I am a voter in District 7. Kyle Holden has provided a detailed yet lengthy explanation of the annexation issue in District 7. And he is correct in that the issue has spawned a great deal of debate, back-and-forth, and even name calling (i.e. Sabrena supporters and campaign manager shouting “liar” at Phil Smartt during the East Hamilton debate). However, Mr. Holden has missed the point in my opinion. The only reason we are talking about this issue is because of the claim made by Sabrena Turner – that she was the “ONLY candidate that fought annexation.” She has staked her entire campaign on this issue – just drive in the District and you’ll notice the hideous bright blue signs that say as much.
When the city accuses Phil Smartt of creating a "poison pill" to thwart annexation plans, I'd say that qualifies as "fighting annexation." Sadly, it seems clear that Ms. Turner doesn’t have the courage to admit the truth. Why let the facts ruin a good political argument? But I hope the voters in District 7 will not be fooled. Mr. Smartt clearly played an important role in the fight. Now, can we please take down the bright blue signs? It’s ruining my view of Spring.
W. Scott Ray