RECENT COMMENTS
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
lanny on then it happens to you...
JessOfRVA on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Updated! Guess what's happening on Mosby/Venable?
Mary on then it happens to you...
Sid on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Church Hill Startup Tackles Insurance for Freelancers
Council deliberations on appointment to be closed to the public
01/27/2009 10:23 AM by John M
Silver’s Richmond City Council Reporter & Telegraph has a look into City Council’s deliberations concerning the appointment and just how closed to the public this process will. Read his take and then listen for yourself:
At forty seconds into this recording Valerie Salaam, Council policy advisor (one of Council’s four policies advisors), describes the process that will be used to select the next Council person from the 7th District. Ms. Salaam delivers the bombshell at 2:40 in the recording, “The interviews, as well as any further discussion and consideration of candidates will all be held in Closed Session.”
Disgraceful!! Yet again, the citizens of the city are forbidden to be included in another council process where our district is at stake. Sad how those that represent us fine it so important to keep us in the dark.
The theory is that, by doing the interviews in public, later candidates will have an unfair advantage, since they will know both the questions and other candidate responses. I would still have preferred the process to be more transparent.
“Sad how those that represent us fine it so important to keep us in the dark.”
To add insult to injury, folk who do not represent us will keep us in the dark on the appointment for our district.
But Ron also has a point. What council should do is video tape each interview for us to see or better yet, place applicants in one of those sound proof glass cases they use in beauty pageants when they test the individual contestants IQ.
The reasoning for doing this is absolutely malarkey. You could sequester the candidates like an employer does at a job interview — one of many solutions that doesn’t involve taking the public out of what should be a very public process.
Unfortunately, this is part of a trend with our city council.
http://saverichmond.com/?p=647
Where is Mayor Jones? Can he hum “Kumbaya” to this tune?
Thank goodness there are a couple good journalists around -thank you Don of Save Richmond and Style writer, Chris Dovi.
A few good journalists…Silver too.
RE: post #3 – “…one of those sound proof glass cases they use in beauty pageants when they test the individual contestants IQ.”
Totally! Because that is exactly what I thought of when I read the proposed questions mentioned on another thread. Dead serious!
Is this real life? Cause it reads more like a John Waters film.
No, that would be Baltimore. Richmond is more like a David Lynch film without the dwarves.
And why arent they holding a special election? I’m sorry but dont we (7D residents) have ANY input on who the councilperson to represent us will be.
Seems odd, please forgive me if not up to date on how this process works. I thouht we vote for our councilperson.
Democracy – Richmond style, eh? What a load of bologna…. In all seriousness this can not be legal… we need someone with legal expertise to look into this one.
I must thank my City Council member, Chris Hilbert, for demonstrating the backbone and brains to stand up for transparency in the process of choosing a representative for the 7th District.
Hallelujah, Hilbert!
Were something similar to this happening in the Third District, Chris and I both know citizens of the Third would be on fire with the injustice of the very notion that anyone — or any entity –would deny us our Democratic right to have input or influence over whom would be chosen to represent us.
It doesn’t need to be this way. When our School Board needed to replace the Fifth District member who resigned mid-term, we faced a similar situation.
Sensitive to the issue of choosing a representative for a district where none of us resided, and mindful of the need for transparency and fairness, each board member submitted questions which we were then asked by the School Board Clerk to each candidate in a specially called open meeting.
All candidates were in the room at the same time as were members of the public and press. Each candidate received the same questions and each had the opportunity to demonstrate their public speaking and thinking skills.
Afterwards, we went into closed session to discuss the various candidates and to come to consensus.
I remain proud of our board and the unity of purpose we demonstrated the night we used a transparent process to choose Betsy Carr to represent the Fifth District.
Instead of heeding President Obama’s call for greater for greater openness in government and accountability for our elected officials, I see signs that Richmond’s leaders are attempting to go back in time. This is so wrong. This obsession with secret-keeping continues to make our city sick.
Let us all do our part to re-make America, starting with our own city.
#9, there will be a special election, but it’s not going to be until next November. Supposedly that means more people will show up at the polls…draw your own conclusions as to whether the appointed person will get an advantage from having been in office from Feb. until then. I truly don’t know, at this point, because of all the publicity this has gotten. If Newbille gets the nod, I think that just gives the rest of us that much more time to be public and loud about it!
#11, thanks Ms. Wolf. I think a lot of us here in the 7th are doing what we can – I note, as has gray, that we seem to be getting some journalistic attention now.
#12,
crd, I have been following the situation and need to do a “shout-out” here for all the heavy lifting that the citizens of the Seventh have already been been doing!
You, gray, John Murden, Joe, SEW, Torey, Steven, Bob, Ron, UnionHill, Shannon, chgal, Deanna, bill2 & bill9, Eric, ptaylor, Peaches … the list goes on!
You have also garnered some serious journalistic attention in the print and digital media, thanks to John Murden & CHPN and everyone reaching out to people like Dovi, Silver, Don Harrison … and this list goes on.
Hallelujahs for all … yet another example of how the digital media is helping remake the world. Now, if only we could find a way to get everyone access to a computer and the internet.
Been busy for a couple of days and am just catching up… That just plain reeks. So, WHEN/date are they going to make the appointment? Thanks!
Appointment scheduled to be made Feb 9.
Don is right (#4). The reasoning is ridculous. How can the public be sure that all the questions to all 12 candidates are exactly the same?
If Newbill is the candidate of choice by the powers that want her, how do we know the interview with her will be the same as Candidate X or Y, and not a back slapping get to know ya, “can’t wait to have you on board” session?
If they do this in closed session, City Council should release all the questions they ask of each candidate either before or after.
If they do so before, all the candidates will know the questions but won’t know each other’s answers. If they release them after, then the candidates will know if they all got asked the same questions and if this thing really is the circus it has already become. Barnum was right.
There no reason good enough to keep this thing is closed session and plenty of excellent reasons to open it to the public and press.
Something has got to give here. This has to be illegal!
If Wolf and the School Board can figure out how to do something in a transparent way, why can’t City Council?
I know — that was then and this is now and she is no longer on the SB.
But, sheesh …… this is insane.
There *is* no reason good enough ….
Boo, boo, boo. Shame on Richmond City Council! “…government of the people, by the people and for the people”, but not, apparently, in the River City.
This is about as transparent as a brick wall. I’m sorry but things like this just can not be allowed to stand. I’ll do a little research tomorrow on Council protocol and our rights as citizens/residents of the 7th. Time to raise a little Hell and more media attention to this process.
#21, Deanna – speaking of media, somewhere on one of these related threads I thought someone had one of the local television stations doing an interview. Any idea what happened with that? I’m curious. If they did an interview, maybe they’d do a follow-up with this latest news of closed session at Council? Plus, perhaps Dovi would do same…
Has the Newbille camp really sunk that low? This makes me want to leave Richmond. I’m so disgusted. We need to write Council Members and press again and again. I know one thing, if this story is true, I don’t want a single tax dollar of mine to go into that Newbille’s pocket. I don’t care how many folk she has helped. There are plenty of helpers out there who are both decent and ethical.
http://chpn.net/news/2009/01/19/newbille-a-7th-district-resident-for-the-past-18-days/
“I attended a community forum last night at the Family Resource Center. The Forum was sponsored by City of Richmond’s Social Services and the Family Resource Center, a young girl was passing around a petition supporting Newbille for the 7th district appointment during the forum. I not sure if people were totally aware that it was a petition they were being asked to sign, because I thought it was a sign in sheet. I almost sign the petition because the girl ask me to sign in for the meeting, just as I was about to sign it, I realized it was not a sign in sheet at all, it was the petition.”
It sure looks like Council doesn’t want us to “slow down the process” of appointing our 7th district rep.
From a procedural standpoint, Council has already voted to make this Monday’s applicant interviews private.
Its possible that a council person (possibly after we’ve barraged them with email) could make a motion on Monday to make the interviews and deliberations public. That could possibly delay the hearing, but so what?
Another possibility is that the Monday applicant interviews could be video taped and then made available to the public.
The most practical thing to do now might be to send lots of email to the Council saying we want the applicants interviews and deliberations to be public or at least video-taped and made available before the council votes.
This would in theory give 7th district folks time to send email/letters (to Council) voicing support for the applicant of their choice.
James River Maven’s post “Government In the Dark” gives us some coverage.
http://jamesrivermaven.blogspot.com/2009/01/government-in-dark.html
Re: #22 Sandra Jones from Channel 6 did a few different stories for both the 6 and 11pm newscast…I think it was last weds. During her interview, she interviewed Newbille who proclaimed that she was “invested” in this community. However, none of Jones’ questions were pointed squarely on the fact that Newbille’s new residence is just a front. Jones also interviewed McQuinn…didn’t really get to the hard-hitting question of whether she was behind planting Newbille in the district. She got Torey Edmonds on camera who accurately expressed the frustration of the neighborhood. From a personal source at the station, I think Sandra was a little disappointed that she could not get more residents ON CAMERA to share their views. If some of you are passionate about some follow-up coverage…I’m sure a follow-up would be done if we get folks to commit to going on camera.
Gray, you’re right, that is a GREAT column! Everyone here needs to read it!
#26 kelly, so sorry, I didn’t see your comment before I posted in response to gray – not sure what happened, maybe I needed to hit ‘refresh.’ Anyway, maybe we need to do that, get an entire group to commit to going on camera. I surely would do so but I’m working some very weird hours right now, and I’m not available much. Let me know when and where, though, and I’ll do my best. Can you get someone to set it up? I’d really love to see a group of twenty or even fifty people on camera, just all agreeing that the process itself is flawed, no matter which candidate they support.
crd, et al – I’m game. I’ll contact Sandra from Channel 6 and see if she can meet next week in the evening if that works for everyone. I’m happy to host at my house on 36th across from the park
Call Holmberg, too.
People may be blowing this out of proportion? I asked this to Valerie Salaam and daisy Weaver answered in part below:
” City Council members determined they would use a closed session to interview all candidates who applied and are deemed qualified as certified by the City Registrar under current election laws.
While the interviews are expected to be conducted during a closed session, Council’s nomination and final vote will take place during an open public session on February 9th during its regular meeting. Council members continue to receive input from the public. ”
I think the interview process is necessary so those who do the hiring knows how each candidate stand and their qualifications while not cross-contaminating each candidate so they can’t build on each other’s platform. After that process is over, the public is still active.
Eric
I agree that the public’s interest is most important and that there be an election – sometimes it is at a future date. Interim appointees are not uncommon in government and it is generally followed by an election — I can’t imagine that you’ve missed the recent Illinois Senate seat Appointment process and the New York Senate seat Appointment process — who could miss it with the dramas that unfolded. Not uncommon — not necessarily smooth — not necessarily exactly what the people are looking for longterm — but not uncommon. Sometimes a hidden gem comes forth. Appointments are followed by an election at some point in the future. there’s always November.