Everyone has an opinion on replacing the Neuse River bridge in downtown Smithfield - everyone except the people who will help make the decision. Most people I know want to rip out the old bridge and replace it all at once. That would cost less and take less time than the alternative, which is to leave a couple of old lanes in place while building new ones. Folks who support that plan fear downtown businesses would dry up if the bridge closed.

What Smithfield residents don't know is what their Town Council candidates would do. Many of them managed to avoid answering the question when asked by a reporter. And yet the council that takes office next month is the one that will make a recommendation to the N.C. Department of Transportation, and the DOT has promised to consider the town's wishes.

To be honest, I didn't expect the candidates to answer that question before the election. Why risk alienating some voters before they went to the polls? But I am disappointed in candidates that lacked the courage to say what he would do. Put another way, I am pleased that mayoral candidate Daniel Evans wants to move us forward; I just wish he'd say how.

Traffic goes too fast on North Third Street. I hadn't noticed that until a homeowner pointed it out to me during one of my midday walks a couple of weeks ago. Since then, I've paid attention, and traffic on North Third is fast, too fast for a residential neighborhood. (It's also too fast on North Second Street.)

How best to slow down traffic? I've never been a fan of speed traps: A police officer sitting in his parked cruiser with just one goal in mind -- ticketing speeders. Who wants to live in a town where the police do that? I do like that streetside radar that tells folks how fast they're going. I know I slow down when I see one. But in Smithfield, that device moves around town, and rightly so, because speeders are everywhere. Since the homeowner stopped me the other day, I've had more than one occasion to be driving on North Third Street. I've found myself slowing down because I've remembered what the homeowner said. I hope you will too.

An editorial last week gave Clayton leaders high marks for moving to lower insurance costs while encouraging town employees to get fit (or fitter). As the editorial noted, such innovation in local government is rare, and that is why I think Clayton has one the best town governments I have ever come across.

Alas, among Johnston County towns at least, Clayton also has one of the highest costs of government. Its property-tax rate is high, and Lord knows its electricity rates are too. (Clayton is among those misguided North Carolina towns that sells electricity. Unfortunately, Johnston County has three others - Benson, Selma and Smithfield, and all four cost more than Progress Energy.)

In any event, the danger for Clayton is that the cost of living could grow so high that people would choose to live elsewhere. If that happened, the people left behind would bear alone the cost of keeping up the town - its streets, water and sewer lines, parks, community center, and the like. No newcomers would be coming along to share the cost. I don't think Clayton will get there. A study a while back showed Clayton just how much more it could grow government without substantially raising taxes. I trust Clayton leaders will use that knowledge to keep growing wisely.

We now know that Smithfield and Selma can cooperate; they're sharing the cost of certifying land for industrial development. The question is, can they do more? The answer, I think, is yes, and now, amid a recession, is a good time to start.

I don't pretend to know exactly how town hall works in any town. But to use just one example, I can't think of a reason why Smithfield and Selma could not bid their street-paving projects together. Seems to me a contractor could offer a better price if he had a lot of work to do in one spot, and Smithfield and Selma are essentially one spot on the map. I also see no reason why the towns can't pool their buying power to purchase paper, pens and paper clips. The potential areas for cooperation are many and even extend to police, fire and rescue services, although merging those would require great political courage.

I wasn't around all those years ago when the Smithfield and Selma chambers of commerce merged, but I would guess they did so in part because their leaders knew that two chambers could not operate as cheaply as one. Neither can two towns, and if Smithfield and Selma truly want to give their citizens the biggest bang for the buck, they will share services where doing so makes sense.