EDITORIAL: Town Staff Should Not Manipulate Elections

HOW THE WAVE SEES IT

November 1, 2012

The flier on the right was produced by Town of Cape Charles staff and distributed through the official Town Gazette.

It advertises last week’s Candidates Forum, sponsored, so it claims, by Arts Enter.

The flier is a falsehood. Arts Enter did not sponsor the forum — town staff, in their official capacity, did.

This should be of deep concern to every resident of Cape Charles, regardless of political viewpoint.

Town staff apparently realized the impropriety of conducting a political event, and so claimed that an independent organization, Arts Enter, was in charge.

But Arts Enter’s sole involvement was to allow the Palace Theatre to be the venue.

If our town staff were federal employees, under the Hatch Act they would be liable for prosecution for engaging in political activities while on duty.

The Hatch Act also extends to municipal employees who have oversight of federal grant funds.

The fact that both candidates participated in the town-sponsored forum does not lessen the seriousness of the impropriety. Town staff had the opportunity to manipulate the event however they felt might benefit their favored candidate.

Town staff required questions from the audience to be in written form, including the name and address of the questioner.

The assistant town manager then “screened the questions for appropriateness.”

This same “screener” displays in his yard a sign for candidate Steve Bennett. It was clear to a number of observers by the way he shuffled through the cards that he was not submitting questions at random.

Town staff determined that Steve Bennett would have the first opening statement and the last closing statement.

This is not the first time that town staff have attempted to manipulate an election. Our town manager and assistant town manager actively schemed to influence the previous Town Council election in May — when Steve Bennett was also a candidate.

CONTINUED FROM FIRST PAGE

The Wave reported October 9 that emails obtained under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act show that the town manager and assistant town manager manipulated the date for signing a contract to give away school and park property to Echelon Resources.

“It will be a smoother transition with our May 1st elections to execute the contract on May 10th,” the town manager wrote in April.

In case her subtlety is lost on the reader, the assistant town manager was more blunt: “We are trying to avoid possible electoral consequences of contract approval just before the May 1 election,” he wrote.

What could those “possible electoral consequences” be? None other than that the incumbents — including Steve Bennett — might not be re-elected if they gave away  the school and park property before the election. (And of course, that’s exactly what happened — voters rejected all the incumbents.)

Why is it so important to our town manager and assistant town manager that Steve Bennett be returned to Town Council? The Wave believes it is because their jobs could be on the line. Bennett represents the status quo, and if he is elected, their jobs are safe.

Bennett’s opponent, Dan Burke, on the other hand, has openly questioned why a town of 1,000 population needs both a town manager and an assistant town manager.

According to public town documents, the combined salary and benefits for the town manager is $97,400. The part-time salary for the assistant town manager is budgeted at $46,900, without benefits.

Had we known that these same town officials were in charge of last week’s candidates forum, the Wave would have sounded the alarm then. But we believed Arts Enter was in charge.

Absent needed guidance of town staff by our elected officials, it becomes the duty of town residents to mount a hue and a cry against yet another impropriety by our public servants.

The Hatch Act stipulates that federal employees may not use official authority or influence to interfere with an election. Should the residents of Cape Charles demand any less of their town’s public servants?

It should be the best man who wins on November 6 — not the candidate pre-selected by town staff.

 

Share

Comments

15 Responses to “

EDITORIAL: Town Staff Should Not Manipulate Elections”

  1. Deborah Bender on November 1st, 2012 7:07 am

    Well, well, well — again we find out that our town employees are trying to manipulate an election! When are the people of this town going to finally get sick and tired of being manipulated by this group of not so sly town employees? I still question why this tiny town even needs an assistant town manager in the first place. Does anyone realize that Bob Panek was only a consultant to the town right up until the time that the whole Echelon deal started?

    Bob Panek should not have had anything to do with the forum. The town wants Steve Bennett back on the council so that they can continue to vote and swing the votes for whatever they want. Don’t let them swing your vote on election day! I am voting for Dan Burke because he is all for OPEN GOVERNMENT!

  2. Bruce Lindeman on November 1st, 2012 8:13 am

    As always, thanks for the transparency, George!

  3. David Gay on November 1st, 2012 8:13 am

    This shocking activity should be a warning to all those “Bay Creekers” who think what the Town Council does in the Historic District will not affect me. WAKE UP! There will continue to be lawsuits and discontent in town until the Council stops trying to manipulate the election and stack the deck in their favor. They must represent the concerns and interests of ALL the people in Cape Charles not just their own self-interest. Be aware OUR TAXES WILL GO UP as a result of this divisive behavior. What has the Old School debacle costs us already? You should ask yourself do I really want to support Bennett and maintain the status quo or do I want BURKE for positive change, accountability and open government? Tuesday, YOU have the chance to decide!

  4. Benjamin Shertenlieb on November 1st, 2012 8:22 am

    Looks like the ol’ boys network is still alive and well in Cape Charles!!!!

  5. Karen Gay on November 1st, 2012 9:03 am

    Thank goodness for the Wave. This was an enlightening editorial and I am sure that the Wave will welcome rebuttals. I think we should all be able to understand and assess both sides of any issue. I too am for accountability and open government.

  6. Kathy Fraas on November 1st, 2012 9:06 am

    I wouldn’t want to be an elected official in this town for all the tea in China, and I love tea! I would like to be removed from your email list.

    To stop receiving emails, click on the “unsubscribe now” link at the bottom of the email. –EDITOR

  7. Ettore Zuccarino on November 1st, 2012 9:07 am

    Well reported, Wave! I support the spirit with which this article was written. It would be great if the Wave were to turn out to be a voice of local public conscience and integrity. God knows how much we need it!

  8. Don Bender on November 1st, 2012 9:30 am

    Back room deals and sneaky behavior is all this town council, mayor and town managers want. They are almost all “come-heres,” and while I have nothing against people coming here and living a nice peaceful life, the come-heres on the town council are all about making backroom deals with developers! Make no mistake about me folks, my wife is a come-here and so are a lot of my friends. I have no problem with people moving here and enjoying all that our little town has to offer, but how dare this council, mayor and town managers try to manipulate this election for their benefit. All the current council wants is to continue to do business behind closed doors and to manipulate people into believing that taxes will go up if they don’t get what they want. At the last town council meeting my wife gave evidence that under the current leadership this town has run up a bill of at least $850,000 on their shady, colluded deal with Echelon. $850,000 taxpayer dollars down the drain! Please don’t let the town convince you that Steve Bennett is the man for the job. He was on council during the dirty deal with Echelon. Dan Burke is the right man for the job. He is all about governmental transparency and open government.

  9. Karen Gay on November 1st, 2012 12:44 pm

    I’d like to reply to Ms. Fraas’ comment above. After my previous post I got to thinking about the members of the Town Council. I know some of them and consider many of them friends. I can imagine how hard they work to achieve what they think of as the goals of the town. These are good people; like most of us, they struggle to do what they think of as the right thing. I am hoping that they will take note of what the editorial is saying: Some people in Cape Charles would like to be heard by the Town Council before major decisions are made. On one hand it is easy just to turn off the source of criticism … I hope that the members of the Town Council don’t do this because it will lead to further division. Perhaps a statement by the Town Council, Mayor, or Town Manager as to how they plan to work with people in Cape Charles in the future would be helpful.

  10. Wayne Creed on November 1st, 2012 2:14 pm

    Once again, thanks to the Wave for shedding light on issues that are almost always swept right under the rug. However, there are several instances that give me pause. The piece seems to infer (probably not intentionally) that Mr. Bennett is somehow in cahoots with members of the town staff in his re-election efforts. This is a small town, and those lines get blurred pretty quickly -— as citizens, we have to stay on top of it, demand objectivity, but in the end, as we all know, friends are friends, and it is what is. Steve and I disagree on most issues, especially the Echelon deal, yet I find it hard to believe that he would be party to such a scheme (Nan would probably slap some sense into him if he even tried it). I must add that I have worked with Steve and his wife Nan several times, especially with the daunting task of putting on our Christmas Progressive Tour. Having seen how well Steve works and organizes, I don’t really see him having to resort to something like this.

    We also seem to be splitting hairs about who “sponsored” the forum. The Town is almost always responsible for this thing, and it is usually put on in the firehouse, which is a horrid venue. Arts Enter opened its doors for the event, and in return, was given some props. That’s usually how it happens around here.

    There was also some hand wringing regarding the shuffling of questions by Mr. Panek. When I ran for Mayor, we had a similar candidate’s forum, which was also moderated by Bob. During that event, he also shuffled and skipped over some questions. In that case, the questions were ad hominem, personal attacks, meant to embarrass me. Mr. Panek was not a supporter of mine, yet he skipped over those questions and attempted to keep the forum focused on the issues, and not on personal attacks. I wasn’t at the latest forum, but I have a feeling he did the same thing there.

    Back to the original point, these are serious allegations, and Town staff has been caught with its hands in the candy jar once before; however, I’m not sure thanking Arts Enter for hosting the event, or Bob making judgment calls on the appropriateness of the questions gets us there. What the piece does highlight is just how distrustful citizens have become of the inner workings of our Town government. They have become disgusted with back room, sweetheart deals, and the Vladimir Putinesque nature of a Council which seems more than willing to run roughshod over the concerns of the full-time residents of the historic district. Believe me, Old School Cape Charles gets it —- we’ve lived it. This is also why there are two lawsuits pending, and we hired one of the best constitutional attorneys in the State. The issues being generated here (which are being talked about from Norfolk to Blacksburg to Arlington), and which may affect the General Assembly, more than likely will have to be decided by the Virginia Supreme Court.

    Thank you for your comment, but to be clear, there is nothing in the editorial that either implies or infers, intentionally or unintentionally, that Mr. Bennett is somehow “in cahoots” with town staff. The editorial focuses wholly on the unethical actions of town staff and casts no aspersions whatsoever on Mr. Bennett. –EDITOR

  11. Peter Lawrence on November 1st, 2012 3:58 pm

    WHAT A SCANDAL (kidding) . . . Town hosts a public forum so citizens can learn more about two candidates running for council. I’m certain they spent at least $20 on the fliers and several hours of staff hours circulating them. RIGHT UP THERE WITH WATERGATE. Even if there was a technical Hatch Act violation, there was no violation of the spirit of the Act (influencing elections). Questions were screened for appropriateness (read proper civil discourse). I’m sure if someone’s question that seemed to question a specific issue for either of the two candidates wasn’t read, that questioner would have let us all know that night . . . or the WAVE would have found that person and publicized their complaint. INSTEAD of carping on a technical violation when there clearly was no effort/intent to influence the election/Forum, the WAVE might have questioned the appropriateness of the Town’s promotion ahead of time and offered to promote and host it instead. And please don’t belittle the Arts Enter sponsorship. In-kind contributions are often the lifeblood of special events like that. I congratulate them for making the space available. I’d also like to thank Bob Panek, Heather Arcos and Willie Randall for VOLUNTEERING their time that night. It was a great/informative Forum and well attended. I look forward to the WAVE becoming a true solutions provider and partner in Cape Charles instead of playing Woodward and Bernstein as often as possible.

    Thank you for your comment. You will find nothing in the editorial that is in any way meant to “belittle” Arts Enter. The Wave is a strong supporter of Arts Enter and the Palace Theatre, and is pleased to publicize their productions to the greatest extent. But if you were to speak to the Arts Enter leadership, as we did, you might learn that Arts Enter did not “sponsor” the candidate forum. –EDITOR

  12. Scott Walker Jr on November 1st, 2012 6:40 pm

    You people get your noses kinked out of shape too easily. You got proof of a rigged election? OK, so the ad should have read “hosted” by Arts Enter…

    The Asst Town Mgr (as he did in 2008) culls the questions to weed out the whackos. You can do better? Volunteer next time.

    Meanwhile, go shovel some sand…

  13. Kathleen Mullen on November 1st, 2012 7:46 pm

    Thank you WAVE staff for exposing the problems within the town council. I am shocked that such behavior is demonstrated by elected officials and we don’t hear back from any of them an apology or explanation. Where is the honesty? I am saddened about the angry comment “go shovel some sand” as if what the WAVE is doing is not important. Keep up the good reporting and let the rest of us do the shoveling.

  14. Deborah Bender on November 1st, 2012 9:36 pm

    To Peter: If you don’t think these town officials would manipulate an election you had better put on your reading glasses. They attempted to manipulate the election to help Steve Bennett and Larry Veber win in May. Bob Panek had no business reading and deciding the questions at the forum.

    To Scott: When you move back into this town you get to voice your opinion.

  15. Stephen K. Fox on November 2nd, 2012 11:47 am

    It is disturbing that the Wave appears to have become a conduit for expressing vitriolic comments against Town employees and elected officials. Whatever happened to the idea of representative government in which the people’s voices were heard at the polls rather than weekly running commentary lacking in civility?

    Thank you for your comment. When emotions run high, vitriol seems part of human nature, and if you read online comments in other publications such as the Washington Post, you would be even more disturbed. Most publications do not have the resources to monitor online comments, so anything goes. Because the Wave serves a small town, the number of comments is low enough to be manageable. The Wave agrees that civility is to be desired, and hopes that even angry readers will agree. Expressing one’s opinion at the polls is the democratic way, but that democratic tradition has always gone hand in hand with a free press, including letters to the editor and, in our electronic age, online comments. –EDITOR