville mayor to resign

Mayor will not seek re-election

Mayor Chris Montgomery will not seek re-election in November.

The mayor wrote his plans in a letter he hoped to publish to coincide with the Monday, Feb. 7, town board meeting, but a draft was prematurely published on BusinessTodayNC.com, Montgomery told Mooresville Weekly on Thursday. In the letter, addressed to friends, family, town staff, town commissioners and citizens, Montgomery acknowledges that some elected officials have asked for his resignation but that he has no intentions of resigning.

“I am committed to completing this term as your mayor, but will not seek reelection,” Montgomery wrote. “Rather, I will focus on my faith and family.”

At their meeting on Monday, commissioners expect to discuss, for the first time publicly, the recent media firestorm that began with the exposure that Montgomery used town e-mail to frequently communicate with a woman who is not his wife and then applied for a job with a group of developers that had business before the town.

Commissioners could decide on Monday to begin an investigation into Montgomery’s actions, the first step toward censuring him per the town’s Code of Ethics.

In his letter, Montgomery wrote that he is “sad to have caused a scandal.”

“Let me make no excuses, I made a mistake. I publicly ask for your forgiveness regarding my lack of judgment, Last November I was entrusted to make sound decisions. In many ways I let you down. I am sorry. I fully understand the repercussions that have reverberated throughout our region.”

For a full copy of the letter, visit BusinessTodayNC.com.

Carney says company name was a joke, apologizes for 'distraction'

Commissioner Chris Carney – who told town officials that Mayor Chris Montgomery applied for a job with local developers who had business before the town – was himself listed as a member of a company with one of those developers.

Carney and Langtree Group developer Brad Howard are listed as managing members of “Slush Fund, LLC,” a company that was created in October 2008 and dissolved effective Dec. 31, 2009, according to documents filed with the N.C. Secretary of State.

But Carney said the company was actually a charitable concept turned joke. “I had nothing to do with the corporation of that business except that I was in the initial conversation about helping local charities process credit cards for donations,” he said, pointing out that his signature is not on any of the documents filed with the Secretary of State.

Carney said the initial concept of the business – to help smaller Mooresville charities accept credit-card payments and keep the processing fees – was a joint idea of his and Howard's, both of whom have sat on non-profit boards like the United Way, YMCA and Dove House Children's Advocacy Center.

“Brad and I both sat on a charitable fundraising committee (actually several) and there was a need for credit card processing,” Carney wrote this week in an e-mail to the town board, town attorney and a Mooresville resident who confronted him about Slush Fund LLC after it was brought to light in the comment section of the Report.

“To the best of my memory, a representative from Heartland (Payment Systems) brought this to Brad and we looked into it as a possibility,” Carney wrote. “They needed a corporate ID for processing. I was really only involved in the preliminary discussions and had nothing to do with the filing.”

The Slush Fund name “was my idea,” said Carney's childhood friend, Jon Wright, who is also listed as a managing member of the company. He said the company was named Slush Fund “because it was not designed to make money – it was just designed to pass savings on.

“Unfortunately, Chris's name got added, and I don't know how,” he said.

Wright, who lives in Hickory, said he has always viewed Carney as a friend and not a political official. “I guess I need to change that,” he said.

Howard agreed that the company was named Slush Fund “in jest.”

Carney said that upon learning of the prank name, “I asked (Howard) not to have my name associated with it as I thought it to appear inappropriate. I did not like my name being associated with something called slush fund.”

He said that he and Howard “found a better way to run the credit cards and moved on.”

Last month, Carney informed fellow commissioners that Mooresville's mayor had sought employment with Langtree the day before the developers were to appear before the town board for an adjustment to their tax district. Carney called Montgomery's pursuit of employment with Langtree “an unfortunate and certainly improper situation” that “needs to be dealt with.”

The developers rejected Montgomery's application because they had business before the town, Carney told commissioners. “They felt it inappropriate to even be perceived as a conflict,” he said. “I think we should thank them for their integrity!”

In a letter to Langtree's Rick and Brad Howard, Carney wrote: “Any elected (official) seeking a job with organizations that have business before the town is inappropriate, but certainly your situation, tax districts and joint infrastructure projects, makes it that much worse. Please accept my apology and my sincere appreciation for your making me aware of this issue.”

So what makes Carney's involvement with Slush Fund LLC and Howard any different?

“This was never a real company, and I never received nor attempted to receive any income or opportunity from this entity,” Carney said. “I actually think I paid a nominal amount to dissolve it.”

Carney submitted a copy of his personal taxes to Town Attorney Steve Gambill this week in case commissioners or the public has questions about whether he profited from the business. Gambill confirmed on Wednesday that Carney made no personal money from his association with Slush Fund, LLC.

Still, Carney said he fully understands that having what appears to be a business with a developer would seem improper. “And for that, I'm sorry,” he said, adding, "I feel terrible that this is a distraction for the citizens of Mooresville.”

Carney said he has never hidden the fact that Howard is among his friends. “I have made that as a public statement on several occasions,” he said. “I have friends in many circles that do many things, and it's never gotten any of them influence on our town board.”

Interestingly, on the same day the articles of corporation for Slush Fund, LLC were filed with the Secretary of State's office, on Oct. 17, 2008, Carney was quoted in the Report saying: “I have business with developers, and I’ve had wine with developers – I’ll be the first to tell you.” However, he said, “A glass of wine doesn't buy a vote, and if (it does), that's a bad thing.”

Carney, who owns a title insurance business, said he has also played golf with developers but that he pays his own way.

He said he once recused himself from voting on an issue because it involved a developer who has gone with him on mission trips.

Carney said being friendly with developers is one thing - allowing friendships to cloud judgment is another.

He said this week that Howard and Wright have apologized to him for using his name on a business without his permission. “They didn't do it maliciously,” said Carney, adding: “If I have to give up friendships for this job, it isn't worth it.”

Censure is no quick fix

Do Mooresville commissioners have enough to censure the mayor?

That’s anyone’s guess. But if you’re expecting to attend the Feb. 7 town board meeting to watch a mayor getting censured, don’t waste your time.

Still, at least one town commissioner says there will be conversation at the meeting.

“We will discuss where we are, what our options are and what we’re going to do next,” Commissioner Chris Carney said Wednesday. “We must have a public discussion.”

Mooresville’s Code of Ethics – first adopted in 2005 but amended Oct. 18, 2010 due to a state mandate – lays out a specific, lengthy process for censuring an elected official. According to that policy, the town board, at most, could officially launch an investigation into Mayor Chris Montgomery’s recent actions, including his use of public e-mail from July to December 2010 to communicate with a woman who is not his wife.

Two weeks after those e-mails were exposed, the mayor found himself in the spotlight again when Carney notified commissioners that Montgomery had applied for a job with Langtree Group – developers of the planned $800 million mixed-use project at Exit 32 – while the developers had business before the town.

In his letter to commissioners, Carney called Montgomery’s pursuit of employment with Langtree “an unfortunate and certainly improper situation” that “needs to be dealt with.”

The developers rejected the application because they had business before the town, Carney said. “They felt it inappropriate to even be perceived as a conflict.”

In an e-mail to Montgomery about the Langtree job application, Commissioner Mac Herring wrote: “What wisdom is there in this? It potentially could put the town in an adverse situation. I do hope that there are no other potential conflicts of interests out there.”

Montgomery, part-owner of Lake Norman Woman magazine, responded to Herring, saying he had apologized to the developers.

“The magazine business is tough,” he wrote. “My correspondence to (Langtree) was one of many e-mails including my resume and job expectations. I usually do this twice a year, always looking to better myself and earnings for my family.

“I put the board in a precarious position. It was never my intention to do so. My acts were shortsighted, selfish and lacked integrity. While mayor, the interests and welfare of the town should be top priority. They will be moving forward.”

Montgomery has said that he does not intend to step down as mayor. He said this week he is still deciding if he will seek re-election when his term expires in November.

Some commissioners have said their hands are tied and that the mayor’s e-mails and job application may not be sufficient grounds to censure him per the town’s Code of Ethics. Commissioners have yet to discuss the mayor’s e-mails as a board – at least during open session – since the Gatton Report/Mooresville Weekly first broke the story on Jan. 7.

Using a Code of Conduct for elected officials in Evans, Colo., as an example, Commissioner Miles Atkins recently asked Town Attorney Steve Gambill to draft a Code of Conduct for Mooresville’s elected leaders to review and potentially adopt to complement the town’s Code of Ethics.

What’s the difference between the two policies?

“A Code of Ethics is meant to be more general and more subjective,” Gambill said in an e-mail on Wednesday.

On the other hand, “a Code of Conduct is something that can be pointed to for specific acts which could be considered to be unethical” and “can act as guidelines that address specific actions by a board member which, if violated, can lead to a charge of unethical behavior,” he said.

Gambill said a Code of Conduct is not all-inclusive. In other words, “it is meant only to address those areas most generally encountered by commissioners; that is, even if an action is not set out in a Code of Conduct, the board could find that the action was in violation of the Code of Ethics.”

Gambill said he is still working on the draft Code of Conduct: “I am doing everything I can to get it to the Commissioners in sufficient time for them to be able to review it.”

The Evans, Colo., Code of Conduct states that “city council members who intentionally and repeatedly do not follow proper conduct may be reprimanded or formally censured by the council.”

Mooresville’s Code of Ethics details a lengthy process Mooresville commissioners must follow if it decides to seek censure.

“If a majority of the board has reason to believe that one of its members has violated a provision of this Code of Ethics, it may open an investigation into the matter to determine whether probable cause exists to initiate censure proceedings against the member,” the code reads.

If the board determines that a violation has occurred and decides to proceed with censure proceedings, it is required by the Code of Ethics to call for and advertise a public hearing.

A non-binding resolution of censure is adopted if approved by three-fourths votes of the board.

Even then, a censured board member does not have to step down.

“A member of the board so censured, and in order to maintain the public’s trust in the office being held, has the discretion to tender to the board his or her resignation,” the policy states.

Herring told Montgomery in a recent letter that the board is looking into its options.

“Your situation must be discussed publicly, as it is not a true personnel the board may cover in closed session,” Herring wrote. “I am not sure what our options are, nor what the will of the board is on the issue. All of us on the board are quite concerned, and various options have been considered. “

Herring told Montgomery that public opinion was not in his favor and that the board had received a letter from a citizen, demanding commissioners take action to restore credibility to the mayor's office.

“In essence, your effectiveness as mayor has been compromised and mitigated,” Herring wrote. “It seems as if you don’t fully realize the consequences of your actions at times.

“I am now constantly being asked by the public ‘What is wrong with him, is he just stupid, etc…’ I don’t know how to defend that. I respect the position of mayor, but less and less I respect your ability to exercise your role as mayor.”

Town postpones All-America City bid

Mooresville’s efforts to obtain an All-America City designation have been postponed.

But that decision was not because of the recent public exposure of Mayor Chris Montgomery’s use of town e-mail to communicate with a woman who is not his wife, said Karen Shore, president and CEO of the Mooresville-South Iredell Chamber of Commerce and member of Mooresville’s All-America City steering committee.

The All-America City bid was Montgomery’s brainchild and his most touted project in 2010.

“Obviously, (the mayor) is a key player, and he’s the leader of the (All-America City) steering committee,” said Shore, adding, however, that the decision not to pursue the award in 2011 “is not really about him.”

Montgomery, in a Tuesday, Jan. 25, e-mail to Mooresville Weekly, said, “Transitions in municipal government and economic development, plus recent strains between myself and the board have unfortunately overshadowed the initial intent.”

He said, “We have had several issues over the last few weeks that have taken away from the effort. This is an event where we need to focus all of our energies on the prize.”

Shore cites the resignation of the town manager, as well as the economic development director, as factors for the decision.

Town Manager Steve Husemann’s resignation became effective at midnight on Jan. 9, at which time Erskine Smith, Mooresville’s longtime assistant town manager, became interim town manager.

Only three days later, the Mooresville-South Iredell Economic Development Corporation announced that Executive Director Russ Rogerson had accepted a position as senior vice president of economic development services at the Charlotte Regional Partnership.

Rogerson’s resignation from the MSIEDC is effective Monday, Jan. 31. Robert Carney, MSIEDC’s industry and marketing manager, has been named the interim executive director.

Rogerson served on the All-America City steering committee, but Husemann was not included in updates Montgomery e-mailed to the committee, according to e-mails obtained last month by Mooresville Weekly.

Regarding the town’s push for the All-America City designation, Shore said, “We all recognize this is an enormous amount of work and all the stars have to be in alignment.”

She said the steering committee has discussed over the past month the idea of postponing the town’s efforts. “We’re not pulling the plug totally,” she said. “Perhaps we’ll reconsider it for 2012.”

By then, Montgomery may no longer be mayor. His term expires in November.

Montgomery told Mooresville Weekly that he has no intentions of stepping down as mayor before his term is up. He said this week that he’s still deciding on a possible re-election bid later this year.

“Although I have not decided on a second term, let me make it perfectly clear how proud I am of Mooresville,” Montgomery said. “It would be an honor to strive for All-America City in any capacity when that opportunity presents itself.”

The All-America City designation is the country’s oldest and most prestigious community recognition award, according to the website of the National Civic League, which grants the annual award to “communities of all sizes that collaboratively tackle challenges and achieve results.”

Since 2000, 10 communities in North Carolina have received the All-America City designation, including Statesville, Concord, Gastonia and Hickory.

Town of Mooresville's Code of Ethics

Click on each document to enlarge:

Mooresville will not seek All-America City designation this year, after all

Mooresville is postponing its efforts to become an All-America City.

But that decision is not because of the recent public exposure of Mayor Chris Montgomery’s use of town e-mail to communicate with a woman who is not his wife, said Karen Shore, president and CEO of the Mooresville-South Iredell Chamber of Commerce and member of Mooresville’s All-America City steering committee.

“We started this year with the resignation of the town manager, and now we’re facing the resignation and departure of our director of economic development,” Shore said.

Town Manager Steve Husemann’s resignation became effective at midnight on Jan. 9, at which time Erskine Smith, Mooresville’s longtime assistant town manager, became interim town manager.

Only three days later, the Mooresville-South Iredell Economic Development Corporation announced that Executive Director Russ Rogerson had accepted a position as senior vice president of economic development services at the Charlotte Regional Partnership. Rogerson’s resignation from the MSIEDC is effective Jan. 31.

The All-America City bid was Montgomery’s brainchild and his most touted project in 2010.

“Transitions in municipal government and economic development, plus recent strains between myself and the board have unfortunately overshadowed the initial intent,” Montgomery said in a Jan. 25 e-mail to the Report/Mooresville Weekly.

The All-America City designation is the country’s oldest and most prestigious community recognition award, according to the website of the National Civic League, which grants the annual award to “communities of all sizes that collaboratively tackle challenges and achieve results.”

• Read more on this story here and in the print edition of Mooresville Weekly on Friday, Jan. 28.

Continuing coverage of mayor controversies

Charlotte Observer: Mooresville considers censuring mayor

Mooresville Tribune: Mayor controversies a 'major distraction' for town

Mooresville Tribune: Mayor's job request 'certainly improper'

For the Mooresville Tribune's story, click here: Mayor's job request 'certainly improper'

Code of conduct in the works for Mooresville's elected officials

Mooresville may soon have a code of conduct for elected officials.

Town Attorney Steve Gambill is drafting a policy that if adopted by commissioners would define the town’s ethical standards for elected government officials, Commissioner Miles Atkins said this week.

News of a potential code of conduct came less than a week after The Gatton Report/Mooresville Weekly exposed hundreds of intimate e-mails between Mayor Chris Montgomery, who is married, and a woman, who goes by Lisa Richards, Molly King and Grace King, that were discovered in a public records request.

A second public records request turned up hundreds more e-mails between the mayor and woman from July 5, 2010, to Jan. 3, 2011.

Atkins said the town’s ethics policy, which he spearheaded as a private citizen in 2005, “provides guidance on ethical issues and questions of right and wrong.” But the town has been lacking a written code of conduct for elected officials, he said.

Commissioner Rhett Dusenbury said the absence of such a policy gives elected officials latitude of use. However, Dusenbury said, “We are frequently reminded that this is public equipment, our uses should be discrete in nature, and (we should use) common sense.

“We have all been informed in different training classes that N.C. Freedom of Information statutes apply to the use of all public equipment and that our conversations/uses of public equipment are open to public scrutiny,” Dusenbury said.

Commissioner Thurman Houston said he thinks that could be one reason the town has never felt the need to consider a code of conduct for elected officials: Because those leaders should simply know better – or at least, he said, they’re trained better – than to behave in such questionable ways.

Commissioner Mac Herring acknowledged that “the mayor did not violate a policy.” However, he said, “Were his actions inappropriate, unethical and unbecoming of him as mayor? Yes. Do we need to come down hard on him about it? I think public opinion will do that.”

Commissioner Chris Carney said the town board “has nothing adopted that allows for us to censure anyone for this kind of action.” But “the mayor’s recent misconduct in office” has provided Mooresville with the opportunity to develop and adopt a code of conduct, which Carney said he would “support 110 percent.”

Codes of conduct for elected officials have traditionally been hotly debated; it’s anyone’s guess how the policy may be officially received by Mooresville’s elected officials.

But one thing on which they all agreed this week is that the mayor’s frequent use of public e-mail for private matters, in the words of Commissioner Mitch Abraham, “is very much inappropriate and unacceptable.”

Said Dusenbury: “I would have to say that as a constituent, taxpayer, (and) voter, I am disappointed in the mayor. We are given the trust of the public when we are elected, we swear to uphold the U.S. and N.C. Constitutions to the best of our ability, and we are expected to represent ourselves in the community accordingly.

“I really don’t care what the mayor of Mooresville does in his/her own home, but the fact that he voluntarily ran for office to represent the people of Mooresville as their public face and lead ambassador carries with it the responsibilities of a public official … a higher standard of conduct than the average taxpayer.”

Referring to the code of ethics he pushed for the town in 2005, Atkins said he lives by the same standards he applies to anyone else and “if in any capacity I ever abuse the position or authority graciously give to me by the people of this community, then I expect to be held accountable for it.

“As elected officials, we must hold ourselves accountable to the taxpayers and citizens of Mooresville by using public equipment solely for carrying out town business,” he said.

But the mayor and his wife have placed part of the blame for the mayor’s recent actions at the feet of Town Hall. Lisa Montgomery said she told her husband upon his election as mayor that “a lot of people in that town office … will stab you in the back as quick as you turn around.”

The mayor told Mooresville Weekly prior to last week’s story that he wondered if the report on his e-mail use was “politically motivated” and said: “I don’t walk away from the rumor mill – I run. At Town Hall, that’s all there is. There’s no one – maybe with the exception of Steve Gambill – that I can trust.”

Each and every town commissioner took issue with that this week. Houston, Abraham and Herring said Town Hall bears absolutely no responsibility for the situation.

“It is sadly unfortunate that the mayor feels this way,” Abraham said, adding that he is “deeply disappointed that I did not first hear about these e-mails directly from the mayor himself.” He said “the mayor is welcome to discuss his actions with me personally, face to face.”

Carney called the mayor’s statement about Town Hall “a terribly irresponsible comment” that was “even more irresponsible than the (the mayor’s) actions themselves.”

Elected officials, Carney said, “have to put politics aside and work alongside whoever the citizens put in place. We have no buddy system in place, but we do have an expectation of work ethic, and we expect the mayor to come in and do his part of the heavy lifting. If he has felt that he’s not been welcome, that’s probably because he’s not been able to get his part of the job done as of yet.

“We’re all trying to do our part, and it is improper for any particular elected (official) to insinuate that they’re treated with anything less than the respect of their office,” Carney said.

Instead of the story being brought on by Town Hall, Carney said, “This situation is a distraction brought upon the Town of Mooresville, the town board and staff by one person. None of us would have ever asked to be placed in a situation to have to comment on the character of an elected official.

“Nobody leaked this information,” he said. “Nobody was even aware of this information until the public-records request went through.”

Added Atkins: “My understanding is that all of this came to light as a result of the public records law that allows access to all government communications.

“I don’t care to speculate on blame, political motivations or who is to bear responsibility for this situation,” he said. “I firmly believe in and am committed to transparency and accountability in our town government. If any elected official or paid staff member uses publicly funded tools such as e-mail or cell phones to conduct private business, that is not in keeping with our responsibility to the taxpayers and citizens of Mooresville.”

Said Dusenbury: “I am sorry that the mayor feels the way he does regarding other commissioners and town staff, but he is an adult who makes his own choices, and this situation boils down to very bad judgement on the mayor’s part.”

Dusenbury said he is “not aware of any conspiracy to remove the mayor from office or to diminish his standing in the community. I would have to state that to the contrary, we have all given him advice regarding issues before the town, and he has exercised his own judgement when he had the opportunity.”

Regarding Town Hall responsibility, the office of mayor “has certain standards and responsibilities that come with it,” Dusenbury said. “These standards come in the form of adherence to North Carolina Statutory Law, ethical conduct, decorum and a moral component consistent with the accepted norms of our society, and (Mayor Montgomery) accepted these voluntarily and intentionally.

“We as adults should all weigh the consequences of our actions before we act … but regardless of whether we are a bad legislator, public speaker, etc., one of our first duties as elected officials is to avoid bringing disrepute on our community whether it be in deed or even in inference.

Mayor's private chats on public e-mail

(Pat 3 of 3)

Part 1: Mayor: E-mails were 'not appropriate'

Part 2: When private matters become public

This list was in the Jan. 7 Mooresville Weekly. In case you missed it, here it is:

Editor's note: In several e-mails, the mayor and his friend correspond using acronyms, which are commonly used to shorten text messages. To interpret the messages, we consulted the online “Urban Dictionary” and people who regularly use acronyms and shortened words in texting. Those interpretations, if determined, are provided under the acronyms when they are used. Also, time stamps for about a dozen of the e-mails appear out of order, but the e-mails are presented in the order of the conversation.

Wednesday, Nov. 10, 2010

King (10:06 a.m.): i need to apologize for my “guts” and contributing to your bad weekend. i understand if you would rather me not call today.

(10:24 a.m.): just please let me know.

Montgomery (11:08 a.m.): It's gonna be okay. Call me in the morning before eight.

King (11:10 a.m.): what's gonna be ok? can I please talk to you for just a min?

Montgomery (11:21 a.m.): Can't now. Morning.

King (11:25 a.m.): Are you sure you want me to? I will go away if you want. I just need to know. I said that in a nice voice.

Montgomery (11:32 a.m.): Tomorrow.

King (1:11 p.m.): are u in a meeting?

Thursday, Nov. 11, 2010

King (8:10 a.m.): thank you. imylc*.

(*i miss you like crazy)

King (7:46 p.m.): Do you want to meet Friday?

Montgomery (8:56 p.m.): It would have to be later. Call the office.

(Editor's note: The name associated with the woman’s e-mail address changes from “Molly King” to “Grace King” at this point, though the e-mail address remains the same.)

Friday, Nov. 12, 2010

King (7:31 a.m.): when will you be in the office?

Montgomery (7:57 a.m.): Call me here at 8:30.

King (3:46 p.m.): i know about tiffany. pls just tell me if lisa knows about me.

Montgomery (3:50 p.m.): Huh? Tiffany is the editor of Blossom. I am so tired of explaining things to you.

King (3:54 p.m.): family-less? it's ok. im not mad. i just want to know for sure if lisa knows about me.

Montgomery (3:59 p.m.): I told you no. But when have you believed me? Don't answer this. Just leave me alone.

King (4:12 p.m.): is there a time i can call you tomorrow?

King (5:13 p.m.): everythings gonna be alright.

Saturday, Nov. 13, 2010

Montgomery (3:15 p.m.): Tx*.

(*Thanks)

King (5:12 p.m.): let me know if you want me to call monday.

Montgomery (5:37 p.m.): Yes! I am just embarrassed.

King (5:40 p.m.): don't be.

Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2010

King (7:42 a.m.): Did you have a chance to check your calendar?

Montgomery (8:59 a.m.): Yep.

King (8:56 a.m.): Tomorrow?

Montgomery (9:01 a.m.): Yep.

King (8:59 a.m.): Time?

Montgomery (9:10 a.m.): 10:30 at BR. Bring peanut-butter and sd. Cm.

King (9:12 a.m.): See you then.

Montgomery (9:16 a.m.): Yep.

King (12:45 p.m.): everythings good. i was just checking in.

Montgomery (1:21 p.m.): Groovy.

King (2:11 p.m.): nc*?

(*no comment)

Montgomery (2:17 p.m.): ?

King (2:25 p.m.): youre sure its different?

Montgomery (2:34 p.m.): vs*

(*very sorry)

King (3:14 p.m.): vvs*?

(*very, very sorry)

Montgomery (4:15 p.m.): Y

King (4:16 p.m.): yes or why?

Montgomery (4:46 p.m.): Si*.

(*yes in Spanish)

Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010

King (9:41 a.m.): 1030?

Montgomery (10:22 a.m.): Here now.

King (1:20 p.m.): Tell me not to worry about the car that backed up.

Montgomery (1:25 p.m.): Don't worry bout the car that backed up.

King (1:28 p.m.): thank you.

(4 p.m.): Everything good?

Friday, Nov. 19, 2010

King (9:28 a.m.): Is there a time I can call you for a minute?

(1:30 p.m.): can't get “time on her hands” out of my head. good song.

Montgomery (1:37 p.m.): Tx.

King (1:41 p.m.): i go back and forth in my head between that and never going solo. i think i scratched my cd.

Montgomery (1:47 p.m.): I will sing it to you personally.

King (1:47 p.m.): that would be even better.

(3:48 p.m.): after thanksgiving seems really far away.

Montgomery (5:41 p.m.): Yep.

King (5:46 p.m.): icwtkya*.

(*I can't wait to kiss ya.)

Montgomery (5:58 p.m.): mt*.

(*me too)

Saturday, Nov. 20, 2010

King (8:06 a.m.): its different?

Montgomery (9 a.m.): Yes.

King (9:12 a.m.): i told you i might need to be reminded. sorry.

Montgomery (11:47 a.m.): Np*.

(*no problem)

King (12:18 p.m.): :)

(1:55 p.m.): wfrf.

Monday, Nov. 22, 2010

King (7:01 a.m.): “If I get to pick what I do, then it's play... if someone else tells me that I have to do it, then it's work.”

Montgomery (7:31 a.m.): My thoughts exactly.

King (7:30 a.m.): i know. do you want me to call?

Montgomery (7:40 a.m.): Know what, Dummyhead?

King (7:38 a.m.): that those are your thoughts exactly, loml*.

(*love of my life)

Montgomery (7:46 a.m.): Loml?

King (7:59 a.m.): yes

Montgomery (8:09 a.m.): ?

King (8:14 a.m.): what?

(10:51 a.m.): let me know if you want me to call.

(12:30 p.m.): i dont like it.

Montgomery (12:37 p.m.): ?

King (12:39 p.m.): maybe its too much.

Montgomery (12:44 p.m.): Come see me now at the office.

(12:50 p.m.) Please!

King (12:55 p.m.): how long do u have?

Montgomery (12:59 p.m.): Nm*. I better work. Tomorrow morn?

(*Nevermind)

King (1 p.m.): i can't do tom.

Montgomery at 1:04 p.m.): Man!

King (1:04 p.m.): im on tyvola. Do u have a few min?

Montgomery (1:08 p.m.): Come on!

King (1:08 p.m.): im leaving cokesbury. 5 or 20 min.

Montgomery (1:12 p.m.): Cool.

King (1:26 p.m.): here.

Montgomery (1:40 p.m.): Where? Come in. Hurry!

King (1:39 p.m.): whos the man that just left?

Montgomery (1:44 p.m.): Come in.

King (3:27 p.m.): thanks. sometimes I get so confused.

Montgomery (4:09 p.m.): Don't.

King (4:07 p.m.): will you be in the office in the morning?

Montgomery (4:11 p.m.): Yep.

King (4:10 p.m.): want me to call?

Montgomery (4:29 p.m.): Yep.

King (6:03 p.m.): are you there?

November 23, 2010

Montgomery (7:28 a.m.): No.

King (7:28 a.m.): can I call you?

Montgomery (7:33 a.m.): 9

King (7:32 a.m.): i can't do 9. its ok if not.

(7:45 a.m.): nm.

(12:43 p.m.): I hope you have lots of fun at the parade!

Montgomery (12:48 p.m.): U2

King (12:56 p.m.): I'm not going to a parade.

Montgomery (1:09 p.m.): Bummer. Never?

King (1:13 p.m. 4th of july but not today.

Montgomery (1:24 p.m.): O

King (1:29 p.m.): but i do love parades!

Wednesday, Nov. 24, 2010

Montgomery (3:34 p.m.): At the beach, missing you.

Thursday, Nov. 25, 2010

King (8:02 a.m.): its not whats in your pocket that makes you thankful, its whats in your heart....happy tgiving!

Montgomery (8:10 a.m.): Hmmm...

King (8:11 a.m.): pretty sunrise.

Montgomery (8:27 a.m.): Thanks. Change your name again. I like Peggy Siden.

King (8:30 a.m.): say something so I know this is you.

Montgomery (8:35 a.m.): Love your ears!

King (8:39 a.m.): whos peggy siden?

Montgomery (12:16 p.m.): She lives in my head.

King (5:14 p.m.): 14

Saturday, November 27, 2010

King (8:07 a.m.): Did you forget?

Montgomery (1:27 p.m.): Forget what?

King (5:38 p.m.): Hope you're having fun. Good weather?

November 28, 2010

Montgomery (6:54 a.m. Very cold.

King (8:20 a.m.): well shucks. when do you come home?

Montgomery (9:01 a.m.): Now.

King (10:10 a.m.): Are you driving?

(4:17 p.m.): imbtfttbo.

Montgomery (4:56 p.m.): Home.

King (6:03 p.m.): what time should i call?

Monday, Nov. 29, 2010

Montgomery (7:31 a.m.): Now.

King (7:41 a.m.): I tried.

(8:20 a.m.): 22 baby

Montgomery (8:26 a.m.): Man!

King (8:39 a.m.): yep! i might be able to do today if thats better. just let me know your schedule.

(11:13 a.m.): don't use that phone please. im here.

(11:42 a.m.): how long do you have?

(12:35 p.m.): here.

(4:53 a.m.): Did you ever receive the emails? Enjoyed the talk today.

Wednesday, Dec. 1, 2010

King (7:37 a.m.): hope you have a good trip. how did you have my number to call yesterday?

Montgomery (8:37 a.m.): At the airport now. The number was in my “previous” calls, I think. Next time we talk, I'll be two hours behind you. Want to know anything that's gonna happen before it happens?

King (9:17 a.m.): i want to know it all before it happens! im excited for you. be open!

Montgomery (9:22 a.m.): Open to what?

King (9:30 a.m.): life. :)

Montgomery (1:20 p.m.): Hmmm. We have landed.

King (1:40 p.m.): nothing to hmmm about. glad you're there safe. did you get patted down?

Montgomery (1:45 p.m.): I got patted down Monday.

King (3:28 p.m.): hmmm.

Montgomery at 4:28 p.m.): You got that right!

King (5:23 p.m.): having fun?

Montgomery (5:27 p.m.): Not yet.

King (5:36: why not? i already miss home.

Montgomery (5:44 p.m.): You are not here.

King (6:40 p.m.): I bet youre closer to the moon.

Montgomery (6:52 p.m.): Agreed.

King (3:57 p.m.): everything is good. no worries.

Thursday, Dec. 2, 2010

King (7:37 a.m.): there?

Montgomery (10:41 a.m.): It was GREAT to hear your voice. What are we going to do?

King (10:42 a.m.): When?

Montgomery (10:52 a.m.): Life.

King (11:11 a.m.): be in the now. we'll figure it out.

Montgomery (11:28 a.m.): I hope so. But I like the now. I like you.

King (11:49 a.m.): You know what Bob says …

Montgomery (11:58 a.m.): eigba?

King (12:01 p.m.): yeah. And I was thinking...some people never find home.

Montgomery (12:07 p.m.): It really feels like home.

King (1:44 p.m.): I know.

(3:02 p.m.): shelter.

Montgomery (3:22 p.m.): Can you give me shelter?

King (3:56 p.m.): listen to shelter by ray lamontagne.

(4:20 p.m.): and i hope.

Montgomery (4:27 p.m.): K.

King (4:49 p.m.): Have a great night! Look for the moon. waning crescent.

Montgomery (5:10 p.m.) Its not waning here. Its perfectly clear. Are you part Japanese?

King (5:08 p.m.): hehehe.

(7:06 p.m.): to love is to recognize yourself if another...ekhart tolle

Montgomery (8:28 p.m.): Cool name.

King (8:28 p.m.): he's very cool.

Montgomery (10:21 p.m.): Call me.

Friday, Dec. 3, 2010

King (7:31 a.m.): Everything ok? Let me know when you're up.

Montgomery (7:53 a.m.): Now.

King (9:46 a.m.): You know the answer to that question, don't you?

Montgomery (9:52 a.m.): Yes. And it is so weird. I mean what has it been, 25 years?

King (10:07 a.m.): It never seemed that important. I'm weird.

Montgomery (10:13 a.m.): And now?

King (11:09 a.m.): It seems important right NOW!

Montgomery (11:14 a.m.): So we would if I was there?

King (11:12 a.m.): now.

Montgomery (11: 18 a.m.): Man. I thought I was the only one who was like that. Wow.

King (11:19 a.m.): the only one in the whole world?

Montgomery (11:26 a.m.): Yeah. Now I guess there are two of us.

King (11:45 a.m.): You've created a monster! haha

Montgomery (11:54 a.m.): So glad you like it. Are you still wanting it?

King (1:30 p.m.): Yes.

Montgomery (1:40 p.m.): Even now? That would be good.

King (2:03 p.m.): That would be very good. What seminar are you in?

Montgomery (2:24 p.m.): Criminals re-entering the community. Can you fly out here?

King (2:31 p.m.): I wish! Never been there.

Montgomery (2:36 p.m.): Come on! Spend tonight.

King (2:42 p.m.): When's lunch?

Montgomery (2:52): No lunch today. I had a good breakfast. Hey, I just drank a bottle of water. No Sun-Drop or Cheerwine in Colorado.

King (2:51 p.m.): Nice! Wasn't that bad, was it?

(3:03 p.m.): I meant to tell you Hannah sent in her application to CIT. Isn't that weird?

Montgomery (3:06 p.m.): I'd rather have a SD, CW, or both.

Montgomery (3:13 p.m.): Very. But I guess no weirder than my knees killing me and my hemorrhoid flareup.

King (3:13 p.m.): The water will help if you keep it up! I still have some things on my mind.

Montgomery (3:23 p.m.): Water helps you “keep it up”?

King (3:23 p.m.): When do you get out?

Montgomery (3:36 p.m.): 4.

King (3:43 p.m.): can i call you in the morning?

Montgomery (3:49 p.m.): Sooner.

King (3:47 p.m.): When?

Montgomery (3:54 p.m.): This afternoon.

King: What time?

Montgomery (4:04 p.m.): 3 for me, 5 for you.

King (5:07 p.m.): there?

Montgomery (6:03 p.m.): Yup

King (6:02 a.m.): i tried at 5.

(7:40 p.m. I feel dizzy.

Montgomery (7:57 p.m.): Good. Now lay back and think of me. Chris doesn't know what he is missing. I do.

King (8:39 p.m.): shelter.

Montgomery (8:44 p.m.): Hitting downtown. Wish you were here.

King (8:53 p.m.): one day?

Montgomery (8:58 p.m.): You bet!

(9:04 p.m.): Let's move to Colorado.

King (9:52 p.m.): No ocean?

Montgomery (10:03 p.m.): California?

Saturday, Dec. 4, 2010

King (9:29 a.m.): Sorry I woke you up but not really.

Montgomery (11:05 a.m.): Me either.

(11:08 a.m.): Just met Jeb. Photo op later.

King (11:34 a.m.): have you heard him speak? can't wait to see the pic.

Montgomery (12:24 p.m.): No pic. But I'm not too upset about it. I like W. better.

King (12:43 p.m.): yeah...w is the best!

Montgomery (12:51 p.m.): Dummyhead.

King (12:59 p.m.): Who w? I guess you're right.

Montgomery (1:04 p.m.): Funny. Very funny.

King (1:04 p.m.): Just teasing...but I think you're a lib at heart

Montgomery (1:10 p.m.): Why would I wanna help somebody?

King (1:14 p.m.): Not sure...but you do!

Montgomery (1:35 p.m.): Naw.

King (2:03 p.m.): You're missing the snow!

Montgomery (2:11 p.m.): Crazy. It's sunny and 50ish here.

(2:16 p.m.): What would you do to make my knees feel better?

King (2:37 p.m.): when do you have the pain? all the time or when your walking a lot?

Montgomery (2:45 p.m.): There you go being an expert...

King (2:43 p.m.): you better be nice to me.

Montgomery (2:53 p.m.): I took 4 ibuprofen?

King (2:51 p.m.): you sounded sorta like ronald reagan with that “there you go again..”

Montgomery (3:03 p.m.): Did he say that? Yeah, I think he did. He also said, “well...”

King (3 p.m.): I like him.

Montgomery (3:05 p.m.): Really? Well that makes no sense.

King (3:11 p.m.): he had principles that he believed in. i doubt the repub party today would even accept him.

Mongomery (3:16 p.m.): Wow. Well said. I will have to think about that. Pretty good for a flowerchild.

King (3:16 p.m.): I bet you won't have to think too hard about it! flowerchildren are people too!

Montgomery (3:12 p.m.): I love you and promise we will be together without hurting anyone.

King (3:14 p.m.): hope so.

Montgomery (3:23 p.m.): Know so.

(3:32 p.m.): I want to cover you in rose petals.

King (3:39 p.m.): email is making me nervous.

(3:50 p.m.): Are you out of your seminar?

Montgomery (3:56 p.m.): Call.

King (4 p.m.): 15 or 20 min ok?

Montgomery (5:40 p.m.): Now.

King (5:44 p.m.): Can't now. Morning?

Montgomery (5:54 p.m.): Yep.

King (5:59 p.m.): Good day?

Montgomery (6:07 p.m.): Yep.

King (6:04 p.m.): What time do you want your wake up call?

Montgomery (6:24 p.m.): Early, so we can talk longer.

King (7:23 p.m. knees better?

Montgomery (7:39 p.m.): Yep.

King (8:03 p.m.): good. i need a daisy bumper sticker.

Montgomery (8:07 p.m.): Have you checked online?

Sunday, Dec. 5, 2010

King (7:53 a.m.): dizzy

Montgomery (9:05 a.m.): :)

King (10:41 a.m.): let me know when you land.

Montgomery (12:13 p.m.): K

(4:06 p.m.): Landed.

King (5:54 p.m.): good.

Monday, Dec. 6, 2010

Montgomery (10:05 a.m.): Where are you?

King (10:04 a.m.): right here waiting to hear from you.

Montgomery (10:21 a.m.): Gr8! Now I'm gonna work. For real this time. Will e-mail you tomorrow about this week.

King (10:35 a.m.): ok. sometimes i like it when youre the one who stays in touch. :)

Montgomery (10:45 a.m.): I knew that's what you were doing!

King (11:42 a.m.): nah. you don't know what i'm doing.

Montgomery (12:15 p.m.): Yes I do.

(2:07 p.m.): Will be somewhere? In Charlotte tomorrow afternoon.

King (2:07 p.m.): what time?

Montgomery (2:11 p.m.): My appointment is at three.

King (2:09 p.m.): with who?

Montgomery (2:15 p.m.): CATS.

King (2:14 p.m.): I'm ok after 1 tomorrow. I'll know about Friday by tomorrow am.

Montgomery (2:22 p.m.): Kewl.

King (2:21 p.m.): what do you have before cats?

Montgomery (2:35 p.m.): Don't know yet, but banking on a visit with you.

King (5:13 p.m.): That's what you're banking on, huh?

(8:39 p.m.): icwtkyft*.

(*i can't wait to kiss you full time.)

Tuesday, Dec. 7, 2010

Montgomery (12:47 p.m.): Help!

King (12:47 p.m.): where are you?

Montgomery (12:54 p.m.): Tryon. Call.

King (2:58 p.m.): did you find it?

Montgomery (3:07 p.m.): Good.

King (3:05 p.m.): mya.

Montgomery (4 p.m.): U2

King (5:13 p.m.): thanks for the gift.

Montgomery (5:18 p.m.): Was just thinking of it... I swear, wish I could give you more.

King (5:30 p.m.): don't need more...i promise. Can you do sort of early fri?

Montgomery (5:44 p.m.): Maybe. Guitar shop asked me to work.

King (5:48 p.m.): what time are you working?

Montgomery (6:25 p.m.): TBA

King (6:24 p.m.): i can do thurs or fri next week... no worries...

Montgomery (6:31 p.m.): K

King (6:42 p.m.): im freezing! where are you?

Montgomery (7:02 p.m.): 8th Grade Band Concert. But everything is groovy. EVERYTHING.

King (7:02 p.m.): why is it so cold. im moving south.

Montgomery (7:07 p.m.): Cuba. Carmen Miranda, here I come!

King (7:05 p.m.): carmen miranda?

Montgomery (7:10 p.m.): Google her.

King (7:08 p.m.): i know who she is silly. what about me?

Montgomery (7:18 p.m.): ?

King (7:24 p.m.): nm. want me to call tomorrow?

Montgomery (7:38 p.m.): YES!

King (7:36 p.m.): what's your schedule?

Wednesday, Dec. 8, 2010

King (2:58 p.m.): did you find out about fri?

Montgomery (3:44 p.m.): Not yet.

King (4:19 p.m.): you liked being in the store?

Montgomery (4:26 p.m.): ABSOLUTELY!

King: because you like being in public?

Montgomery (4:31 p.m.): WITH YOU.....