Franco Cedrone who is running against Maria Scibelli Greenberg in the contest for the open Ward 1 seat on our city council has declined the League of Women Voters Newton’s invitation to debate his opponent, the league reports.
These debates are typically the highest profile of the candidate match-ups because they are recorded at and air on NewTV. But there will be no Ward 1 Councilor forum, since LWVN requires a minimum of two candidates to attend.
Cedrone was one of the few new candidates who also did not submit a candidate column for Village 14. But Greenberg’s column is here,
Two years ago, Cyrus Vaghar passed on his opportunity to debate Margaret Albright in the Ward 2 School Committee contest (and I gave him a hard time for it.)
I was happy to learn that this year Cyrus has agreed to participate.
It’s a real disservice to the voters when a candidate for public office declines to participate in a debate. It’s also very frustrating for their opponent who loses the opportunity to go before the voters and get their message out. I know this first hand because my opponent refused to debate me in the last election resulting in a nearly invisible campaign. The Tab didn’t even bother making an endorsement because my opponent was not taken seriously and the Ward 1 race was considered “uncontested”.
Unfortunately, I cannot vote in the Ward 1 race. But I urge everyone to donate to Maria’s campaign to help her get her message out (which Cedrone’s refusal to debate seems tailored to prevent). Here is a link to her campaign website: https://www.mariafornewton.org.
I don’t agree with Cedrone’s
approach, but it is not his responsibility to help Maria
get her message out.
@Alison-
Message:
Stop whining. You won
Mr. Green,
While it is not Cedrone’s responsibility to help Maria get HER message out, it is his responsibility to get HIS OWN message out. How can he be taken seriously as a candidate if he neither provides written statements nor agrees to take part in a debate?I do not vote in ward 1 but if I did, I would dismiss this candidate immediately if he refused to articulate to me why I should vote for him.
I didn’t take Alison’s message to be evidence of whining: it perhaps was a warning to Cedrone that, should he persist in running an “invisible” campaign, he will assist Maria in sliding into a similarly “uncontested” victory.
This is terrible. This is typically done when one candidate thinks they will win and doesn’t want to give the other candidate any visibility. It’s bush league. It happened to me in the Governor’s Council race when Marilyn refused to debate me and we were invited in 3 different cities and one of the cities gave us an open ended invitation and she said she was too busy with GC stuff. It’s bush league. I wish Maria all the best…it’s frustrating.
In my experience, candidates who refuse to debate have something to hide. They’re shirking their responsibility to explain their views to the voters.
Hopefully this candidate will explain why he refuses to debate.
@Bryan — Agreed — http://www.newtondemocracy.org/news/why-vote-no-on-charter-watch-latest-episode-of-common-ground
I hope Ward 1 residents support Maria in this race – she’s great. Really dedicated and committed to the city and her neighborhood. Maria will be an excellent councilor – one reason of many is that she is ready and willing to debate or talk with the public about her candidacy any time.
We really need a forum where candidates in contested races can be seen even if their opponents refuse to debate. It’s not about fairness to the candidates – it’s what’s fair to the voters.
I agree with not including candidates in uncontested races. However, it shouldn’t be too hard to include people like Greenberg and just ask them the same questions being asked of all other candidates for Councilor. This would be in the public interest.
@Meredith. This makes total sense.
Meredith, I don’t believe the lwv would do that. They are suppose to be impartial and having one candidate and not the other(s) would have the visual of being partial. I am sure there’s someone out there willing to do that for the candidates, though.
@Tom – that reasoning would be reasonable if they only allowed a debate if all candidates attend (yes, I understand your point that it’s about the visuals). But as it is, they allow candidates in a 3 person race to participate if only 2 of them attend. IMO, the rule should be that only candidates in contested races are invited. If one chooses not to attend, then announce that at the beginning so it’s clear to everyone that there’s no partiality, just a choice by the candidate.
Again, if the purpose of the forum is to have informed citizenry on Election Day, then the purpose is defeated if willing candidates are barred due to their opponents not wanting to let the electorate know their views.
Meredith, as a past candidate, I totally agree with you.
I don’t know the reason why Mr. Cedrone is refusing to debate Ms. Greenberg, but if it has something to do with the LWV organizing it then perhaps a different venue would be an option? @Tom, similar to the one you moderated for the Ward 1 contest in 2013 at the Post 440.
The League works really hard to find a time where all candidates who choose to participate in a forum can. Only candidates can see that we’ve been working since late July trying to find a time when all candidates in each race are available–so it took about a month to find a schedule that works for everyone. We’ve managed to do this in all races every municipal election that I’ve been involved in, except when someone refused to participate.
FYI, I think only three candidates will be involved in the Ward 1 Councilor at Large forum, since I didn’t hear from Jay Ciccone despite repeated emails and phone calls. He is more than welcome to attend the forum, but we had to finalize the schedule without any confirmation that he would attend.
About adding one candidate to a different forum, there are some issues that are raised specific to a ward that might not be relevant to all candidates. But I think it’s a fair point to say that we might not have all four candidates in the other Ward 1 race, but can still hold the forum. I suspect the difference is that holding a forum for 1 candidate looks like (and could act like) an endorsement, but a forum with 3 doesn’t.
@Sue – I think you could make a clear disclaimer that the League isn’t endorsing anyone, that the race is contested but the other candidate chose not to attend. I don’t think that would look like or act as an endorsement. And voters shouldn’t be penalized and not get to hear a candidate just because another refuses to participate.
I’d be happy to do that again for this election, but both candidates would have to come to me with a time and place, I’ll be there with questions and rules.
My name was used with specious comments. I just want to provide the facts .
I welcome the opportunity to participate in forums to educate people on what the Governor’s Council does and how I am working for the people .
In 18 years I have missed only one forum. ( includes primary and general elections)
About 4 years ago I received only one invitation to participate in a forum – from the Newton LW voters. It was for the November general election . I was unable to attend and asked if they could’ change it to another night . They were unable to reschedule . I was disappointed that I had to miss this opportunity before the election.
When I served as a Councillor at large for many years – I never missed one forum . Forums are important to give voters the chance to see and hear from the candidates who they will be voting for. I agree all candidates should appear at forums – they owe that to the voters.
Marilyn M.Petitto Devaney