[RP TownTalk] TownTalk Digest, Vol 9, Issue 30

[Euniverz at aol.com]

Alan and all,
 
I am not bringing this up to make life difficult for anyone and Alan,I  
appreciate the difficult and hugely subjective task you have been asked to  handle  
-- determining what is electioneering and what is not.   Frankly, I haven't 
yet heard exactly what "electioneering" is; and what it  should not be is, "I 
can't explain it but I know what it is when I see  it."  You perform your list 
moderator duties admirably.
 
Make no mistake, I believe that to further restrict open  discourse on this 
list would be the wrong path to travel.  No definition or  perception of 
electioneering should dampen open, respectful discussion  between candidates, 
incumbents and the public. That is EXACTLY why I am on  this list.  I also 
appreciate the efforts others have made to establish  other lists to exchange this 
discourse.  But there are neither enough list  members nor enough candidates to 
conduct open discourse on those lists. 
 
This is the list on which we should be doing that.  This community  list 
gives us the opportunity to stretch the boundaries of open exchange as  opposed to 
shrinking them.  
 
Thank you,
 
Adrianne Lefkowitz
Madison Street
 
*******************************************
 
Dear Ms. Lefkowitz,

Yes, some of the statements you marked could  be construed as
electioneering, as could many other statements that have gone  out on
the list recently.  I did not view them, in context,  as
electioneering.  If you believe I made an incorrect decision there  is
a process for appealing my decision specified in the policy  (see
http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/2007-April/001549.html).
Of  course, I cannot pull messages that have already gone out back, but
if my  decision is determined to be wrong I can restrict future
postings  more.

Regards,

Alan Thompson
List Administrator and Acting  Webmaster
Town of Riverdale Park

On 4/19/07, euniverz at aol.com  <euniverz at aol.com> wrote:
>
> Electioneering:   "persuasion of voters in a political campaign"
>
> Can any of the  statements in the Mayor's post (see below) be construed as
>  "electioneering"?  Specifically, those statements around which I  placed
> asterisks?
>
> Not complaining, just seeking  clarification.
>
> Adrianne Lefkowitz (apparent Town  Contrarian)
> Madison Street
>
> Dear voters,
>
>  <snip>...These paper postings, along with an advertisement in a paper  of
> general
> circulation (we use the Town Crier), are the Charter  mandated means of
> getting information about elections out to you.  (emphasis added AML)
> ****Anything that is done by the
> town  beyond that represents the Mayor and Council going extra steps to give
>  information to the public.***
>
> You will note that when the  announcement went out electronically via
> the Town Announce it included  for each candidate the 1) phone number; 2)
> email address; and 3) web  site (if the candidate has one). If you want to
> have a one-on-one  discussion with the candidates for office (Emphasis added
> AML) ****you  are better
> able to do that now than in any election that has ever  occurred in the
> history of Riverdale Park****--and Riverdale Park  already had a very good
> record
> of constituent access to  candidates.
>
> (Emphasis added AML) ****Every Council member in one  way or another
> advocated providing more
> information to improve  electronic/voice access to the candidates. The only
> no vote on the  current policy for improving this access came from a council
> member who  wanted to go farther still...****
>
> <snip>
>
>  Best wishes,
>
> Vern
>
> --
> (Emphasis added  AML) Vernon Archer, ****Mayor
> Town of Riverdale Park,  Maryland****







************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20070420/c3c6ca3a/attachment-0003.html>