By Christine McTaggart
Monroe, North Carolina, is a small town located in Union County, about 30 minutes from Charlotte. It is the county seat, and for most of its existence, it was a nonpartisan municipality, which meant it did not hold primary elections. Instead, all candidates running for office would simply be on the ballot on election day. That changed in 2025, when House Bill 3 was passed by the General Assembly, without the involvement of Monroe city leaders, and made Monroe a partisan municipality.
The change meant new requirements for Monroe elections, including candidates running for local office having to declare a political affiliation—something they didn’t have to do in the past— and the holding of primary elections.
In the heart of Monroe, at the city’s center, St. Paul’s has been a welcoming congregation for more than 100 years and a strong thread in the fabric of the community. It was St. Paul’s that started the local chapter of Loaves and Fishes, and it was St. Paul’s that founded what is now a domestic violence shelter.
At the time House Bill 3 was working its way through the General Assembly, the parishioners of St. Paul’s were in a discernment process of where next to direct their outreach energy. They wanted something that included everyone in Monroe, leaving no one marginalized and letting everyone know they were important. When news of the change to the municipality’s status came, the people of St. Paul’s knew what they wanted to do.
A Hopeful Ask
“When [the bill] passed, all of a sudden, Monroe went from being a community where people would just show up in November and vote, to having to vote in a primary,” said Melinda Plue, St. Paul’s senior warden. “All of a sudden, this was really important. It was important for people to understand what a primary is and that we are now in a two-party system. They needed to understand the why and the how so they could be an informed voter, no matter what they chose to do, whomever they voted for.”
To help provide that education, the leadership of St. Paul’s decided to hold an event with candidates running for local office. It was structured as an information session rather than a debate, and it was held early enough before the March 3 primary election to give citizens time to make decisions about their affiliation and make any adjustments necessary. It was to be an evening as much about informing the community members about their voting rights and new processes as it was about introducing the electorate to the candidates.
“It felt important for our church to be a part of educating the whole community,” said Plue. “We [thought] if we put this event in a church, we could insist on the decorum we felt was necessary.”
While the plan was for Plue to lead the organizing, to ensure the fidelity of the process, the planning team also turned to Dr. Joseph Ellis, a St. Paul’s member who is a political scientist. Ellis has extensive experience with candidate-related events, and at first, he was asked to consult on the event’s development before ultimately being asked to serve as the meeting’s moderator.
An important element of being a moderator is neutrality. He could provide recommendations and guidance on how the event was structured, but Ellis would have no meaningful interactions with the candidates prior to the event. So it was Plue who extended the invitations. In emails with subject lines that read “A Hopeful Ask,” she invited all primary candidates running for the offices of mayor and city council to St. Paul’s “Meet the Candidate” event.
Dr. Joseph Ellis, a political scientist and member of St. Paul’s, moderated, and Melinda Plue, the church’s senior warden, kept time.
Along with the invitation itself, Plue outlined some of the ground rules in her email: No candidate would receive questions ahead of the event; the questions would range from the broad to the granular, and while some might be specific to the office being sought, none would be of the “gotcha” variety; the focus would be on policy and vision; the format of the event would include opening and closing statements by each candidate, with one-minute answers to the questions asked of each; all candidates would be asked the same questions; and the tone of the evening was to be “positive and informative to voters.”
Three mayoral candidates and five city council candidates accepted the invitation, and Plue got to work on developing the questions. Ellis recommended soliciting input from a group of Monroe citizens to develop 10-12 questions from which he would select what would be asked at the event itself. Plue did just that, asking for questions from people from various socioeconomic and diversity backgrounds, business owners, parents and residents of all ages, all of whom collectively contributed a variety of perspectives. Ellis never knew who submitted the questions, nor did he provide input on what the questions should be.
The neutrality of those involved with planning the event was paramount from the start. “Obviously churches have values and things they care about,” said Ellis. “But to do [an event like] this effectively, you have to be seen as largely neutral.” Among the factors he noted as important in that process is having a separate organizing committee; inviting all of the candidates; offering a format that was fair and transparent; including ground rules in the invitation to set accurate expectations; and the moderator having no role in the creation of questions or interactions with the candidates. Ellis noted, too, that it helps to have a moderator with experience.
“I have many years of experience doing [events like this],” said Ellis. “From a moderator perspective, I think it helps to have someone with professional experience, or someone well-known in the community, like a local television or radio personality—someone that people are familiar with or perceive to have legitimacy or a version of neutrality.”
A Living Embodiment
On the evening of the event, it was standing-room only in the parish hall of St. Paul’s, with most of the attendees coming from the community at large. For those not able to attend in person, a generous donation provided the equipment and manpower to livestream the information session.
Ellis opened the evening with a statement of welcome and transparency, noting for the audience that his election-day ballot would not include any of the candidates taking part that night. He outlined the process and the ground rules, and the opening statements began. While Ellis deftly kept the session moving, Plue assisted in her role as timekeeper, adhering strictly to the time limits given to the candidates in the initial invitation, muting microphones when the limit was reached.
“I did, and it was hilarious,” she chuckled. “People loved it. They began to expect it. It became something that all the candidates laughed about.”
Feedback on the event was universally positive. Those who watched the evening via livestream commented on the professionalism of the broadcast. Ellis received comments on how fairly everyone was treated. Plue received positive messages from all of the candidates, including the two who declined the invitation and expressed regret at having done so. She was asked by many if St. Paul’s would do this before every election, and she came to learn that the education provided through the event assisted unaffiliated candidates to attain the petition signatures now needed to be on a ballot. The turnout for the primary exceeded expectations. For the congregation of St. Paul’s, perhaps the greatest feedback of all was the surge of visitors to the church in the weeks that followed, several of whom cited the respect St. Paul’s displayed at the event and for the election process as a reason.
In a time when civil discourse seems a thing of the past, the people of St. Paul’s proved it is still possible. On a January evening, they became a living embodiment of what it means when the dignity of every human being is respected and a radical welcome is extended to all.
“It disarms people that are expecting a fight,” said Plue. “We had people with a wide variety of opinions present that night, and we were radically hospitable to every single one of them. Showing hospitality like that, there’s nothing that anybody could say that could seem like it was unfair, unkind, unloving or unwelcoming. If you go into it with that spirit, it really isn’t that heavy of a lift.”
When it comes to politics, especially local politics, that radical welcome can also act as a reminder. “Even if you disagree with [candidates] about everything,” said Ellis, “you have to respect what it means to work in local politics. There is not a lucrative paycheck at the end of the day for these folks. These are people engaging in public service. They are people that have full-time jobs, and on top of that, they’re providing public service for the community.”
For those contemplating extending that welcome in this year’s election cycle, Plue has advice to offer. “Be very, very organized. Give your guidelines to the candidates the minute you invite them. Stick to the rules. Be radically welcoming to every single person involved and in attendance.
“And use the mute button on the microphone.”
________________________________________________
Christine McTaggart is the communications director of the Diocese of North Carolina.
