Friday’s editorial in The Virginian Pilot focused on the recent call for a strong mayor form of government in Norfolk as well as the results of a recent survey. At the center of both is Councilman Randy Wright.
No “survey” can undo any of that progress, especially one done by a single-issue advocacy group, Norfolk Tea Party 2. Here’s a hint about how seriously to take their survey, released this past weekend: Councilman Wright – who won re-election by a hair – was deemed the most popular member of City Council, by 40 percentage points.
This wasn’t a survey; it was self-serving political theater, a sham to be ignored. Wright calls the plays for the Tea Party.
Ouch! But it gets better:
Norfolk should be doubly wary of Wright’s assurances that all great cities have a strong mayor, the implication being that one follows the other.
“What we need is someone who’s responsive to the citizens, someone who will pick up the phone and return calls, someone who won’t be stuck in some ivory tower,” he said, a cheap dig at Mayor Paul Fraim’s 10th-floor office.
We called New York City to ask about their centuries of experience with strong mayors. We’re still waiting for New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to get back to us. Strangely, neither the mayors of Philadelphia nor Washington, D.C., are known for returning calls, either.
Then there’s Richmond and its tumultuous experience with former governor and current Mayor Douglas Wilder, who has entirely upended city government, not always with reason or to good end. Nobody cares whether he returns phone calls.
I have to commend the Pilot editorial board for stepping up and calling it like it is. Now, if the “news” department could do the same, we might just be on our way to having a decent newspaper.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
oops…150 W. Brambleton
Brian,
The opinion page is just that. It doesn’t call itself “survey results received from the city”.
There were more effective ways to make a poiint is all that I’m saying. Flooding city hall with letterss may have made more of an impact.
But calling that a “survey” is as much of a joke as the “polls” AOL has on their site.
It got them a story.
Brian – I don’t defend the Pilot often but this time you’re wrong about them publishing polls. Yes, they have polls on their website. But I can’t recall a single story published in the paper based on those polls. (And they have all kinds of disclaimers about the polls being unscientific to boot.)
I think the Pilot erred in writing the story the way they did, particularly with the graphic in it that I posted in this post. It gives the appearance that the poll was reflective of the views of the citizens of Norfolk, when, because of the survey methods used, is not the case.
Vivian, do we really want to draw a line between what a newspaper has on its website and what it puts on paper? It’s still the Pilot, and it’s still called a “Poll”, it’s still on the front page of the Pilot website, and it doesn’t have a single disclaimer on the question or the results. I just voted in today’s poll.
Maybe they put “all kinds of disclaimers” in the printed Pilot.
Yes, I’m drawing that line, because the poll online is not anywhere near being the same as being published in the paper.
And I see that with the site redesign, they have left off the disclaimers. They used to show up once you voted.
Brian,
You say you understand research methods but rely on data such as online “polls’. Thanks for the chuckle. IT may have gotten the NTP2 a story but for those of us that respect accurate polling and methodology- it was a joke and discredited the NPT2.
Unless samples are drawn randomly, results will be skewed and not an accurate representation. Period.
The truth is in the pudding, as the saying goes. If NTP2 really does believe that survey results “capture the pulse of the city at this time,” well then they’re entitled to that belief, just as the editorial board is entitled to its collective belief that it’s highly suspect considering its methodology and its results when stacked against the ultimate scientific survey of likely voters: election day returns. So I found nothing unfair in the Pilot’s editorial about the survey, and I likewise don’t find anything unfair in Smith’s defense of the survey–the idea that this survey is valid becuase “every opinion counts” reminds me of the old saying “opinions are like asses, everybody’s got one,” but if that’s the defense he wants to mount, so be it. I just wish he’s stop whining about the people who do share the contrary opinion–that his organization is a sham. Since when does that opinion not count?
Sure, Anonymous, your opinion counts.
But I don’t think the Mayor and Norfolk City Council thought the Norfolk Tea Party was a sham in November 2006 when we presented a petition with over 16,000 signatures of registered Norfolk voters calling for a reduction in the tax rate.
In fact, Mayor Paul Fraim said at the time “This is a well-organized effort by a well-meaning group of citizens who have touched a nerve. We need to listen” (source: VP “Tax-cut proponents push issue with 16,000 signatures).
And when it time came to pass the FY08 budget, providing significant tax relief in the form of a 16 cent cut and expanded seniors/disabled tax relief, weighing all competing interests and concerns, the Mayor stated “The voice I heard loudest was the concern about rising real estate taxes.” (source: VP “Tax: Tea Party led push for lower rate”). It was not the voice of a sham organization Paul Fraim heard.
Most members of Norfolk City Council, even officials from other cities, as well as citizens from surrounding cities, have told me in person of their respect and appreciation for what the Tea Party has done. I actually believe they are being honest and sincere; while I am always quick to point to the hard work of many others, because it has merely been my privilege to be a spokesman, as best I can.
Ask City Manager Reginia Williams if she thinks the Tea Party is a sham. Was it a sham when at her April 2007 budget presentation hundreds of citizens walked out in silent protest. We were respectful. But we weren’t gonna just sit there either.
Was it a sham when over 700 citizens from throughout Norfolk jammed the auditorium full at Lafayette-Winona MS last March for a city-wide Town Hall meeting hosted by the Tea Party? Kudos to the Council members, all 7 of them [Paul Fraim was in DC accepting a well-deserved national award for homelessness prevention efforts] who came and participated. I’m sure they did so because they knew we are not a sham organization.
The Tea Party has probably conducted 10 tor 12 public meetings, none of which had less than about 200. Most have average 250 or more. And these even on cold and rainy mornings. These are not numbers of a motley “sham” organization.
Members of the General Assembly, in particular the Norfolk delegation, past and present, are not of the opinion the Tea Party is a sham either. They’re right.
I could go on, mentioning, for example, the Tea Party’s organized efforts to participate in civic life in Richmond. Has your organization taken chartered bus trips and van-loads of volunteers to go up to Richmond to support legislative reforms to defend the interests of Norfolk’s citizen-homeowners lately?
Sure, Anonymous, your opinion counts. It’s just an ill-informed one.
Now, “whining”? Be serious. I’m the first to admit to the habit of defending the integrity of the Tea Party, however. I suppose if that is your definition of whining, well, you are entitled to it.