The First Mayoral Debate

[Bryan Schwegler]

Personally I'm at a loss in this whole fiasco.

There are claims going on that about 5 or 6 different groups are planning to hold debates. The primary is in October...it's almost September. Do we have dates from any of these wonderful civic groups on when their forums or debates will be held? Do we have commitments from the candidates to attend them?

It seems, given the fact elections are only 6 weeks away and there are no announced dates, that none of these groups are serious about setting any of this up. Rather disappointing since there's obviously a desire from the people to have them.

I'm glad the event on 9/5 is going on as planned, even if the venue changed and the current Mayor is not attending, at least we'll hear a little more from those who want the job.

If I'm completely missing something, please correct me. It just seems that more of the details should have been worked out by now if any of these were going to happen.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
Is there a Debate(or whatever the word of the day is for it) on Sept. 5th? If there is, where is it being held? I always find the Women's Pavilion nice and cost effective.

I have a strong feeling at least 1 candidate for Mayor does not want to participate in a debate. I hope the other candidates do not let that get in the way of their desires to express their views to the public.

[Bryan Schwegler]

Hi,
Is there a Debate(or whatever the word of the day is for it) on Sept. 5th? If there is, where is it being held? I always find the Women's Pavilion nice and cost effective.

I have a strong feeling at least 1 candidate for Mayor does not want to participate in a debate. I hope the other candidates do not let that get in the way of their desires to express their views to the public.

It's 7:00 PM in the Harrison Gymnasium on 9/5. Demro and FitzGerald have accepted. Mayor George declined...he had a schedule conflict he apparently couldn't work around.

Here's the link:
http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4611

[stephen davis]

The more I hear about these "debates", the more suspicious I become. Who are the real sponsors and organizers? What is the format? Who will moderate? There is an inside view of these "debates" that has not been revealed to me.

I only hope the public is well served by this mysterious process.

Obfuscation is the word that comes to my mind.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Brian

From last year the Lakewood Observer has had a budget for "debates." We had been making plans, and you might remember me asking all members what roll the Observer play in politics. The answer was stay out of it and report it.

From the moment Ed Fitzgerald announced running, the board and myself have looked long and hard how we can get information to the public, without spin, without sound bites.

Throughout the spring and early summer we had gotten calls from other groups that they were going to host debates. With the numbers of debates that were being planned we fell back to a social night, near the election. Over the past few weeks all of these groups have dropped the ball or fallen off the streets. So we have once again looked at hosting debates, but know we can do better.

Many things bother me and others about debates and the very limited format they provide. Time, rebuttal, sound bites and the contest factor of winning and losing. This is not the way to select the person running our city for 4 years! We need to know the depth of the individual.

Monday, we are planning on announcing the LO Program for this election cycle, in hopes to make it better for the actual election. Everyone we have talked with has found it exciting, fascinating and far better than what any single debate would ever give to a city and it's residents.

It will be the ONLY open and 100% transparent discussion about the city, and it will be online, and in print in a special ELECTION supplement to the LO Hard copy. We will work and print extra copies to target registered voters.

The Lakewood Observer believes we can bring the same open, trusted platform to elections, that we have brought to civic discussion.

We will open the doors to the election process, and the candidates, and turn on the lights in City Hall, the Board of Education, and all public offices.

.

[Jim O'Bryan]

The more I hear about these "debates", the more suspicious I become. Who are the real sponsors and organizers? What is the format? Who will moderate? There is an inside view of these "debates" that has not been revealed to me.

I only hope the public is well served by this mysterious process.

Obfuscation is the word that comes to my mind.

.

[Gary Rice]

I would agree with those fellow Observers who want to know more about what happened with the church debate? In my classes at school, I used to assign the 5 W's as being essential to completing an essay.

Who?
What?
Where?
When?
Why?

I'd like to know WHO ALL WAS INVOLVED in trying to put together this debate? WHAT'S behind it? WHEN was this done? WHO was the "impartial party" moderator supposed to be, and WHO picked him/her?

Were all candidates in agreement as to attendance, moderator, debate parameters etc.. BEFORE the debate and before their expected attendance was announced to the public?

Were the potential ramifications for a church sponsoring a political debate fully explored? Will the church still be sponsoring this debate, or if not, WHO is? Will there even BE a debate?

What ELSE do we not know?

The old reporter in me would like to know. The public DESERVES to know.

[Jeff Endress]

I'm just hoping that this isn't some kind of redux of the council mutiny that was scheduled to coincide with Seelie's absence.....

Jeff

[Grace O'Malley]

I'm just hoping that this isn't some kind of redux of the council mutiny that was scheduled to coincide with Seelie's absence.....

And you can't help but wondering that when the debate, supposedly cancelled because one candidate had a scheduling conflict, was then changed to a different venue ON THE SAME DATE!

[Bryan Schwegler]

And you can't help but wondering that when the debate, supposedly cancelled because one candidate had a scheduling conflict, was then changed to a different venue ON THE SAME DATE!

Just out of curiosity, but has the Mayor made himself available for any debates?

I just wonder if it's truly a question of dates or whether the mayor just doesn't want to debate period? Based on my informal conversations with people I know that live in Lakewood, George is in trouble. People are upset and for better or worse, they blame him.

I understand his desire to run from debates and not appear at any kind of forum where people could ask questions, but at this point, he's doing more damage to his campaign by avoiding the public spotlight. He needs to do a better job in the public eye, being the leader he wants to be and sharing his vision and accomplishments. This has been my criticism of him his entire tenure...he just doesn't inspire.

Now as I said, my opinion is based off of alot of informal conversations, so I guess we'll see how right it is in October...

[Bryan Schwegler]

Brian

Monday, we are planning on announcing the LO Program for this election cycle, in hopes to make it better for the actual election. Everyone we have talked with has found it exciting, fascinating and far better than what any single debate would ever give to a city and it's residents.

Can't wait to hear more Jim. I'm sure it's going to be a great benefit to Lakewood.

Thanks for picking up where the others have faltered.

[stephen davis]

I received my invitation today and it reads:

First Mayoral Debate
Sts. Cyril & Methodius Church

I learned of this debate this past Monday. I had an event scheduled for September 5th which I cancelled so I could participate.

At least Father Duke gave us several weeks to move our schedules around...

Ryan's quote about the "First Mayoral Debate" is from Tuesday the 21st, almost as if he is excited and surprised to be invited, while his campaign representative, Suzanne, has been working on it for several weeks.

Everybody else that is invited gets until the next day, Wednesday the 22nd, to respond to an invitation to a "debate" with no format or a named moderator. Ed Fitzgerald's quote is from Friday the 24th. I guess because he didn't know about it, he got a day longer to respond. Good thing, he had to cancel something on short notice to even be able to attend. When did Tom George know about it, and how long did he have to respond?

Over the course of "several weeks", did Demro's campaign work with Father Duke and his church to establish rules and a format for the "debate"?

Why was the "debate" canceled, then uncanceled and moved? Is SS. Cyril & Methodius still the sponsor?

I'm really in favor of candidate debates, I just can't tell what's going on with this one.

[Ed FitzGerald]

steve-

I'm sorry, but I don't find this very mysterious. I'd suggest you speak with Anna Shakarian, who is the organizer of this debate. I just started speaking with her the other day, and she doesn't exactly strike me as some kind of political operative. She's a former teacher at Sts. Cyril and Methodius, and still substitutes there on occasion. Her sister is the current principal of the school.

I know that just prior to refusing to participate, the mayor had told her that his chances of attending were 50-50. I have no idea if he's out of town, or how anyone else would know.

I do see a pattern here. When we held our first public safety public hearing, we were told by the administration that we should have checked with the mayor first, so that he could "clear his schedule." It turned out he was going door-to-door on Edgewater Drive at the time of the meeting. The second safety meeting, we were asked to clear it with him in advance. After waiting for several days for an answer with no reply from him, we had to schedule it, and never did hear where he was that time. At the Ward 3 Block Watch meeting, I was told he had "a pressing engagement" and could not attend. That turned out to be a fundraiser for himself at Around the Corner.

When a representative of the city's Law Department contacted Anna Shakarian, it was not over the timing of the debate- it was over the whole effort itself. If true, I find that much more troubling than who got what invitation when.

From everything I've seen, the inspiration for this debate was the sincere desire of St. Cyril parishioners to have their issues addressed. If it turns out to be something other than that, I'm sure I'll survive the experience. I do know that I was walking door-to-door in that area of the city today, and I talked with some parishioners who are still looking forward to the debate on September 5th at Harrison School.

[stephen davis]

Ed,

I'm glad to hear your comments. You are running a good campaign and you want to debate. There should be an opportunity for legitimate debates for mayoral candidates.

I want to reply to your comments.

I'm sorry, but I don't find this very mysterious. I'd suggest you speak with Anna Shakarian, who is the organizer of this debate. I just started speaking with her the other day, and she doesn't exactly strike me as some kind of political operative.

I don't know Anna Shakarian. I never said she was a political operative. I don't know anything about her or her involvement in this debate. What is mysterious is that one candidate's campaign seems to have been involved very early in the process, and the other two campaigns got sketchy details with short notice to reply.

At the Ward 3 Block Watch meeting, I was told he had "a pressing engagement" and could not attend. That turned out to be a fundraiser for himself at Around the Corner.

Frankly, I think a scheduled fundraiser is very important to a political campaign. I know that many of you candidates have these. I imagine that not attending your own fundraiser would probably be a little damaging. That is my only comment on this because it is not the important issue here.

From everything I've seen, the inspiration for this debate was the sincere desire of St. Cyril parishioners to have their issues addressed.

I am also interested in debates. I applaud the parishioners' effort. It would be great if they sponsored one. I would attend.

Unfortunately, it looks like one candidate exploited their "sincere desire" by gaining an inside track on the planning process. I think that sort of compromises the neutrality and integrity of their debate. In all fairness, no candidates, or better yet, all candidates should be involved in the planning.

Ed, I'm kind of surprised that it doesn't bother you that one campaign got "several weeks" to move their schedules around. I know you are probably trying to be flexible, but YOU only got a day or two.

Steve

[Gary Rice]

This is getting more and more interesting by the minute...