I got approached last week at a "Future of Fishers" informational meeting at Fishers Town Hall by a couple of Republicans who said they heard a rumor that the only reason I was pushing for Fishers to be a City with an elected Mayor was so that I could run for Mayor myself.
My immediate reaction? I started laughing. Hard. When I composed myself, I finally gave them the straight answer, which is, I found that flattering, but no, I have no interest in running for Mayor of Fishers.
Reasons? Plenty. First, whomever the first Mayor of Fishers is, will need more patience than I possess. It will be a job for someone who has the patience of Job. Second, I have a VERY full-time job as a practicing attorney, and I intend to retire from that sooner or later. Third, I am a Democrat in a community where no Democrat gets over 40% of the vote, so it would be extraordinarily unlikely that I could be elected, as there are those who would not vote for a Democrat no matter what.
My interest is purely in making the government of Fishers more representative and responsive to the citizens, and better in other ways, such as economic development. I strongly believe that the best way to do this is by Fishers becoming a real city, with a mayor elected by the people, not appointed by the council. I continue to be involved with CityYes (www.CityYes.org) and urge all Fishers residents to support that cause.
So if you are a Fishers resident, please vote NO on Question #1 on the November ballot, the "hybrid/merger/sham city" reorganization, and YES on Question #2, for Fishers to become a REAL City with real representative government.
Questions? Email CityYes at firstname.lastname@example.org, or me at Greg@GregPurvis.com.