Left In Lowell

Listening to Milinazzo’s motion now…seconded…by Kazanjian! He shouldn’t even be in the room as far as I know…nevermind participating in seconding and discussion on his. own. property.

Someone want to clue me in, here?

Second to last video. The last one is the doozy! But this one is good…mostly questions about Public Safety.

In case anyone is wondering, here is my final rundown on where I stand on candidates, endorsements, and recommendations.

Vote YES on Question One, Choice Voting. Here’s why I think the anti arguments are silly.

On the GL Tech High School, I endorse with all emphasis Fred Bahou (interview here), and will also vote for George O’Hare, because I think Michael Hayden should be tossed out on his keyster ASAP.

On the School Committee side, I endorse with no reservations Alison Laraba, the only challenger, and incumbents Jackie Doherty and Connie Martin (full disclosure, my company has a contract with Connie’s division at CTI right now, but we’ve endorsed Connie in the past so this should be no surprise). I will also vote for John Lehey and Jim Leary, because if Alison displaces anyone on that School Committee, it needs to be Dave Conway or Regina Faticanti, both of whom are bad for our schools.

For City Council, there is the fabulous list of Move Lowell Forward endorsees - incumbents Kevin Broderick, Bill Martin, and Jim Milinazzo; and challengers Franky Descoteaux, David Koch, Joe Mendonca, Patrick Murphy, Ben Opara, and Raymond Weicker

There you have it…my ballot for next Tuesday. If you don’t get out and vote, you have no right to complain!

If you haven’t had a chance to check out Bad Karma’s post at “Choosing a Soundtrack” on last night’s forum, go read it. He’s got some interesting things to say (some harsh, but all observant) but I thought the most interesting was this:

the highlight of the evening, of course, was the final question where the long line of candidates was given an opportunity to play “what if you could vote” on the andy sheehan firing. (oh, i’m sorry, mr. kazanjian–he wasn’t fired, the funding for his position was eliminated under totally unrelated circumstances). every single one of the challengers–every single one–raised their hand to say they would not have voted to eliminate the assistant to the city manager. not one sided with the dumbfounded and red-faced gang of six sitting at the dais next to them.

I have to say, ballsy of the forum’s organizers to even ask the question! I also liked BK’s commentary on the preliminary (riffing off Patrick’s response last night) which was spot on.

“Rumor” (and you know what rumor will buy you in this town…) has it that Mr. Kazanjian will have a big ol’ ad in the Lowell Sun this weekend with some “big names” “standing by him” (enough air quotes?) in his “time of trial.” (I mean trial in the most literal sense, I hope…)

Said big names are, oh, I dunno, rumored to be elected state officials from Lowell. Perhaps all four of them.

So, what I want to know is, do they stand by Kazanjian once the Middlesex DA and the Feds get through with him, or just for this election? Cuz I’d like to know in what universe Kazanjian is good for the city of Lowell.

But those crazy kids. Personal loyalty always trumps whether or not their friends are actually good public servants. God, we need a challenger in those state primaries…wouldn’t you agree? Any decent soul who did so would have my vote, donations, and volunteer time.

Of course, this being rumor, maybe it isn’t so. (Or at least said individuals have time to think sanity and back out if they act fast.)

Jackie has a nice rant up about how some people’s news appears to be more important, right before an election, than others’.

WCAP appears to have a habit of allowing hours of airtime for just certain people despite their current candidacy, to speak on “news matters” while others get to sit on the sidelines. For instance, Rita Mercier gets her weekly “I fill your potholes” time every week, even now with the election coming up. Now, under FCC rules about campaigns and equal time this is fine, so long as she does not promote her campaign, but seriously, there’s only one city councilor who’d come on and talk about the current events on the Council? Did they even ask the other incumbents to maybe rotate in? Right. WCAP may be holding to the law of the FCC regulations, but certainly not the spirit. Bad form.

The Sun came out against Choice Voting in a Sun editorial. Here’s some holes I find in their reasoning. (It took only a couple seconds of reading it to find them.) For instance, they say:

Under choice voting, a candidate for City Council can secure one of the nine seats if he or she is selected as the number-one candidate by 10 percent of Lowell’s voters. Certainly, this will make it easier for candidates representing various segments of the population to get elected.

But is it really fairer?

Is it right that a candidate who may have the support of only 10 percent of the community is elected to represent 100 percent? Will that candidate merely cater to his or her base in order to ensure re-election? Will this system merely replace one problem with another?

What the hell do you think district-based voting would be? Let’s say you chop Lowell into five districts for five of the seats. This means only a segment - in this example, 20% - of voters will get to select those candidates in any one district, but that councilor has a full vote on the Council. Given that turnout of registered voters is lower in some areas, you easily could have only 10% of voters making a decision on a full member of the council in district voting. This is a poor reason to dislike Choice voting in favor of another system. I dub this reasoning totally lame.

Another one:

Registered voters from every neighborhood in Lowell should be turning out at the polls and fielding candidates for office. But whose fault is it that they all don’t? Every adult citizen of Lowell is not only eligible to vote, they are all encouraged to do so. Regrettably, many choose not to participate.

Given that the Lowell Sun drums up the “why don’t voters vote” mantra every year but then in their big Sunday POLITICAL column less than two weeks before the election they say absolutely nothing about the race, this seems to me to be crocodile tears to some extent. Gee, your way to get turnout sure ain’t doing anything for Lowell…

As to the rest of the article,

Lasting change typically occurs from within the system. Once an inspiring candidate from a different neighborhood, ethnic group or socio-economic status catches the electorate’s attention and secures office, it will prompt more political novices to toss their hats into the ring.

Yeah. Clap harder and maybe you can save a fairy’s life. Also, lots of inspiring candidates from other neighborhoods and ethnicities HAVE come on the scene. Mehmed being the latest example. It doesn’t matter; if you come from a low turnout area or are a member of a group less represented by registered voters, you will NOT win in a winner-take-all system. Mehmed worked his tail off, got multiple neighborhoods and ethinicities on board with his campaign, registered new voters…and came in 10th.

That is severely discouraging to the next guy, who maybe wonders just how much it’s worth it to do all that work and never get anywhere. If Mehmed couldn’t do it on his first try, as connected as he was to many different communities, who the hell else would be capable in two, or three, or more tries?

I have remarked to myself before how reluctant New Englanders are to try anything new or embrace change. I find this attitude of the Lowell Sun’s editorial staff to be no exception. Hidebound and stuck in the Museum.