Lakewood's Needed Debate On Hospital Falls Apart

[Corey Rossen]

My college Statistical Analysis professor used to say that the beauty of stats is that they could be used and twisted to benefit just about anyone. The power is in using them properly and in your favor.

Corey

[Brian Essi]

Corey

Sorry, this is not the clever use of statistics. This is an outright lie. He has no record to run on other than Failure and bungled decision making.

[Bill Call]

If this deal was so good, why not take the time to crow about it?

Excellent question. I've told supporters of the Mayor that I could be swayed with the right argument and the right ideas. I might be swayed if they could answer the following questions.

What will you build?
How can a small medical office building meet all the healthcare needs of the people of Lakewood?
What happened to the money?

[Phil Florian]

Brian, thanks for the response and kind words. I am not disagreeing with your assertions about the Mayor's record. Not at all. They are what they are. What my point is (and I apologize if I buried the point in too much fluff) I don't think the entirety of a debate between two candidates for Mayor should turn into what would amount to a public trial of Mayor Summers on one specific issue with no real opportunity to learn anything about his opposition. It wasn't that Summers didn't want to even talk about the Hospital. It seemed like (from my reading of those letters) that he didn't want to spend the entire time on that one issue.

My extra point was that the reason we don't need this in THAT venue is that thanks to your involvement and that of folks like Dennis Kucinich this is already being looked at by just about every regulatory body that has a stake in it. If the facts are, as the SLH team would say, on the money then there should be no real concern that justice will have its day in court. So good, lets let that play out and instead see these two guys talk about the OTHER issues in this city. You brought up good ones. Housing stock, new businesses, etc. Policy ideas. And so on. And goddamn Marginal Ave. That crater filled nightmare. But I digress... (yes, a bit was paved so it is a bit better...)

I would love to see this talk. Hearing a guy I don't know (Skindell) essentially play prosecutor and not have to defend his own record or position is a waste. I think Skindell should have taken the debate with some middle ground as he still would have been able to get some jabs in for free on the Hospital issue and then we could have seen what else he was made of. One would have to admit, if the biggest criticism someone has about you is that you are a one-issue candidate lacking management experience and you drop out of a debate that doesn't let you spend the entire time debating that one issue you are running on... well it does raise eyebrows. Skindell should have been bold and taken his opportunity to have any face time but now we hav only carefully chosen propaganda from both candidates to help drive our decisions. My only real thing to use, I am told, is the PD interview and sadly that sounds less-than-flattering. But I guess his advisors are recommending the safe road by letting the onslaught of negative hype rule the day with Summers.

Alas, to the ballot box we go.

[Brian Essi]

Great points, but I think it's fair to say from the letters and facts that Skindell initiated the talks of a debate and compromised from his initial position and that Summers did not really want a debate at all.

Given the stonewalling of Summers/Butler on my many public records requests may I suggest that Summers and Team Summers are very relieved there will be no debate and no deposition of him before the election.

I think his deposition or a hospital debate would have produced more relevant information for voters than any debate talking about garbage pick up and solstice stairs.