By Adam Pagnucco.<\/em><\/p>\n It was the spring of 2008.\u00a0 Five-term County Council Member Marilyn Praisner, who had represented District 4 since 1990, had passed away and eight candidates were running for her seat.\u00a0 One of them was a woman.\u00a0 One of them was a person of color born in another country.<\/p>\n Her name was Nancy Navarro.<\/p>\n At that time, District 4 included most of US-29 north of Downtown Silver Spring to the Howard County border and the areas south of Olney, east of Rockville and north of Wheaton.\u00a0 It had little in the way of restaurants or shopping.\u00a0 There was the aging, emptying business district in Burtonsville.\u00a0 There was the decrepit, asphalt-covered shopping center in Glenmont.\u00a0 Here and there, small and mid-size retail strips clung to the sides of New Hampshire Avenue and other major roads.\u00a0 A tiny colony of fast food and lowbrow restaurants had just sprung up on US-29 at Tech Road.\u00a0 Walkable urban shopping was nowhere to be found.\u00a0 If residents wanted that, they would have to drive to Downtown Silver Spring to get it.<\/p>\n None of this was an accident.\u00a0 For years and years, the civic leaders and activists who dominated the district\u2019s politics had worked hard to keep development out.\u00a0 Mrs. Praisner was their champion.\u00a0 They regarded development as a bad thing, attracting both traffic and \u201cundesirables.\u201d<\/a>\u00a0 But newer residents, including people of color, wanted the restaurants, jobs and shopping that most other people around the county had.\u00a0 Colesville resident Nancy Navarro was one of them, and soon she became their<\/em> champion.<\/p>\n Navarro stood out during the 2008 special election, and not just because of her gender and heritage.\u00a0 The other seven candidates running for Mrs. Praisner\u2019s seat, including her husband Don, adhered to her vision of little or no growth.\u00a0 (Don Praisner\u2019s campaign slogan was literally \u201cFulfilling the Vision.\u201d)\u00a0 Navarro instead talked about the benefits of economic development, such as creating jobs for residents and giving them amenities that they had not previously had.\u00a0 Navarro was also supported by many in the business and real estate communities and the public employee unions.\u00a0 None of this sat well with the old guard, who regarded developers as evil and unions as tax-happy.\u00a0 Navarro quickly became a target.<\/p>\n The March debate at the Aspen Hill library typified the direction of the campaign: nearly every other candidate concentrated their fire on Navarro.\u00a0 Their attacks centered on the allegation that she was allegedly a \u201ctool\u201d of developers<\/a> and unions.\u00a0 (It didn\u2019t help that MCPS Superintendent Jerry Weast invited union leaders to his house to get them to endorse Navarro.<\/a>)\u00a0 But there was more to it than that.\u00a0 To Navarro\u2019s supporters, the implication of this \u201ctool\u201d argument was that women and people of color were supposedly not intelligent or strong enough to make up their own minds, and that when they made common cause with others, they would inevitably fall under their \u201ccontrol.\u201d\u00a0 Furthermore, while Don Praisner\u2019s supporters criticized Navarro for taking contributions from developers and businesses, Mrs. Praisner had done the exact same thing for years<\/a>.\u00a0 Later, it was revealed that Don Praisner himself accepted money from a property owner in the district seeking redevelopment<\/a>.<\/p>\n Much of this is par for the course in the rocky world of political campaigns.\u00a0 After all, opposition to change frequently arises in politics and outrage can be selective.\u00a0 But with Navarro on the ballot, it mutated into something far darker: a toxic stew of racism and xenophobia.\u00a0 Don Praisner defeated Navarro in the 2008 Democratic primary and would serve on the council for less than a year before he passed away.\u00a0 When Navarro returned to run again in the 2009 special election, the forces of extremism were prepared.<\/p>\n First came the illegal anonymous robocalls<\/a>, a repeat of a tactic used against Navarro in 2008<\/a>.\u00a0 Then came rumors circulated both on-line<\/a> and off linking Navarro (who was born in Venezuela) to the Hugo Chavez regime.\u00a0 Help Save Maryland, labeled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a \u201cnativist extremist group,\u201d<\/a> began targeting Navarro for her alleged support of \u201cillegal aliens.\u201d<\/a>\u00a0 Their challenge to Navarro was posted on a racist website equating President Obama to Satan<\/a>.<\/p>\n Most bizarre of all was an email<\/a> sent to Navarro\u2019s campaign asking about her immigration status.\u00a0 The author wrote, \u201cI am informally involved with a group of Independents and we are trying to identify a candidate that we feel comfortable endorsing. It would be great if you could put the rumors to rest and provide information as to when (what year) and where, which state, Ms. Navarro received her naturalization or citizenship. Thank you.\u201d\u00a0 In fact, the author \u2013 who used a fake name \u2013 was a GOP activist<\/a> who wrote for the party and had testified against drivers licenses for illegal immigrants.<\/p>\n Robin Ficker was involved too.\u00a0 The 2008 GOP nominee, Mark Fennel, was a Ficker prot\u00e9g\u00e9<\/a>, had spread the Hugo Chavez rumors<\/a> and threatened to unleash \u201cthe Dogs of War\u201d<\/a> on Navarro.\u00a0 In 2009, Ficker \u201cmoved\u201d to District 4<\/a> to run for the seat and promptly began sending out illegal flyers<\/a>.\u00a0 During a televised campaign debate, Ficker waved a set of decade-old tax liens against Navarro and her husband in his opponent\u2019s face.\u00a0 Ficker did not use Help Save Maryland\u2019s race-baiting tactics directly, but he did not repudiate them either.<\/p>\n Given this history, it\u2019s no surprise that Help Save Maryland\u2019s participation in Ficker\u2019s term limits initiative was spurred in part by a desire to knock off Navarro<\/a>.\u00a0 The group has never made its peace with Navarro\u2019s election and has sent out numerous emails slamming her over the years.\u00a0 Supporters of term limits have many motivations<\/a>, but Help Save Maryland is quite clear about theirs: they want to slam the county\u2019s gates shut to \u201cillegal aliens.\u201d<\/p>\n Will any of this make a difference in the current debate over term limits?\u00a0 Probably not.\u00a0 Few voters have heard of Help Save Maryland and understand what the group believes.\u00a0 Even Ficker is less infamous now that his NBA heckling days are mostly over.\u00a0 In any event, voters are more likely to see term limits through the prism of their own perceived self-interest rather than how they impact specific elected officials.<\/p>\n But make no mistake: the treatment of Nancy Navarro during the 2009 special election is a shameful blot on the county\u2019s political history.\u00a0 It must not be forgotten.\u00a0 It must not be repeated.\u00a0 And hopefully, her successors will be treated with the honor and respect that all upstanding candidates deserve.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Adam Pagnucco. It was the spring of 2008.\u00a0 Five-term County Council Member Marilyn Praisner, who had represented District 4 since 1990, had passed away and eight candidates were running for her seat.\u00a0 One of them was a woman.\u00a0 One of them was a person of color born in another country. Her name was Nancy … Continue reading Targeting Navarro<\/span>