City Council candidate Allan Polak (below right) called a statement by councilman Mike Woodard "a complete lie" during a candidates' forum Tuesday night.
The accusation came after Woodard told Polak a statement he had made was "incorrect." Woodard did not respond to Polak's "lie" statement. Woodard and Polak are opponents for the City Council's Ward 3 seat in next Tuesday's election.
Their exchange came after Polak revealed what he called "a gaping hole in the City’s Electronic Records Retention practices" in his opening statement at the forum, sponsored by the Black Law Students Association of the N.C. Central University Law School.
In particular, the "hole" was in council members' email records.
Under city and state law, city officials' email concerning city business is public information, available for any citizen to see. Last week, Polak asked the city clerk for Woodard's records for October 2008. The record included 118 emails Woodard received, but none he had sent.
Polak found the same results for September 2008. When he requested another council member's record, he found emails sent, but none received.
In a prepared statement read at the forum, Polak suggested Woodard (left) might have answered his emails from a personal account, a practice city policy discourages.
"Mr. Woodard should have known better," Polak said.
"In fact, I do," Woodard said, and read an email he sent the city attorney, city clerk and information services director on Friday, after seeing Polok's request and the record provided to him. Council members are routinely notified whenever their email records are requested, Woodard said after the forum; one reason is, they have to provide a password for the clerk to access their records.
Woodard's email expressed his own surprise at the absense of sent messages. "I'm confident something has been overlooked," he wrote. "Please review the system again."
Polak then said Woodard sent his email only "because in fact I raised the issue and I discovered the issue. And he was alerted either by the city clerk’s office or someone at city hall. He was told."
Woodard started to interrupt, but Polak continued,
"Mr. Woodard, you mentioned to me yesterday -- "
Woodard: "No."
Polak: " -- that you knew I had reveiwed your emails. How were you aware of that? How were you aware of that? You mentioned to me while we were outside -- "
Woodard: "You're incorrect."
Polak: "That is a complete lie. Yesterday, when we were outside of Duke University, Mr. Woodard specifically stated to me in front of Mr. Clement that he knew that I had reviewed his emails. He said this to me yesterday in front of Duke University as we went to enter the [candidates'] forum.
"That's unbelievable, sir."
Woodard did not reply, but, responding to a question from the audience later during the forum, said he believes the problem is "a technical issue that can be easily fixed" and that he would be willing to share the sent emails once the records of them are located.
Polak said, in his statement, that his discovery of the missing records, consultation with the city clerk and attorney and suggestions for solving the problem demonstrated "is the type of experience and public advocacy that I would bring to City Council."
