Friday, October 26, 2007

Lunch Time

I have found a writing window!

In the real mayoral race, Matt Lampke continues to have the proverbial Friends Like These. The current issue of ThisWeek has a Bonnie Butcher story about the FOP endorsement that Mr. Lampke has been touting, and the impression among the other candidates that the FOP endorsed somewhat capriciously and without going through their typical notification process. Some of this can be attributed to the timeline, as Mr. Lampke was doing his endorsement interview before Robyn Jones or Scott Weinblatt had made official announcements, and within days of John Brennan's announcement. Bill Minckler and Travis Irvine, however, are both quoted as saying they were never informed, and they were both publicly declared candidates for several weeks at that point.

So, the FOP's credibility takes a bit of a hit from this. Even Mr. Lampke says he went out of his way to ask others about the endorsement process, and does not give any indication that he received written notification. It would appear that, at least by their own standards, the FOP fouled up the process this go-round.

It doesn't appear that Mr. Lampke himself fouled anything up. He pro-actively sought an endorsement and got it. Now, due to factors assumably beyond his control, the endorsement has lost some luster. I tagged his friends earlier over a pseudo-endorsement. The snarky part of me is forced to wonder if ThisWeek is pursuing the Conservation Voters' endorsement.

In the meantime, I'm more upset with the FOP for their efforts to create a special class of records that provide privacy for their members that is not afforded to the general public, or other public employees. I can understand their concerns, but what about judges? What about attorneys? What about teachers and principals? Who, exactly, will never make enemies? Our State Senator, David Goodman, expects their proposal (by expects, I mean he was in an expectative state last Tuesday, which has probably been replaced by actual knowledge in the meantime) to pass out of his committee, although the article doesn't attribute a position to Mr. Goodman either way. Of course, in today's Dispatch, Goodman does come out for greater openness in terms of legislators' emails. Perhaps I should send one of those public record electronic messages and ask him about his position on shielding/hiding public safety officials from the public.

In news of the other mayoral race, I told you so. As if on effing cue: Bill Todd.

7 comments:

Bexley voter said...

6 of the 7 candidates interviewed for the Conservation Voters' endorsement and Mr. Lampke was chosen. I read the article and find the timing suspect. Mr. Weiss was prominently featured on the front page in last week's paper for an event that all candidates attended and now just 10 days before the election, he pursues the FOP issue. Besides, in the article, Pappas said he had 3 people call him, but Mr. Lampke was the only one that followed through. That leads me to believe 2 other people were initially interested and didn't do anything about it.

bonobo said...

Thanks for the info on the Conservation Voters. As for the FOP thing, Mr. Pappas states that three people called him, and one followed through. Fair enough. The problem is that they claim to have notified everybody about their endorsement process, which nobody, not even Mr. Lampke, seems to corroborate. Lampke's endorsement interview took place two weeks before the BOE had a candidate list, and the decision came about two weeks after the filing date. It may be true that three candidates made inquiries, but it seems to me that the more experienced candidates knew enough to make inquiries without being notified.

This isn't just a question of the FOP endorsement. I've heard similar complaints about other endorsements in this race, namely that little effort was made to reach some of the candidates who might have been interested in seeking the endorsement. For what it's worth, I don't really think any group has any obligation to justify their process, and if somebody wants to endorse based on pulling a name out of a hat, that's their perogative. The problem with the current situation is that the FOP claims that they used a process that would maximally ensure fairness, but appears to have used some other process.

My point was actually that folks like the FOP do more harm than good for their candidate when they become the story like this. Like I said, Mr. Lampke did nothing wrong, and does nothing wrong by continuing to cite the FOP endorsement.

What it comes down to, and in this I am much less judgmental toward Mr. Weiss than you are, but it comes down to the fact that a lot of people like Matt Lampke. Heck, I like Matt Lampke. This, and his resume, have garnered him quite a bit of support (and his share of publicity). People know this, and I assume some candidates are frustrated when they feel they unfairly missed out on a chance to get more traction in a very competitive race.

Jeff Cohen said...

I just want to thank Bonobo (? whomever that is) for putting this together. I had searched for email addresses for candidates for several days and didn't find what I needed until getting this site-now, I've been able to contact most candidates directly. Too often these local races are overshadowed by state and national tickets, I for one am profoundly interested in the mayoral race this year as it may have profound implications for Bexley--and certainly could (and probably will) signal a large change in the way things are done around here. It amazes me how many candidates will not state their positions on important issues facing Bexley--that is why I appreciate the emails here. ONe thing I've asked is what a candidate means by "effective leadership" for example. I would be very interested to learn if anyone has ever run on being ineffective -- HA, as if. I wish there was a bit more on school board stuff here--while Bexley has a Board of Ed that is dedicated to science and learning, science is under a great deal of pressure around the state and nation, and we can't let our guard up even for a minute.

Anonymous said...

It is time to move on... The FOP endorsement does not answer who should be Mayor of Bexley.

What have these candidates personally accomplished for Bexley?
Not a council or commission vote... personal accomplishments for Bexley.

How have the candidates taken personal risks to better bexley or how have they personally given of themselves for our city?

Where have the candidates been while our Main Street continued to decline? We have many new buildings which are empty. What have some of our council and commission members done while our Main Street has made The Short North, New Albany, Grandview, German Village, Gahanna, etc. SO POPULAR for Bexley residents to visit and shop.

These questions answer "Who should be the next Mayor of Bexley."

Verdad said...

The fact that this goofball "anonymous" posits that Main Street is somehow declining cuts the legs out from under whatever flimsy credibility they might otherwise have had.

Anyone can bitch and moan. Post some ideas along with the rant, smart guy. Unless and until you do that, your post isn't worth the 1s and 0s it utilizes.

Anonymous said...

Verdad you prove that you know nothing about Main Street nor do you shop Main Street. If you did you would know many of our business are GONE and compare the traffic and activities of the Short North, Grandview, etc. to our traffic.....you must not get out too much.
Finally....I'm not on any council or commission for the city, nor am I running for any elected office.
As a voter I look for those individuals to show their skills.

Verdad, unless you are on a commission/council or running for office. WHY did I hit your nerve???

Verdad said...

As I said before:

"Anyone can bitch and moan. Post some ideas along with the rant, smart guy. Unless and until you do that, your post isn't worth the 1s and 0s it utilizes."

I stand by the comment, as you've done nothing to add to the debate. Businesses go in and out of business everywhere, including "Golden Idol" communities like Grandview. The issue is whether or not Main has gotten better or worse.

If more options, a better look and more tax $ is your criteria (and it's not), it's impossible to argue that it has gotten worse.

To opine that one must be on a commission or in office to dispute your conclusion is arrogant and just plain silly.