Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
The returns are coming in, and it looks like it’s all incumbents + Ramirez. Kristin R-S was at about 12th or so the last time I was at the Blue Shamrock, Darius and Richard are near the bottom.
I know some people will be happy about that, but some of us malcontents won’t be. Planning for the next local election starts next week, people, stay tuned. Some great ideas are being incubated at the Drinking Liberally meets and in places like UTEC. There’s energy there and it won’t dissipate.
Voter turnout was pretty bad according to reports so far, which is pretty disappointing but not unexpected. Will have more stats soon.
UPDATE:
Here are the prelim (I assume not certified) results - from the spreadsheet at the Blue Shamrock
City Council [EDIT: Added numbers for Mendonca and Zaim, I was typing fast on a laptop, sorry!] about that!)
1. Rita Mercier: 8041
2. Eileen Donoghue: 7203
3. Bud Caulfield: 6460
4. Rodney Elliot: 5989
4. Armand Mercier: 5989
6. Kevin Broderick: 5961
7. Jim Milinazzo: 5959
8. Bill Martin: 5808
9. George Ramirez: 5148
10. Joe Mendonca: 4131
11. Michael Zaim: 4049
12. Curtis LeMay: 3987
13. K. Ross-Sitcawich: 3246
14. Rady Mom: 2707
15. David Laferriere: 2155
16. Sambeth Fennell: 1777
17. Richard Douglas: 1682
18. Darius Mitchell: 1461
—–
School Committee
1 Jackie Doherty: 7099
2. John Leahy: 6810
3. Regina Faticanti: 6068
4. Jim Leary: 6033
5. Connie Martin: 5820
6. Kevin McHugh: 5528
7. Vesna Nuon: 4625
8. Tim Lavoie: 4180
9. Cecelia Okafor: 2541
Things of note: The difference between 6th and 7th place is 2 votes, 4th and 5th are tied, the margin between 4th and 7th is 30 votes. Does this strike anyone as interesting? I find the fact the incumbents get listed as the first candidates on the ballot to be anti-democratic. Talk about talking an advantage that incumbents have and making it worse.
[powered by WordPress.]
43 queries. 0.712 seconds
November 8th, 2005 at 11:14 pm
harumph.
November 8th, 2005 at 11:33 pm
Adding George Ramirez and subtracting Dick Howe results in a tremendous win for progress for the city. This is really a very strong city council.
Hope to see Richard Douglas and K-R-S run again in the future.
November 9th, 2005 at 12:16 am
It’s a shame there was not a preliminary election.
I worked on a campaign in the past in years with a prelim and we were able
use the outcome of the preliminary to see where our weakness was
and focus on bringing up the numbers in those wards.
My candidate went from #12 in the preliminary to a seat on the council as a result.
I suggest in 2 years that if we are faced with a situation where there will not be a
preliminary again we should recruit some ringers to throw their names in just to force a
preliminary election.
November 9th, 2005 at 12:22 am
Great job on the live blogging, Lynne. I just looked at the Sun and they don’t have any results, posted. I expected at least the pre-lims.
November 9th, 2005 at 12:24 am
Yes, I second that praise. I checked the Globe, Sun and LTC and no one has the number
and since I’m out of town at the moment without your blog I would have had to wait until I
got home and sit through the re-run of the LTC coverage
Thanks!
November 9th, 2005 at 12:26 am
That’s it. I’m moving to Canada. No, I’m not.
I find it is interesting how we talk about the “city” like it is a corporation, instead of talking about the people. Think of what a corporation is, it is just this entity. It can lay people off, sell all of its assets, buy a completely new plant and hire new people, or fire the CEO, shareholders sell and buy its stock. It can merge, be cut up, or a hostile take over can occur. A corporation has one goal, make profit.
I have nothing against making profit, but private industry not public office is the best place for such goals.
I feel more like a shareholder at the company’s annual meeting then a voter.
November 9th, 2005 at 12:51 am
Well, thank Rich Douglas, he grabbed some printouts for me from the Blue Shamrock where they had the spreadsheet being updated all night.
I’m glad it was useful.
If you wanna feel more like a voter not a shareholder, come to Drinking Liberally next Monday night at 7:30pm (The Brewery, 201 Cabot St). We’ll be talking about this election, and our vision for engaging more people in this process.
November 9th, 2005 at 12:52 am
PS the Sun would never bother to update in a TIMELY fashion…I mean, aren’t you asking for a lot there?
November 9th, 2005 at 12:55 am
To follow up on Lynne’s comments about incumbants being listed on the ballot first and
that helping them be re-elected.
Kevin Brodrick finished 10th in the last election.
Tonight he’s 6th after only a month or so on the council (replacing Rithy Uong after he
resigned)
So, were voters that impressed with Brodrick’s work in the past few weeks, or
did he score a thousand votes (conventional wisdom) for having his name first on the ballot?
In the preliminary election the order of ballot is drawn by lottery, it’s only in the general
election that incumbants are listed first alphabetically.
That has to change. I wonder how
we do that?
November 9th, 2005 at 1:09 am
Lynne, You know I’m the token conservative, I can’t drink liberally.
November 9th, 2005 at 1:10 am
It’s state law, regarind incumbents being listed first. Tsongas tried to have it overturned once, but the court ruled there was no way to judge the fairness of alternate systems.
November 9th, 2005 at 1:16 am
LOL Renee, you’re welcome anyway.
Besides, I still think most of local politics isn’t about liberal vs. conservative…it’s about a lot of other things. Like inclusiveness, accountability, transparency…
November 9th, 2005 at 1:48 am
http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/08/evolution.debate.ap/index.html
At least we aren’t in Kansas.
November 9th, 2005 at 4:34 am
Good campaign Douglas.
Let’s get em in ‘07
November 9th, 2005 at 10:24 am
The current listing on the ballot is patently unfair, but the differences in the results are larger than that effect could possibly be — maybe in a close election it would come into play. The real problem is the apathy of the voters, as a 26% turnout is the issue. But maybe it is a sign of satisfaction with the status quo. I disagree, but there are apparently a lot of Mikes and -bs out there.
So will there be bigger issues for the voters 2 years from now? I suspect we will see taxes become an issue, unless there is a big bump-up from the state on the cherry sheets. But that issue can be manipulated, as it could be there this year, but does anyone really know it? Will Julian Steele be online and successful? How about the JAM plan, new parking garage, infrastructure and traffic improvements, the Hamilton Canal redevelopment and the Post Office/Tsongas arena development? Will there be a new hotel in that area, and will the current hotel be integrated into MCC? Will the hockey team still be here? How about the Mass Mills expansion? Will the State complete the court development in the Davidson St. area? And will we get some business base out of UMass Lowell’s research efforts? Will the common folk still reside in Lowell, or will they have relocated to the back woods of Maine? Unfortunately, with all this potential, the greatest contribution some will make in earning our votes is to name some street corners after our relatives. Nice, but not enough by a long shot!
I agree with Lynne, that anyone that wants to have a realistic chance in 2007 must work over the next 2 years, and not wait to see what issues may surface. A little foresight and a lot of hard work are required.
November 9th, 2005 at 3:00 pm
Hey Lynne, thanks for the awesome coverage. Maybe if the Lowell Sun upgrades their web publishing software to the 21st century one of these days we’ll get updates like this there. Don’t see it coming though. Haven’t been around in a while, glad you’re still blogging. I’ll see if I can make drinking liberally on monday.
November 9th, 2005 at 4:00 pm
Jay: they could always hire me to do their website. *grin* But somehow I doubt they would turn to me!
I still think the city is in serious trouble and the coasting that has been happening on past plans and successes will erode as housing costs stagnate or are driven down. People keep mentioning to me there’s a real estate guru in town who buys property at the bottom end and sells at peak - and he has just sold a boatload of real estate in the area.
November 9th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
His name is Louis Saab. Had two large downtown properties sold recently, to developers of more —CONDOS! He made the comment that it was time to cash in on his property investments. It’s all in the timing!
November 9th, 2005 at 5:58 pm
Doesn’t it speak volumes as to where a City’s future is heading, when on election night, the only place you can get the results is on a BAR ROOM wall!!!
November 9th, 2005 at 7:40 pm
Mr. Saab is generally the owner of most of the empty or underperforming storefronts in downtown as well.
November 9th, 2005 at 9:29 pm
On 11/2/2005 Louis Saab sold 148 & 166-174 Central St. to Runnels LLC for $2.3M.
November 9th, 2005 at 11:16 pm
So, are the y’all going to keep whining, or move out of Lowell? I just don’t get it. If the City is really headed for the dumps than shouldn’t you just move out? I think we have our problems but, just like so-called-progressives always do, they never mention anything good that is happening. The potential here is incredible.
November 10th, 2005 at 12:20 am
Thank you jdaniels, judging by election results there are plenty of people that support the direction of the city, and I am one of them.
November 10th, 2005 at 12:41 am
Or plenty of people who don’t turn out to vote.
It’s not called whining, it’s called “engaging” in the “process.” LAST I CHECKED, it was a free country and a democracy. I have every right to want to improve my government, just like you have every right to be content.
Maybe you don’t talk to the people I talk to. Fine. But if you aren’t, then you aren’t getting the whole picture.
If you don’t like the “whining” - maybe you ought to be moving out.
Potential is just that - and it can be manipulated, and remain exclusive and no good to many if people do not speak out.
There were solutions discussed and offered for the things we feel are bad for the city at the Affordable Housing Forum the CBA ran. If you weren’t there, that was your loss. Plenty of people have solutions. They just don’t get listened to.
November 10th, 2005 at 1:04 am
So you are discounting the opinion and value of those that took the time to come out and vote?
November 10th, 2005 at 1:35 am
ok, guilty, whining might have been an inflammatory word.
but I do think there is a place in between totally content and totally disgruntled that many of us might reside. let’s get on the same page. i talk to alot of people in this city, (i took that as an insult) and consider myself part of this city. i know there are people that are disgruntled, and there are people that are apathetic and there are also people that are grateful for what they have. many that have moved to lowell with nothing or come from nothing or have just picked up the pieces of their life and they are glad to be alive. i talk to them, too.
how could we not be frustrated by the election results? you’d think it was 1965, not 2005, the way some of these councilors talk. i read lakoff’s ‘don’t think of an elephant’ and it is clear that progressives need to use nuturing language that brings their values into the public discourse to reframe debates. i know some folks at the CBA, and they seem like a good group, but i did find some of their rhetoric confrontational, and i am pretty open minded person. if we can reframe this message in a language that the average lowellian can appreciate - without compromising their mission, then maybe we can all benefit from their positive ideas.
November 10th, 2005 at 7:03 pm
Well mostly homeowners vote at this present time. And I notice a lot of the political ads alluding how real estate has dramaticly increased in price as a good thing, and mentioning the “postage stamp” lots were irresponsible. I didn’t buy my postage stamp lot to make a profit 5 or 10 years from now, I bought it to be my home for life because I love my community.
That is why I said the “city” sounds more like a corporation. So if the community is unable to thrive with homes they can afford and decent work isn’t available I will have to go where my community lives and where I can sustain my modest lifestyle.
November 10th, 2005 at 7:32 pm
I find it amusing that it’s OK for everyone else to use sharp rhetoric, but not progressives. Oh, no, we’re not supposed to get angry, we’re supposed to use pretty soothing words and caress our way into power.
That doesn’t seem to be a standard for anyone else…unless maybe my TV beams in news from other planets and I’ve been missing what’s been happening.
Anger can be powerful too. In fact, channeled correctly, ie not violently but into action, it is most productive.
November 10th, 2005 at 10:07 pm
Yes, if channeled correctly. Sometimes, however, confrontation is not the best way to get things done and often works in reverse of the goals at hand. This seems to have happened with CBA time and time again.