To Mayor Pam Miller’s surprise, council member Chuck Ellinger received 47 percent of the votes in the Lexington/Fayette Urban County Government primary on May 26th. Armchair pundits and commentators all seemed to be surprised at Mayor Miller’s wimpy showing and Chuck Ellinger’s wide margins. Upon analysis and with the benefit of hindsight, perhaps the mayor’s vote deficiency could have been forecast.

Before starting her new administration, the mayor and some of her lame duck council members increased payroll and business taxes by 25 percent. Even with huge budget surpluses during the past four years, high employment levels and a boom economy, only one half of the tax increase has been rolled back.

During the mayor’s five years at the helm, she has rarely taken a strong position on issues facing the community. Her decision not to take a leadership role and espouse a political philosophy means that she has no hard base of political constituency. Great political leaders (FDR, Truman, Reagan, Goldwater, Gingrich, Ted Kennedy) stood for something. When election days came, their supporters got out and voted. This does not appear to be the case for Mayor Miller.

Because Mayor Miller has projected a low profile leadership role, voters don’t know or perhaps misinterpret what she stands for in many areas: No growth or pro growth; lower or higher taxes; empire building or privatization of government; expansion or status quo of the urban service area; promoting regional road systems to reduce traffic in Fayette County or advocating nothing; for or against the environmental impact study for Blue Grass Airport; protecting the integrity of neighborhoods or allowing incompatible land uses.

Since neither the business community nor neighborhood leaders are sure about Pam Miller, they voted for a new leader in the primary— Chuck Ellinger.

How can Pam Miller or Chuck Ellinger win the general election? Both need to run an issues-oriented campaign to set out their positions on the wonderful opportunities available to our community. The failure of one candidate to run on the issues will mean their opponent will win. For neither to run on the issues will be a loss for our community.