Re: ‘He Says Last Night’s Candidates Forum Fell Flat,’ Feb. 21, Op-Ed.
Charles Deen writes that the format of the Candidates Forum on Feb. 20 in Sunkist Park didn’t work. Maybe it didn’t.
I don’t know because I wasn’t there.
But I do know that the existing formats don’t work that well, especially with nine candidates.
Consider the logistics. Each of the nine candidates is given a three-minute opening statement. That is a minimum of 27 minutes but probably more than 30 with the introductions and getting to the microphone.
And they conclude with each of the candidates giving a two-minute closing. Another 18 to 20 minutes. This is 50 minutes out of a one and a half to two- hour forum, leaving 40 to 70 minutes for questions.
Considering that each candidate will be given one minute to answer the question and the person probably took a minute to ask the question, this allows for four to seven questions. That would be all right if the questions you had were asked.
In my experience, they usually are not.
Also the limited number of questions limits the candidates’ ability to differentiate themselves from the other candidates. So I applaud the Sunkist Park Neighborhood Watch in trying something new.
Maybe another group will try a different format. They could try having three or four forums that each dealt with a specific topic, like development or city services.
Forego the opening statements, which are nothing different from what is said in the campaign brochures.
Collect questions before the start so the forum could be kept on topic. This is just one thought.
I am sure that others can come up with different ideas. To better inform the electorate, we need to try other formats.
Mr. Supple can be contacted at
tomjsup@ca.rr.com
