In an ongoing series, Elizabeth Nelson is profiling each of the six candidates for City Council. In the past three days, she has written about Democrat David Brown (love the headline headline: “Chiropractor wants to give back”), Democrat Kendra Hamilton, and independent Vance High. Still to come, of course, are Democrat Kevin Lynch and Republicans Ann Reineke and Kenneth Jackson. Doing her best to make this election interesting, Nelson has been covering each of the candidate forums, most recently the NAACP forum, the highlight of which was a woman calling Kevin Lynch an “airbag” with a personality problem who is “full of crap,” leading to Lynch’s rejoinder that he wasn’t the one with the need to defend his personality. Ah, those wacky forums.
Sideblog
Police announced this afternoon that their investigation into what was initially believed to be a fatal fire on Rugby Avenue is now a homicide investigation. #
The Virginia Supreme Court has denied George Huguely’s appeal. His second-degree murder conviction will stand, WRIC reports. #
In a carefully worded story, and not citing specific sources, WTVR reports that forensic evidence belonging to Jesse Matthew Jr., the main suspect in the disappearance of Hannah Graham, matches forensic evidence collected during the investigation of Morgan Harrington’s 2009 murder. #
In the wake of Hannah Graham’s disappearance, and the evidence that came from private security footage, city officials are revisiting the question of installing security cameras on the downtown mall. #
Both Charlottesville Registrar Sheri Iachetta and former Electoral Board member Stephanie Commander have turned themselves in to the police on
four six and four felony counts of embezzlement, respectively. #Ten years ago, the National Institutes of Health budget doubled and schools like the University of Virginia built massive new research facilities. A decade later, those buildings remain largely underutilized. NPR visits UVA in this story on the effect of federal binge and spurge spending in the sciences. #
In 2012, Council approved a new student housing complex on West Main—now some council members are questioning whether what they were shown matches what was built. #
The Architectural Review Board has approved a bike-themed mural on West Market, below the McGuffey Art Center, although at least one member expressed concerns that it might look like the bicyclists were riding away from Charlottesville’s downtown. #
City Police Chief Tim Longo is meeting with city leaders to work on protocols regarding the use of military surplus police weapons in Charlottesville. #
A 100-year-old Colonnades resident received military honors for her service in the WWII Women’s Army Corps #
-
Archive for Sideblog »
"the highlight of which was a woman calling Kevin Lynch an "airbag" with a personality problem who is "full of crap," leading to Lynch’s rejoinder that he wasn’t the one with the need to defend his personality."
you have to love the day and age of Jerry Springer and reality shows.
Doing her best to make this election interesting
If she doesn’t find local politics interesting, Ms. Nelson should be assigned to a different beat.
NAACP forum: Democrats poised to lose power on May 4 2004 Apr 28 2004 (all 13 questions with historical perspective)
If she doesn’t find local politics interesting, Ms. Nelson should be assigned to a different beat.
Those were my words, not her’s. I’ve found this election lacking in many of the more interesting dramas that have occurred in the last 3-4 elections. There’s been lots of potential for drama (if this were a sitcom, we’d call it character-driven), but it doesn’t seem to go anywhere. And, frankly, I want some entertainment. ;)
Actually, I find this election interesting, but I don’t think that Channel 29 or the papers do it justice. They seem to blandly report a sentence from each candidate, but it’s never the quote that is jaw-dropping.
For instance:
Reinicke was asked what she thought of the proposed interchange improvements to Hydraulic and Rte 29. She replied that she hadn’t heard of the project, but it would probably be expensive, so she’d oppose it. She asked why we don’t just run a bunch of buses up and down Rte 29 to relieve traffic.
Shouldn’t a basic knowledge of what was talked about in City Council in the past year be a requirement for holding the office? Is she really that ignorance of local traffic issues that she thinks that if we run a bunch of busses up and down Rte 29 everyone will suddenly give up their SUV? I haven’t seen her remark mentioned anywhere.
At the same forum, Jackson appeared ignorance of just about every issue. When asked for a specific view on something, he usually said that he’d have to study the problem. If I were running for council, I think I’d try to get familiar with the issues before fielding questions in public.
The candidates submitted written email responses to questions posed by the Locust Grove Neighborhood Association.
Jackson’s responses were in desperate need of a proofreader. It was full of sentence fragments and misspellings. He even used the phrase, "the ladder of the two" at one point. He made a couple of obvious factual errors, too, that should have been caught before he hit "send". For instance, he said that the city budget grew faster than the county’s, but it is actually the other way around. He also thought that Fashion Square Mall was in the city and talked about increasing the tax revenue from it.
The difference between Jackson’s and Lynch’s responses was stark. Lynch is well spoken, he has a deep knowledge of the issues, and he has figures to back up his claims. He also appears to have a spell check program.
Interesting that Paul is so concerned about proofreading when he writes, "appeared ignorance" and "is she really that ignorance," and he goes on to assess Lynch as well spoken. Ha!
Reinicke is impressively informed on the issues, and if this person had listened to the debates, he would realize that she is fully aware of and informed about the interchange issue, and the bypass issue, and has particularly commented that a strong majority of the voters she has spoken to (going door to door) have emphasized their support FOR the parkway.
This would be a point that Kevin Lynch routinely misses because he is adamant about imposing his agenda on our city, rather than listening to anyone outside of his tight little party circle. His experience is worthless, as he has never attempted to integrate other peoples’ viewpoints unless they categorically agree with him.
I am in complete support with the sign on Park St. that says Write-in Meredith Richards. This is what I intend to do, and since I personally blame Kevin Lynch and his nasty letter just before the nominating convention for the fact that Meredith Richards was not nominated, I would never consider voting for him and will consider candidates outside of the Democratice party.
Whoops! – Democratic party.
Write-in Meredith Richards campaign is real: Ex-mayors endorse party line-up
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/kwik-e-simpsons/wallpapers/nelson-800×600.gif
i am going to have to keep that link. And on a side note, you ever noticed that you have to be a ‘well spoken’ person to hold any public office. The moment they found out you don’t have a english you are doom. Just my thoughts.
This would be a point that Kevin Lynch routinely misses because he is adamant about imposing his agenda on our city, rather than listening to anyone outside of his tight little party circle. His experience is worthless, as he has never attempted to integrate other peoples’ viewpoints unless they categorically agree with him.
In addition to my own experience that tells me otherwise, I’ve got some strong evidence to the contrary.
"Reinicke is impressively informed on the issues, and if this person had listened to the debates, he would realize that she is fully aware of and informed about the interchange issue"
I wish I had a transcript to back me up (does one exist?), but at the forum on Monticello Ave, she said she had never heard of the proposal to build an interchange at Hydraulic and Rte 29. I remember it clearly because it made my jaw drop. She is impressively ignorant.
"This would be a point that Kevin Lynch routinely misses because he is adamant about imposing his agenda on our city, rather than listening to anyone outside of his tight little party circle."
I found Kevin to be very accessable. I’ve gone up to him and asked him questions and given my opinion, and have found him both knowledgable and reasonable.
Man3 said:
"And on a side note, you ever noticed that you have to be a ‘well spoken’ person to hold any public office. "
As in Governor of California?
don’t bash Arnold, he won because of well he is Arnold. Why wouldn’t you NOT vote for the Terimator?
I wish I had a transcript to back me up (does one exist?), but at the forum on Monticello Ave, she said she had never heard of the proposal to build an interchange at Hydraulic and Rte 29. I remember it clearly because it made my jaw drop. She is impressively ignorant.
That reminds me of Linda “Ravin'” McRaven, who ran against Brian Wheeler for School Board. At the October 21st forum, in response to a question about teacher pay, she appeared confused, and responded: “I have never had a teacher tell me…they’re underpaid.”
WTF? What planet do you have to live on to not be aware that the major concern of teachers, throughout the nation, is that they are underpaid? I cannot believe that it is possible that she had ever spoken to any teachers as a candidate, because if she had, she would have been told time and time again that teachers want their pay raised. Now, whether or not teachers ought to have their pay raised isn’t even relevant here — she claimed, simply, that she’d never heard of such a thing.
And this woman almost won! Reineke very well may almost win, too, despite having had no idea that there’s been years of discussions and proposals pertaining to building a much, much-needed interchange at 29 and Hydraulic. Naturally, you’ve got to wonder: what else doesn’t she know about?
I think the voters want someone who knows basic principles, not every detail about everything. I could probably find some info you don’t know but I think you should know, then I could legitimately call you an idiot. You know the list would be long.
I prefer the idiot I can understand, rather than the expert who makes no sense and professes harmful policies. All the Dems have is emotion and personal attack.
This year, the Republicans have the ideas and arguments. Whether they win or lose, we will look back at 2004 and say the Republicans (including me) were discussing tough issues in a literate fashion. The Dems had nothing to say, except that everyone else is an idiot.
If we give teachers a raise or increase education spending, we will widen the achievement gap. The gap exists because teachers feel they are under-paid, so they don’t have to do as good a job with all students as they normally would if only they could afford to.
Teacher raises mean tax increases. Teachers don’t pay taxes–they are paid from taxes, so it’s easy for them to demand higher pay and higher taxes for the parents of the students.
If you feel you are underpaid as a teacher when per student spending is at an all-time high, then please switch to a different school or consider career change. Don’t support a system where revenue is a more common concern that the student’s welfare and education.
I support Rob Schilling’s vote not to "fully fund" education. Not while Independent Vance High says that city schools have a "tremendous turnorver" of students and teachers. And we are looking for a new Superintendent. Ron Hutchinson became the interim supreme administrator after the previous superintendent was hire, moved here, and then moved on within a year (if my memory is correct).
It seems the Superintendent of City Schools is not immune from the "tremendous turnover." By supporting an increased budget, the Dems condone the policies that create the high attrition. If you ran a business or bureacracy, would you make any changes if profits went up every year regardless of performance?
How do the Dems rationalize increasing the education budget? Raise teacher pay to attract teachers who are more concerned with pay than students? Naturally you would expect a high turnover whenever these teachers find a higher-paying offer somewhere else.
By increasing the budget, the Dems support the policy of "tremendous turnover." What is their argument? What about my logic? Or am I just another idiot?