| Author |
 Topic  |
|
waterboy
Senior Member
101 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2013 : 08:21:40 AM
|
| WHAT A DISGUSTING PICTURE ON THE MAYORS FACEBOOK PAGE, HE NEEDS A BRA TOTALLY UPSETTING PUT A T-SHIRT ON WILL YOU. |
 |
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2013 : 11:00:19 AM
|
Hello? Is there anyone out there?
It really is a shame what the status of blogging about politics in the city has become in the last six years. Though we rarely ever agreed on issues and candidates, it was fun to get out there and try to convince each other that we knew better than anyone else. It was even better two years ago than it is now; but that's not saying much. Even with a historic event like the first mayoral debate in God knows how long (though it really didn't tell us much that those of us who pay attention didn't already know), the boards are still basically dead a day before the election.
But how could I let the election pass without doing at least one post about it. I've known what I've wanted to post about it for a long time; but I just haven't been sure how I wanted to write about it until I watched the debate last Friday.
The issue is about the city council. With the change to a single branch legislature. I believe that it is also necessary for the voters of the city to change how they choose the people who serve on the city council. I believe, to steal a phrase, gone are the days are when you can choose someone to fill any of these seats only because you like them, they did you a favor once, they support a local institution or a cause that you also support, one of your children knows one of their children, etc., etc. I believe that the people that we put into those seats must be the ones they we feel will do the best job for the voters over the next two years.
After listening to the Mayor the other night, you would think that he feels that the city council works for him. He ripped the board of aldermen for not just giving him everything he wants when he wants it. While I can agree with the Mayor (I think, he didn't expressly make this point) that sometimes things get sent to committee or laid on the table until next meeting needlessly because not a lot else happens by putting the matters off, I defend the city council's right to do that whenever they please. It should be better under a single branch legislature since there won't be another branch to also pass things by. It should also be better when the new charter is in full effect in January and the Mayor will be required to appear before the city council when requested so he can personally defend his requests. But, I also think that the Mayor should be reminded that the rules of the city council state that certain types of items are supposed to be automatically referred to committee, such as financial orders. More often that not, that rule gets suspended and the items are addressed in the body itself, to the Mayor's benefit.
The Mayor should also be reminded, that by referring things out to committee, has been a help to his administration when he has actually been willing to work with the city council. Of note, the first time that the administration put the proposal for an ISD department in front of the city council, they had a frank and open discussion about it in committee and the Mayor asked for the proposal back so that the administration could fine tune it.
So, while I believe that the members we elect to the city council should be the people that we feel can best represent our interests, I'm not so naïve to believe that the candidates that we actually have this year to choose from fit that mold. From all the candidates running for city council, I believe that there are only two or three that will almost always act in the best interests of the voters. The remainder of the candidates seem to fall into one of two groups; ones that are staunch supporters of the current Mayor and ones that have an axe to grind or are more interested in looking out for their own self interests. And the ones that yell the loudest about being independent voices probably aren't. And don't just take my word for it; check their records, if they have one.
So I don't feel that the voters can do the job that we need them to in electing a city council this year. But I do feel that we still need to vote for as many city council seats as we can. As so many people have tried to reminding us, when voting, we can vote for all 11 available city council seats. But please be aware, the choices that you make when you vote for each city council seat will likely have a great impact on the future direction of the city. And the overall choice may not be that great. It seems most likely that we'll either end up with a situation like the school committee where many people feel that body only lives to serve the bidding of the superintendent; or, on the other hand, we'll end with Washington type gridlock with the executive and legislative branches at odds with one another.
So, as I see it, the choices for city council may be very clear to you; or they may be very difficult, as they are to me. If you're in my camp, good luck trying to sort this mess out. But irrespective of who you vote for, please get out there and vote tomorrow. You'll only have yourself to blame if you don't at least try to make a difference. |
Edited by - tetris on 11/06/2013 05:54:04 AM |
|
|
|
Wildfire132
Member
31 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2013 : 11:40:23 PM
|
Bravo & well said.
|
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2013 : 07:23:13 AM
|
Well, I feel that I was little bit, if not more, wrong. I think that the voters of Everett did an excellent job of electing a new city council that is as balanced as it could be and congratulations to them for that. While we'll have to wait to see how it actually plays out, I don't think that the new city council will be dominated by any one faction. It has its share of Mayor loyalists, members that won't cut the Mayor any slack and members that will usually vote in the best interests of voters. For those of us that follow the city council and city government closely, it should be an interesting two years.
So what did this election tell us about what it takes to get elected to the city council beyond qualifications? It seems to me that name recognition stills plays a big part in the process; Joe McGonagle got elected by doing virtually nothing in a contested race. Beyond that, who knows? It seems that attempting to tie yourself closely to a popular proposal didn't work. I think that the candidates with the best newspaper ads/handouts/mailings, whether you agreed with them or not, all lost. In particular, I thought that Lenny Jordan put together the best promotional package of any city council candidate. It was very professionally done, probably had some guidance (Matewsky?) But what did it do for him as he received the least number of votes in that race? With only 11 members going forward, maybe the voters will actually be able to focus on electing the best qualified candidates to the city council. We can only hope.
Surprise of the night? Steve Simonelli beating Jason Marcus by the margin that he did. I didn't really think that Simonelli really had much of a chance to win; but, if he did, I thought that it would have been much closer. Simonelli's heart is in the right place; so good for him. But I think that he now owes it to the people who put him into office to not be such a disruptive force as he was on the Common Council. He just needs to learn to channel his energies in the proper fashion.
The other thing that really surprised me was that, even though the Mayor had a strong showing last night, his coattails really didn't bring along as many of those members of the city council that are loyal to him as I thought they could have. Don't know why that is. He's probably glad though that he dodged a bad situation with Joe Marchese having such a poor showing as he did. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Mayoral Election
