logo
Q&A: New Charlotte councilman on ‘Tariq-gate' and hard-to-measure skill in CMPD chief

Q&A: New Charlotte councilman on ‘Tariq-gate' and hard-to-measure skill in CMPD chief

Yahoo09-06-2025
The Charlotte City Council's newest member is no stranger to local politics, but he's coming back on board at a chaotic time in local government.
Republican Edwin Peacock III took office in early June to finish out the final term of Tariq Bokhari, who stepped down to take a job in the Trump administration. Peacock, who previously served two terms as an at-large council member and ran for mayor, will represent south Charlotte's District 6 until December.
Mayor Vi Lyles broke a 5-5 tie among council members to appoint Peacock over Tariq Bokhari's wife, Krista Bokhari, who sharply criticized the city's handling of police chief Johnny Jennings' exit. Jennings' departure and a six-figure separation deal allegedly stemmed from conflict with Tariq Bokhari. Peacock also came in just as fellow council member Tiawana Brown was indicted on federal fraud charges.
Though he'll only be in office for about six months, Peacock is optimistic he can foster better relationships among council members and help with Charlotte's plan to overhaul the region's transportation system.
He talked to The Charlotte Observer about his priorities, his take on the transit plan, recent turmoil and whether he'll weigh in on the District 6 election later this year. This conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
Question: This is not your first time in office, and I know your family has a little bit of a political legacy, too. Tell me a little bit about that and how you got involved in local politics originally.
Answer: My dad, Ed, served on the Mecklenburg Board of County Commissioners from 1974 to 1980. He was the chair of the board from 1979 to 1980. He won as a Republican a few months after Watergate. So I was 4 years old, and I followed my dad around. I did some of the door knocking for him as a kid. You just never know what example is being set for you in those very moments. And then in 1981, he joined the Charlotte City Council. Then in 1983, he ran for mayor, and lost to a mayor named Harvey Gantt. He thinks it still holds that percentage wise, it was the highest turnout that we've seen in a Charlotte mayoral race. It was a very transformative race, and changed, obviously, our whole family's life. I was a young man at that time and influenced by that experience.
Fast forward to me in 2007, and I just sort of knew rule one in politics is you want to run for a seat when there's a vacant one. So I jumped on the City Council and ran in my first race in 2007. Council member Pat Mumford had announced that he was not going to run again. Mayor Pat McCrory was in place. I admired and liked him, and saw an opportunity. I won my first election by, I want to say, 370 votes in an at-large race, and got really lucky. That put me on for the next two years. Then Mayor McCrory was out: he went to run for governor, and he lost. Mayor Anthony Foxx was in, and I served one term with him.
And then in 2011, not really massive issues on the ballot, but the Democratic Party was getting the band warmed up for 2012 for President Barack Obama's reelection. And we later learned that the operatives with Obama's team were very good at mobilizing in small elections, and they were trying to test strategy. Raleigh, Phoenix, Charlotte were kind of on their hit list, and they swept. I was on that down ticket and got taken off the City Council. And it was a bit of a surprise, but I was like, 'Hey, things happen for a reason.'
Q: What made now the right time to come back?
A: A vacancy (laughs) I'm in a different phase of my life where my wife and I have kids that are out of the nest for the most part, in college. So I just knew that six months is doable. I dove in, and obviously I also knew that it's going to be a really short campaign, because I need to focus on only 11 people, the council members and the mayor. I've never really talked to the mayor, but I've known her for a while, and I'm most appreciative for her tie-breaking vote.
Q: It's such a short stint, just six months. What's the strategy there? What's your plan to make the most of that time?
A: I think what compelled me to submit my application had a lot to do with what I noticed at the time, which was obviously some of the bad behavior that kind of led to current situations.
The priority in six months — I'm just talking about my role on the board — is just hopefully to bring some element of bridge-building and sort of hopefully relationship-forming element to what I see as a divided board. They have, like all boards, their own divisions and factions. And I'm noticing that those are a little bit stronger than I thought.
Then, depending on what comes out of Raleigh on the transportation side, that did interest me as well. In 2007 when I ran, we had a ballot initiative to remove the sales tax, the half cent that had been on since 1997. A group of conservatives thought this light rail thing was a boondoggle, and they wanted to have it repealed. And so the community kind of stood at attention and said, 'No, we need to keep the half cent going.' And as a result, it became the issue of the race.
Just very recently, I was asked to moderate a panel with former Gov. McCrory, who was mayor then. You really sort of felt it, at least in my stance, that I can't believe how much time has passed. You're sitting here going, it's been 18 years since that moment, and now we get a chance to see the impacts of our decision to keep the half cent. Then the question is, if we put another cent on, how are we going to get that through?
I'm growing to be skeptical right now about whether the public has got a whole lot of appetite to vote positively for it. It's something we already have. And so trying to sell them on the need, I just don't think the community is really behind it right now. We'll see, but we're not talking about it. So I thought, I could be a part of that. I can help the public to understand that when you make a decision today, it's going to impact you 25 years from now. I'm witnessing it, and I'm going, 'Hey, it's real.'
Q: There's been a lot of talk with the transit bill about the whole 'great state of Mecklenburg' thing and the fact that it's a very Democratic City Council and a very Republican state legislature. The issues that creates, and the need for people like yourself, who are Republicans from Charlotte, to maybe sort of step up and do some lobbying. Is that something you're on board with?
A: Absolutely. I have some relationships in Raleigh. They're familiar with me, and I might be familiar with a few of them. I don't know state House Speaker Destin Hall. I don't know state Senate leader Phil Berger. But I feel like obviously that's an advantage when you're in their party. They don't look at me suspect. They look at Mecklenburg suspect. I think that obviously helps.
Charlotte City Councilman Ed Driggs has really developed the relationships up there, and he knew that's a very important part of what you're doing on council. And when Mayor Lyles got on board to have the Republican National Convention brought here in 2020, she took a lot of heat for that, but she made what I call a Charlotte decision. That really helped her, and it engendered her to Raleigh. Raleigh didn't view her as an enemy.
Q: Are there any other particular policy issues that you're passionate about?
A: I've always been passionate about public safety, and I think that we're also at an intersection there that I didn't anticipate until I got here. We've got what I'm now calling the twin towers, Tariq-gate and Tiawana-gate. The second one has its own separate track, but everything related to Tariq, that's what I'm stepping into. That obviously connects to public safety and what will happen with the beginning of the search for a new police chief. I'm interested in that. I was on council when we hired police chief Rodney Monroe, so I watched that process. It's not me that's making the hire, but you're a part of the selection process.
Q: What are some qualities you'd like to see in a new police chief?
A: A good communicator. The respect of his peers, meaning that he's obviously walked the very beat that they walk.
The other thing, too, is that he needs to recognize that you've got to cover the proactive side of law enforcement and the reactive side of law enforcement. Quite frankly, one of the skills that's really hard to measure as a council is that first one, which is what I consider to be a lot of the soft skills of community building. That is a really important role that a police chief plays. And that always comes into light if we have a very serious incident. You all of a sudden get a chance to see how he's going to make people feel on camera. That's not necessarily something that we can hire for, but you've definitely got to understand what their background has been.
Q: As you alluded to, it's been a bit of a chaotic stretch for the council as a whole, a lot of changes, a lot of controversies. What has it been like stepping into the middle of that? And how are you navigating all of that swirling around you as the new-old kid on the block?
A: I've been in controversies like this before. You've got to take the long view. You've also got to recognize when you've got a board member who's been indicted, and you've got sort of the residue that comes from inappropriate behavior by a previous board member, you have to move forward. You have to look to find ways to just put it behind you and realize that you're going to need to work together.
I tried to stress, even in the very first time that I spoke in front of the council, people are going to remember how you made them feel as a board member. And we tend to forget that. They tend to get really narrowly focused as a board member, and you don't realize you're gonna probably need the member you have something that you're really angry about with right now. You're gonna need them three months from now.
Q: You've said that you don't plan to run for a full term later this year. The punditry and the people like me out there are expecting a pretty crowded field for District 6. It's really one of the few competitive races in the general election left. Any thoughts yet on whether you'll make an endorsement in the primary, or are you just going to keep your oar out of the water?
A: In Republican primaries, my stance has always been to not make an endorsement, primarily because I think it's unfair to the members of my party to do that. I've made some exceptions before when I've got a particularly close relationship with somebody, but I try to stay out of endorsements. I also just believe that it's really hard to correlate whether an endorsement really makes a difference.
This is going to be a competitive race in District 6. I predict somewhere between four to eight candidates will run for it. District races have become ridiculously expensive, so you have to have somebody who knows how to raise money, somebody who knows how to do a ground game.
I'm curious how the Democratic Party will look at this. Do they have a candidate ready to go? Will they pick up Stephanie Hand again? I don't know her, but she came very close to beating Tariq. You don't want a 10-1 city council. That could very much happen. So I think that's really where Charlotte needs to recognize we're on an imbalanced path right now. If there's anything I've been preaching for its good government and to see a more balanced dynamic on the council. Right now, I'm seeing the mistake of having a one-party council.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Musk vows to start a third party. Funding's no issue, but there are others.
Musk vows to start a third party. Funding's no issue, but there are others.

Boston Globe

time16 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Musk vows to start a third party. Funding's no issue, but there are others.

Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Even some of Musk's own supporters have expressed doubts about the direction he now plans to take, preferring that he stay focused on the business ideas that fueled his net worth of roughly $400 billion. Advertisement But as his improbable bid to buy Twitter and front-and-center role in the 2024 election showed, Musk has defied expectations before. If nothing else, he could make life difficult for lawmakers he says have reneged on their promise to cut spending. Advertisement 'Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!' Musk wrote on X, the social media platform he bought when it was still named Twitter, this week. 'And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth.' Musk, who didn't respond to a request for comment, has already identified his next target: the reelection campaign of Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), who opposes Trump's signature legislative package. Urged to support Massie by former GOP congressman Justin Amash, a Trump foe who declared himself an independent in a 2019 op-ed decrying the two-party system as an 'existential threat,' Musk replied, 'I will.' Representative Thomas Massie speaks to the media following a vote to stop a government shutdown at the Capitol on March 11. Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post Massie did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday about Musk starting a third party, but he posted a Fox News story about the chief executive's plans to donate to his campaign. 'An interesting thing just happened,' Massie wrote on X. With Trump already working to defeat Massie next year, the race in northern Kentucky appears to be the first to pit the two billionaires against each other. On Capitol Hill, where the Senate passed the massive tax and spending bill Tuesday afternoon, there were few signs of alarm about Musk. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma), when asked by reporters Monday evening about Musk's threats to punish Republicans who vote for Trump's plan, said the billionaire is not top of mind at the Capitol. 'Doesn't matter, doesn't matter at all, no. It's not even been a conversation of ours,' he said. 'I mean, if we ran every time someone said something about our election, we'd live in fear the whole time.' Advertisement Senator Markwayne Mullin bounces a rubber ball through the Ohio Clock Corridor on Monday, on Capitol Hill. Tom Brenner/For The Washington Post Unless that someone is Trump. Two Republican lawmakers who have been at odds with Trump both said in rapid succession this week that they would not seek reelection. Rep. Don Bacon (Nebraska), who has taken issue with Trump's tariffs and policy toward Russia, announced his retirement Monday. The day before, Sen. Thom Tillis (North Carolina) said he would not seek a third term after Trump vowed to punish him for opposing his legislative package. That leaves Massie as one of the only points of Republican resistance in Congress to Trump's agenda. Musk's decision to cast himself as a potential third-party leader raises questions about his political vision. It has just been in the last few years that he has evolved from Democratic-leaning Trump critic to staunchly Republican Trump acolyte. Trump allies mocked his latest incarnation. 'I think it's the ketamine talking in the middle of the night,' said Trump pollster Jim McLaughlin, referring to media reports about Musk's drug use that he has denied. 'Trump is the Republican Party right now. He is the conservative movement. There's not a hankering for a third party with Elon Musk.' A Gallup poll last year found that 58 percent of U.S. adults agree that a third party is needed in the U.S. because the Republican and Democratic parties 'do such a poor job' of representing the American people. Support for a third party has averaged 56 percent since 2003, according to Gallup. History shows that third-party candidates are rarely victorious. Ross Perot, one of the most successful independent candidates for president in American history, received about 19 percent of the popular vote and no electoral college votes. Advertisement 'Third parties are traditionally spoilers or wasted votes,' said Lee Drutman, senior fellow at the New America think tank. 'But if Musk's goal is to cause chaos and make a point and disrupt, it gets a lot easier.' Ralph Nader's presidential bid in 2000 was a classic example of a disruptive campaign, Drutman said, contributing to an outcome so close that Republican George W. Bush prevailed over Democrat Al Gore only after the Supreme Court weighed in. Ralph Nader acknowledges his mother at an event at the National Press Club before watching the election night voting unfold. Lucian Perkins/TWP The trend in the U.S. toward increased political polarization also makes it more difficult for third-party candidates, Drutman said. When Perot ran in 1992, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush were both running as centrists, allowing Perot to argue that there wasn't much daylight between the two major parties. By contrast, the differences between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump in the 2024 election were much more stark. America's political diversity also complicates matters, Drutman said. 'If there clearly was a party in the center that was more popular than the Democrats or the Republicans, then someone would have organized it by now,' he said. 'It's not like we've just been waiting for Elon Musk to show up.' Musk entered politics in earnest during the 2024 presidential election. Beyond his massive financial investment, Musk frequently appeared alongside Trump at rallies and cheered him on over X. But since Trump's win, Musk's experience in politics has been turbulent. Earlier this year, the billionaire and groups affiliated with him donated more than $20 million in a bid to help conservatives take control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. In the final stretch of the campaign, Musk drew derision for wearing a foam cheesehead at a town hall and for directing his America PAC to pay registered voters for signing petitions. A couple of voters won $1 million prizes. Advertisement But even with the race flooded with Musk's cash, the conservative judicial candidate — whom Trump also endorsed — lost by a wide margin in April. Musk's personal presence in the race did his candidate harm, said Barry Burden, director of the University of Wisconsin's Elections Research Center. Conservative voters appreciated Musk's money, but that wasn't enough to overcome negative perceptions of an ultra-wealthy outsider injecting himself into the state's politics, Burden said, adding that Musk's presence galvanized greater liberal turnout. 'A new party is going to benefit most from Musk if they can draw on his resources but keep him in the background,' Burden said. 'And if he can portray himself as an innovator and a tech entrepreneur — and somebody who is really contributing to the American economy and funding this new operation without being its front person — I think that's probably going to lead to the most success.' Musk floated his idea of a new party nearly one month ago on June 5, after days of criticizing the massive GOP tax bill as a measure that would burden the country with 'crushingly unsustainable debt.' 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' Musk wrote, along with a poll. Since then, Musk has regularly posted about starting a new party and going after lawmakers who vote for the spending bill. 'If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day,' Musk wrote Monday. Advertisement A person who has served as a sounding board for Musk, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter, questioned Musk's ultimate strategy in undermining a party he had hoisted to victory beyond wanting 'to be in the driver's seat.' 'I agree our government is broken, but it's a tougher problem to fix than landing a rocket,' the person said. Paul Kane contributed to this report.

House members in mad scramble back to DC to vote on Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' after heading home for July 4
House members in mad scramble back to DC to vote on Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' after heading home for July 4

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

House members in mad scramble back to DC to vote on Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' after heading home for July 4

Members of the House of Representatives from both parties were forced to return to Washington, D.C. to vote on President Donald Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' after the Senate passed it, Politico reported. With Trump exerting great pressure on Speaker Mike Johnson to get the bill to his desk for a signing before the July 4 holiday, the House plans to vote on the bill as soon as possible. That triggered a mad dash back to the nation's capital and comes amid a Republican rift over the amended bill — which would force cuts to Medicaid and makes states shoulder more of the cost for food assistance while extending the 2017 tax cuts Trump signed. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace posted that she and her team would travel back from South Carolina by van. We have secured a van for a DC road trip tonight to make it in time for votes on BBB tomorrow. Hoah! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 — Nancy Mace (@NancyMace) July 1, 2025 'We have secured a van for a DC road trip tonight to make it in time for votes on BBB tomorrow,' Mace posted. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who is running for Illinois' open Senate seat, hosted a Zoom town hall as he drove 14 hours to Washington after his flight was canceled. We made it. Drove overnight from IL to vote NO on this Large Lousy Law. — Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (@CongressmanRaja) July 2, 2025 'We made it,' he said. 'Drove overnight from IL to vote NO on this Large Lousy Law.' By coincidence, Rep. Derek Tran of California wound up stranded in the Pittsburgh airport, so he and fellow Democratic Rep. Chris DeLuzio of Pennsylvania drove to Washington and hosted a virtual town hall as well. Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin posted how his flight was canceled because of thunderstorms, so he would drive to Chicago to make an early flight to Washington. The bill passed the House of Representatives narrowly last month, partially due to the fact that three Democratic members of Congress had died. House Speaker Mike Johnson has scheduled a vote for the morning. The vote comes after the Senate conducted a marathon 27-hour vote-a-rama before passing the bill by a 51-50 margin with Vice President JD Vance breaking a tie in the Senate. Three Republicans--Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine and Thom Tillis of North Carolina--opposed the bill. But many House members have criticized the bill. During a House Rules Committee hearing, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, who criticized the bill last month but nonetheless voted for it, said the Senate 'failed' with the bill. Plenty of Republican members also fear the cuts to Medicaid could disproportionately hurt their constituents.

White House summons House GOP holdouts threatening Trump megabill
White House summons House GOP holdouts threatening Trump megabill

The Hill

time17 minutes ago

  • The Hill

White House summons House GOP holdouts threatening Trump megabill

A cross-section of House Republicans — from hardline conservatives to moderates — are headed to the White House on Wednesday to meet with President Trump about the party's 'big, beautiful bill' of tax cut and spending priorities. The meetings come as GOP leaders lean on Republican holdouts who have voiced serious opposition to the bill, threatening leadership's hopes of getting it to the president's desk by July 4. Hardliners are vowing to vote against the procedural rule for the bill, which would bring the House floor to a standstill. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus who voted against the rule in committee early Wednesday, said he was headed to the White House to meet with Trump, along with other lawmakers in the group. A source familiar with the matter told The Hill that the White House invited Freedom Caucus members to the gathering. Most Republican lawmakers relented on their concerns with the bill when it came up in the House the first time after Trump and the White House deployed a strong pressure campaign, cajoling the members to get on board. This time around, however, some members are demanding changes to the Senate-passed version of the legislation to win their support. Deficit hawks in the House Freedom Caucus and beyond are furious that the Senate version of the bill does not adhere to the House framework hammered out months ago, which called for dollar-for-dollar spending reductions to offset tax cuts. House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said that without those changes, a group of members in his caucus and beyond will sink the procedural rule vote to tee up debate on the bill, dealing an embarrassing blow to GOP leaders. 'Hopefully it goes back to Rules [Committee], gets moved closer to the House position, and the Senate gets called back into town,' Harris said. 'Senate never should have left town. The President asked us to stay until this issue was resolved and the Senate left town.' GOP sources, though, say leaders are not interested in making any changes — arguing that the Senate made the bill more conservative in some areas and more moderate in other areas, but it is overwhelmingly similar to what the House passed last month. Asked about the White House wanting the House to pass this version of the bill, Harris said: 'Well, the White House doesn't have a voting card.' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) met with a group of deficit hawks, including many in the House Freedom Caucus, Wednesday morning. He told The Hill on the way into the gathering that he planned to tell lawmakers 'we gotta get this done.' He departed the meeting more than 40 minutes later, telling The Hill it was 'productive, we're moving forward,' but being non-committal on if the House would vote on the procedural rule Wednesday, as planned. 'We'll see,' he said. Harris said nothing had changed in his stance after that meeting. Norman, meanwhile, said the Freedom Caucus has 'a three-point plan' of demands to win their support for the bill. In some policy debates of the past, GOP leaders have been able to win the support of 11th-hour holdouts by promising future reforms favored by the critics. But Norman said that won't work this time. Instead, he said conservatives will demand changes to the current bill, which would require it to return to the Senate. 'I'm done with promises,' Norman said. 'The best thing is to send the bill back [to the Senate].' 'What we will add is a three-point plan that [indicates]: this is what it will take to get a yes. And it's what the president wants.' It is not just deficit hawks headed across Pennsylvania Avenue: A group of moderate House Republicans — Reps. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), David Valadao (R-Calif.) and Dan Newhouse (R-Calif.) — were spotted entering the West Wing Wednesday morning, according to CNN. Centrists have raised concerns about the Medicaid cuts in the bill and the aggressive rollback of green-energy tax credits, some of which benefit their districts. Valadao staked his opposition to the Senate's bill over the weekend, voicing concerns about Medicaid provisions in the legislation. 'I support the reasonable provisions in H.R. 1 that protect Medicaid's long-term viability and ensure the program continues to serve our most vulnerable, but I will not support a final bill that eliminates vital funding streams our hospitals rely on, including provider taxes and state directed payments, or any provisions that punish expansion states,' Valadao said in a statement on Saturday. 'President Trump was clear when he said to root out our waste, fraud, and abuse without cutting Medicaid and I wholeheartedly agree,' he continued. 'I urge my Senate colleagues to stick to the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1 — otherwise I will vote no.' Valadao and Newhouse are the two remaining House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Mike Lillis contributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store