We agree with the County Commissioners. It is time to move forward. We need to put the Kelly Ewoldt situation behind us.

The Paper has requested and received multiple emails to and from some elected officials and county employees. After reading them, it is obvious there is nothing in them that rises (or falls) to the level of the Assessor's emails. In fact, with one exception, all were routine and business like. The lone exception? Assessor Ewoldt had an email to a Republican group about an upcoming meeting in her office. Although there is nothing criminal, it would seem another clear abuse of county policy.

The Paper feels that it is important the public knows there is no rampant abuse elsewhere in the courthouse.

At the end of the day, whether voters do anything about the Assessor and her emails is a call only the voters can and should make.

It is worth note that there is much difference in the way two communities have treated the participants in this matter. Madison County Republican Party officials, the media and member of the community have called for Councilman David McCartney's resignation. Montgomery County Republican Party officials and the media have either been in support of or urged caution before final judgments were made about Ewoldt.

What's the difference? It could be that McCartney hid and made flimsy excuses. Ewoldt, to her credit, may have waited a bit long to comment, but when she did, she accepted responsibility and apologized.

Too little too late?

We believe that Ewoldt should think long and hard before deciding on whether to run for re-election when her current term expires. By all accounts, the performance of the Assessor's office has risen under her leadership. But very little of the mess that came to light would have been acceptable for continued employment in most private companies. Her salary of more than $40,000 and the trust the taxpayers gave her mean that she should be held to a standard that includes job duties and personal conduct as well. In that respect, Ewoldt repeatedly decided to spend time on her own agenda and not on the duties of the office. From all evidence that we examined, the same work habits do not apply to her peers in the courthouse. We believe that statement says a great deal.

Agree or disagree?

Send your thoughts to fphillips@thepaper24-7.com.