The TAB’s Trevor Jones had an oped column today that raised the suggestion that if Alderman Scott Lennon were to resign from his Ward 1 seat now, voters could have the opportunity to fill both the At Large and Ward 1 aldermen seats during the June special election.
According to City Clerk David Olson, Lennon could resign before the end of March and free both seats for the special election, but Lennon said that’s not something he’s considering.
As a reminder, Allan Ciccone, Sr. and Alison Leary, have both announced they would like to run for the Ward 1 seat. Lennon is the only person who has announced his plans to run at large. So if only the At Large seat is filled in June, then the ward seat will be vacant until November.
It does seem like losing all around if we spend the money to hold an election in June to fill the empty seat and a side effect of that election is to create a new empty seat.
Its certainly Alderman Lennon’s decision and it certainly follows all of the elections laws and the charter … but the upshot in the end is that city money and effort will be spent and nothing will be accomplished – i.e. we’ll have the same 23 alderman and one empty seat between now and November.
I’m guessing that we can’t forgo expense and effort of the election if there’s only one candidate running.
I like how Trevor thinks, but I don’t think Scott should have to do any more or less than anyone else in this position. 99/100 would never take the chance in resigning. If he were to resign, wouldn’t he lose his presidency as well? He has a lot more at stake than just an aldermen’s position. I dont think he should have to take the chance in resigning.
Just want to set the record straight. Trevor has written a news story here — not an opinion piece.
His story ran opposite the main opinion page, on a page that also featured opinion pieces, so I understand the confusion. Not the best placement in hindsight, but the paper was tight this week and we had to grab space where it was available.
😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀
Thanks for the good hearty laugh.
But seriously folks – you ARE kidding, aren’t you?
I’d like to know who is going to run for J. Yeo’s seat? Any contenders?
I have always wondered why people skydive. Why would anyone jump from a perfectly good airplane if they didn’t have to? My reductio ad logicum, then, would be…why would a “standing” Alderman, particularly one who is Chairman of the Board, jump from a perfectly solid “job” to one that might be “iffy”? Unless, of course, he/she is confident of his/her “re-election” or unless he/she is less a politician and more a statesman (I know, I know, a statesman is a dead politician…but, there should be some self -sacrifice involved to rise from “p” status to “s” status.) The question that needs to be asked and I haven’t heard it…why is it better to be Alderman-at-Large than Ward Alderman? More power? (All Aldermen are created equal, but some Aldermen are more equal than others?) Higher political aspiration? Party politics? (Oops, did I say that?) Alderman Scott should remember that nature abhors a vacuum!
Good question Sallee: Here’s one possible answer. Let’s say you are a ward alderman who hopes to one day run for higher office, including perhaps mayor.
Some would suggest that having run (displayed lawn signs, sent post cards to all voters using campaign funds, etc.) and been elected city-wide might help build visibiltiy for that future run.
Gosh, Greg…then Scott should run at-Large and keep both seats until November, getting two votes on the Board, and not leaving his constituents without representation for one minute!
So here’s a question for all our charter and election rule scholars: What if nobody ran in the June special election? Does the seat remain vacant until November? (Thus saving that cost?) Or would we have to distribute ballots for write-ins anyway?
I’m not advocating this, just asking.
Janet, I’d like to see what Bill Brandel has to say about this matter.
I’m sure that he could provide an expert opinion about this whole situation.
Greg, I think if no one gets the signatures, then election day is off. If election day is off, it would be recognized as having a vacant seat on the June date which is within 6 months of November and they would have the regular election in November.
Tom, do you have a source for your answer or are you guessing? I couldn’t find anything in the charter.
Here’s what I’d like to know: Assuming Scott wins and has to resign his ward seat, does he have to resign his presidency? Wouldn’t he have to be elected again from his new position?
@Sallee and Greg. I know it’s conventional wisdom that holding a citywide office (at-large alderman, School Committee or State Senate) gives one a leg up for becoming Mayor, but the last several Newton mayors don’t support that contention. The last seven Mayors (Howard Whitmore, Donald Gibbs, Monte Basbas, Ted Mann, Tom Concannon, Dave Cohen and Setti Warren) did not hold citywide office when they were first elected. Whitmore, Gibbs, and Basbas were Republican insiders during a time when the GOP was the dominant political force here in Newton. The others were accidental or outsiders when they first ran.
@ Gail: Just my opinion, but I would think he would not have resign provided he remains on the Board of Aldermen during the transition from his old seat to his new seat. The President has to be “from among its members.”
Here’s the charter language I looked at:
Sec. 2-2. President and Vice-President of the Board of Aldermen.
After the Mayor-elect and a majority of the aldermen-elect have been sworn, the Board of Aldermen shall be called together by the Mayor who shall preside. The Board of Aldermen shall then elect, from among its members, a president and vice-president to serve at the pleasure of the Board of Aldermen. The president shall preside at meetings of the Board of Aldermen and perform such other functions as may be assigned by the charter, by ordinance or by vote of the Board of Aldermen. The vice-president shall act as president during the absence or disability of the president.
Gail, I was guessing. I’ve read the charter a couple of times and don’t recall any situation like this.
If what Greg presupposes is true, and no one but Lennon is nominated for the upcoming W1 Alderman-at-Large election, will he be pressed to justify the $30K+ in public monies Newton will spend on this special election? What makes him so extraordinary that we are paying our tax dollars that he may benefit by having his name alone on a city-wide ballot for future political opportunities. Scott can not be that unsure of retaining this seat in Newton City government by simply waiting until November to run for this seat when we will we be having a municipal election, anyway. Is this an exaggerated sense of entitlement?
Since people can still ‘run for office’ without collecting nomination signatures, as a ‘write-in candidate’, I am pretty sure that once the election date is set, the election will continue on whether there is an official name on the ballot or not.
I’ve asked David Olson this question. He’s checking into it with the secretary of state’s office.
Janet, as always, dynamite observations.