Yesterday, the Hamlet City Council convened what it labeled an emergency meeting to address the removal of former City Council candidate Esco Latimer from the city’s Planning Board. The decision—and the way in which the meeting was conducted—has drawn significant concern from residents who believe the process was neither fair nor transparent.
Mr. Latimer, a former United States Marine, ran for a council seat in the 2025 election with a clear message: restoring vitality and unity to the town he calls home. Known in Hamlet for his community involvement and dedication to service, he has been widely regarded as a positive and engaged presence. Despite this, tensions between Mr. Latimer and city leadership—particularly City Manager John Terziu—have persisted, fueling questions about how the city responds to individuals who challenge its authority or decisions.
A video of the meeting, posted publicly online and on the City of Hamlet’s Facebook page, has further fueled scrutiny.
Allegations Presented With Limited Transparency
During the meeting, Councilmember Tony Clewis acted as the primary speaker—a departure from the usual practice in which Mayor Amy Guinn typically leads such proceedings. Despite repeatedly referring to the gathering as a “hearing,” attendees were immediately informed that no questions or comments would be permitted from the public, nor from council members. Law enforcement was present, and the audience was warned that anyone who spoke would be removed.
As Mr. Clewis read the allegations, he appeared to struggle with portions of the wording, pausing and stumbling over several terms—an issue not lost on those in attendance. Further raising concern among observers was the fact that all of the allegations concerned a single day, yet they were presented as though they formed a broader pattern of conduct. No complainants were identified, and much of the language in the statements appeared repetitive and uniform.
One particularly troubling point for many residents was the council’s assertion that a letter sent to Mr. Latimer by City Manager Terziu constituted a “court order” restricting his access to public facilities and interactions with city employees. Attendees questioned this claim, noting that only a judge can issue a court order, raising doubts about the accuracy and legal basis of the council’s framing.
A Politically Delicate Absence
Councilmember Maurice Stewart, the council’s only Black member, was absent from the meeting, and his absence quickly became a point of discussion within the community. Several residents voiced concern that Mr. Stewart may have felt caught in a politically precarious position—caught between siding with a predominantly white council and appearing to act against a respected Black community member in Mr. Latimer.
Some supporters suggested that Mr. Stewart may have chosen not to attend to avoid being visibly aligned with a vote against Mr. Latimer, a decision that could have carried social and political consequences within Hamlet’s Black community. While Mr. Stewart offered no public explanation for his absence, the speculation surrounding it underscores the uncomfortable tensions brought to the surface by the meeting.
Latimer’s Evidence and Limited Opportunity to Respond
Mr. Latimer was given one opportunity to respond to the allegations, during which he presented factual documentation addressing and countering each claim. At one point when a council member attempted to ask a clarifying question, Mr. Clewis interrupted and informed the council that no questions would be permitted, reiterating that their sole responsibility was to vote on the allegations as presented.
Council Votes to Remove Latimer
Ultimately, the council voted to remove Mr. Latimer from the Planning Board.
Community Reaction
Outside the building, supporters of Mr. Latimer—many of them Hamlet residents—expressed frustration and disappointment, describing the process as deeply unfair and suggesting that he had been denied a meaningful opportunity to defend himself. Several also noted that later in the day, City Manager Terziu drove past Mr. Latimer and his supporters and honked his horn, an act some interpreted as intentionally disrespectful.
For many in the community, the meeting raised serious concerns about fairness, transparency, and the treatment of outspoken or reform-minded residents within Hamlet’s local government. Supporters insist that Mr. Latimer was not only wronged, but publicly denied the impartial process he deserved.