All of the candidates for the Norfolk City Council were invited to attend a forum Thursday night hosted by the Norfolk Federation of Civic Leagues and held at Granby High School. Six seats – the five small wards plus the mayor – are on the ballot on May 4. Five of those seats have an incumbent, four of which have opponents. Unfortunately for the citizens of Norfolk, three of those incumbents with challengers chose not to show.
What are these incumbents afraid of? Why would two of them – at the last minute – decide not to participate?
Oh, I’ve heard the official excuses – prior engagements, blah, blah, blah – and the unofficial ones – that they wouldn’t participate unless given the questions in advance – but at the end of the day, none of them hold water. The bottom line is that these three were willing to disrespect not only one of the official citizen organizations in the city, but also the voters, by choosing to stay away.
Is it any wonder that the endorsements this year have all gone to challengers? Are these incumbents – Anthony Burfoot in Ward 3, Paul Riddick in Ward 4 and Randy Wright in Ward 5 – so confident of victory that they can ignore those voters who came last night to hear them?
I wanted to hear the incumbents defend themselves – against charges of mismanagement in the face of the light rail overruns, against charges of the lack of transparency, against charges related to the appointed school board – but except for current mayor Paul Fraim, who at times squirmed uncomfortably in the face of these charges, it was not to be. Shame on Burfoot, Riddick and Wright for not being willing to answer the tough questions.
~
While I applaud the Norfolk Federation of Civic Leagues for putting together this forum, it was not without glitches. And those glitches were significant enough to make the forum less than it could have been. First, to not have at least two working microphones was unacceptable. Moderator Joel Rubin was often the one without, making it hard to hear his questions, even though I was sitting in the front third of the auditorium.
Second, a forum does not work well without a timekeeper. I’m told that the person who was supposed to be the timekeeper didn’t show up. Well, then find someone else. The moderator can’t possibly do both jobs, and the one-minute answers often turned into three or four minute ramblings, much of which had nothing to do with the question.
Finally, I have to disagree with the decision to include a write-in candidate for mayor in the forum. If this guy couldn’t go out and collect signatures to be on the ballot, he shouldn’t have been allowed to participate – and when I ran into him a few weeks ago, I told him as much. It wasn’t fair to the other candidates nor was it fair to the voters assembled last night.
~
The forum was moderated by Joel Rubin, the former host of a local TV show. In the face of the aforementioned adversities, he did as good a job as could have been expected. However, I was disappointed that he gave Fraim more time than the other candidates. I asked him about it afterwards and he defended it by essentially saying that Fraim deserved it, given that there were people included that have less of an understanding of council than Fraim. I understand that from a practical standpoint but from a fairness standpoint, it doesn’t wash. Incumbents almost always know more than challengers – but a challenger will never win without being treated fairly.
~
Speaking of fairness, I have to say that the headline on this story demonstrates the lack thereof. No one “bashed” anybody and the story doesn’t support the headline.
~
Only one non-incumbent challenger didn’t show up last night. After sitting through 2 1/2 hours of the forum, I have to say that I wish a few others had stayed away.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
“I wanted to hear the incumbents defend themselves – against charges of mismanagement in the face of the light rail overruns, against charges of the lack of transparency, against charges related to the appointed school board”
I think you answered you own question.
Your assessment of last evening’s forum is “spot on”. With regard to the Pilot’s article on last evening’s event, shame on them! It was a gross lack of responsible reporting, but then again, when it comes to Norfolk politics, this type of reporting seems to be the norm.
from blog:
“Five of those seats have an incumbent, four of which have opponents. Unfortunately for the citizens of Norfolk, three of those incumbents with challengers chose not to show.”
Clarification:
Actually, 3 out of the 3 incumbents on Norfolk City Council who are running for re-election have challengers — and those 3 were all no-shows at the Norfolk Federation of Civic Leagues Candidates Forum.
Ward 1 incumbent (Don Williams) isn’t running so wouldn’t be expected to show
Ward 2 incumbent (Teresa Whibley) is running but has no challengers – but she showed up anyway for questions and answers.
Leaving wards 3, 4, and 5 with incumbents (Burfoot, Riddick, and Wright) who are running and do have challengers – and all 3 of them failed to show up.
The challengers showed up. The moderator showed up. Hundreds of voters showed up. But 3 out of 3 incumbents running with challengers were no-shows!
Is it a coincidence that 3 out of 3 incumbents who are running for re-election and have challengers failed to show up for the biggest forum in Norfolk for candidates for City Council – and the forum was planned and scheduled well over a month ago?
No way! I only wish I lived in one of their wards so I could vote against any one of them. None of them deserve to be returned to City Council.
At the end of the day, I don’t know if Mayor Fraim got more time in his race than some of the others did in theirs. He just got more time than his challengers, except for Daun Hester who I let speak as long as she wanted, and she did well. Because the other incumbents didn’t show up, it was left to Fraim to defend everything that was said about the current council, including televising of meetings, light rail overruns, etc. For the sake of balance, I had to let him talk a bit more just to put those issues in perspective for the audience. For the sake of the process, I saw the event, not just as six different contests, but as an opportunity for the audience to hear not just criticism of the current regime from a whole host of challengers but also rebuttal from the people in office. Unfortunately Fraim (and Hester, who is forfeiting her seat) were the only ones there to provide the other side. So if I erred, sorry, but frankly, only Fraim and Hester, in the mayor’s race, had really credible comments. Montague was a one issue candidate (light rail construction). The kid was running as a lark and Danny Ginn, as you said Vivian, had no business being on the stage. I moderated a forum this afternoon in Newport News between the two, yes just two, candidates for Mayor, Pat Woodbury and McKinley Price. That was better. Five candidates, when only two have a prayer of garnering votes, is three too many.