Local Politics

Councilman Calls for All Members to Be Drug Tested

Posted December 20, 2007
Updated December 21, 2007

— A Fayetteville city councilman has called for all members of the council to be tested for drugs.

Councilman Charles Evans said he has heard concerns in the community that some council members might be using drugs. Most of the concerns were about one member, Evans said, but he would not name the person.

Evans has been upfront about his own drug use years ago, before he was elected to council. He says all other city employees must undergo drug testing, so why not elected officials?

“I think it would be a good thing if council members would be tested, because we are no different from city employees … and paid by their tax dollars,” he said.

Evans pleaded guilty to embezzlement and felony cocaine possession in 1992. He said he committed the crimes because he was addicted to drugs and alcohol. He said he's been clean of everything since December 2001, before he was elected to council.

On Thursday, he wrote a memo to City Manager Dale Iman suggesting a discussion of drug testing for council members. It will be on the agenda when the council has its next work session Jan. 7.

In order for it to become policy, city council would have to vote on it. Evans said he's not aware of any other city that requires council members to undergo drug tests.


Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • yukonjohn3 Dec 22, 2007

    cont. it cut off the last bit of the 5th Amendment:

    shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

  • yukonjohn3 Dec 22, 2007

    Here is the 4th and 5th Amendments as written:

    Amendment IV

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


    Amendment V

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due pr

  • yukonjohn3 Dec 22, 2007

    I hate to post twice in a row, but I am in total disbelief. I thought illegal immigration or the war in Iraq were the biggest challenges facing our national, state, local govts. but now I see, this is a MUCH BIGGER problem. The idea that you give away personal rights, freedoms, freedoms from the govt., the freedom to not be randomly snatched out, singled out to test for some foreign presence in your BODILY FLUIDS against your will....it escapes me. PLEASE, Please, go back and read the Constitution. As American citizens we have personal rights to even do things that are illegal, ie. drug/alcohol use, without the govt. testing us to see what we have been ingesting. I DO NOT use drugs, but this is HUGE....HUGE....Please go back and re-read OUR Constitution. I honestly do not believe that you can read it and come up with ANY other conclusion. Like I said in my previous post, if you screw up at work...test away, but randomly, for no cause is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!

  • yukonjohn3 Dec 22, 2007

    This is one place that I seperate myself from the folks there that think this is a good idea. Urine testing without cause is a HUGE infringement of your 4th and 5th amendment rights. To me it seems foreign that someone could think this is NOT an infringement to those rights. If you wreck a piece of equipment or mess something up, test away, but just to random test....I think if you believe this is OK with the constitution, please go back and read it again with amendments.

  • Southern Fried Yankee Dec 22, 2007

    On the one hand the council are servants of the people....On the other hand, if the Chair of the Council demanded testing of everyone, I personally would tell him to take a flying leap. Gonna accuse someone, then ACCUSE them...don't be namby-pamby about it....

  • BUCKEYEnNC Dec 21, 2007

    What difference does it make? Wash D.C. re-elected their mayor after being busted in a crackhouse! Whatever district this guy is from won't care!

  • lilreno is in the wind Dec 21, 2007

    I can see the bottles melting now.

  • daisy Dec 21, 2007

    Although I dont have a problem with these guys being drug tested, it sounds like this guy brought the media in on this to handle the council's dirty work. If there is a problem with one particular person then the council should have to guts to directly deal with this. What is this? Middle school?

  • 68_polara Dec 21, 2007


    That makes so much sense, so they'll never do it.

  • whatusay Dec 21, 2007

    I also believe that all recipients of welfare or those in public office receiving my tax dollars should be drug tested every 3 months. If I have to be drug tested while working and paying the taxes to support them then those receiving my tax dollars should also be tested.