One day before election day, I’d like to offer eleven random observations and predictions. Please share yours in the comments section:
- No one will ever confuse Paul Coletti or Allan Ciccone with Michael Jordan. Both former aldermen attempted comebacks this year. Neither are going to be successful. Their out-of-touch campaigns (neither candidate bothered to create a website) did, however, remind us how much Newton has changed over a few short years.
- If Allison Sharma couldn’t win a write-in campaign two years ago against a generally-unknown Chris Markiewicz (who entered under questionable circumstances), Rena Getz won’t prevail on Tuesday in Ward 5 against two higher profile candidates. Bill Humphrey and Kathy Winters both ran solid, multi-dimensional, campaigns for the better part of the year. If Humphrey prevails, it will be because Getz syphoned just enough votes away from the more moderate Winters. (BTW, Markiewicz has been a pretty good city councilor. I only wish he didn’t obtain his seat the way he did. He probably does too.)
- Although this election has been framed as being all about development, every candidate I’ve spoken to says when they knock on doors voters ask about a much wider range of issues. If the Right Sized slate of candidates, don’t win tomorrow, it will be because (except for Julia ‘the tree lady” Malakie) they were seen – fairly or not — as being one issue candidates. Besides local elections are always about just one thing: Who has the best get out the vote strategy.
- All eyes tomorrow will be on the showdown between incumbent Emily Norton and Bryan Barash. Here we have two die-hard progressives who have very little daylight on issues except on the issues of smart growth, development and housing. Both worked very hard this cycle. Both have feverishly devoted fans and detractors.
- The contest with the sharpest elbows has been the Ward 6 race between incumbent Brenda Noel and challenger Lisa Gordon. This wasn’t just about two different world views; it became personal. The hard feelings will likely continue past Election Day.
- On the other hand, the Ward 3 and Ward 3 At Large contests centered on sharp political contrasts; All five candidates there deserve credit for – as far as I can tell — staying issue-focused, cordial and non-confrontational.
- How it is that incumbent Greg Schwartz came to be embraced by Right Sized Newton? Schwartz voted for Austin Street and Washington Place. I predict he will do the same for Northland and Riverside. I suppose it has to do in part with Right Sized’s concerns about Alicia Bowman, who has been more outspoken in favor of muliti-family development. Schwartz is also viewed favorably by Opt Out supporters, who’ve generally embraced the same Right Size slate. (But if that’s true, why isn’t Right Size/Opt Out also supportive of Andrea Kelley, who also was recreational marijuana skeptical?) Anyway, Schwartz was the odd guy out this fall. I’m not sure he deserved it.
- It’s disheartening to see how far the Tab has fallen from playing a role in our elections. Those of us who spend time online had many avenues – including the Globe’s Newton Report — to learn about the candidates. But for many seniors and those who only occasionally follow elected politics, this creates a real void. But kudos to the Globe and Boston University for stepping it up.
- The other real loss this election season was that we had no serious School Committee contests. How that can be in a city that says schools are our most important asset is confounding and disappointing.
- Election Day is tomorrow but the next big vote is just a few weeks away. That’s when the next council will select its next president. Current President Marc Laredo has been far more polarizing than his predecessor Scott Lennon. It will be fascinating to see how his colleagues (and future colleagues) respond.
- Even with a pay raise coming, being a city councilor always struck me as a pretty thankless job, especially in a community that’s not shy about taking things that don’t go their way personally. We should all be grateful to everyone who has served and wants to serve, as well as to their families and supporters who give up so much to engage in this process.
Vote early and often tomorrow. And don’t forget to use the comments section to complain one more time about how mean I’ve been to Emily Norton.
My guess, Greg, is that Councilor Schwartz was targeted because he was anti-charter reform.
I saw a startling site this morning in an otherwise invisible campaign – a Colletti bumper sticker in Waban Square. I didn’t even know that bumper stickers were even a thing in local elections. While it looked new and fresh I’m guessing it must have been a squirreled away leftover from an earlier election
Greg Schwartz was not targeted.
Alicia Bowman has been an advocate and change-maker in Newton for the last 15 years, driving important improvements to pedestrian and bike safety and green space and raising awareness about local climate action. She has also been an advocate for housing and transit-oriented developments. In her spare time she has been a PTO president, Girl Scout troop leader, president of Bike Newton, a LWVN board member, and she has chaired Tour de Newton since its inaugural year.
Alicia has a strong sense of urgency about the intertwined issues of climate, traffic, walkability/bikeability, and transit-oriented development. We need strong leadership on these issues and Alicia is uniquely positioned to provide it due to her tremendous knowledge and her powerful, proactive leadership track record. After 15 years as an advocate at the local and state level, she has reached the point where she feels like she can have more impact as an elected official.
Alicia is not running against anyone, she’s running for the good of Newton. She just happens to live in ward 6, so that’s the only place she can challenge.
I believe Greg Schwartz will prevail tomorrow. He is one of the brightest stars on the Council and doesn’t deserve to be elbowed out. Paul Colletti has always displayed one of the sharpest minds regarding our Municipal budget. He has been a strong voice for fiscal restraint and holding the line on spending. He would be a welcomed addition to the Council. The Ward 2 race is the most exciting. In my opinion, Emily Norton will retain her seat. I do agree that President Laredo will likely face a challenge for the Council Presidency. The chatter is out there.
Greg:
I am disturbed that on the day before the election, you posted a column with negative views about a number of the city council candidates.
As the key moderator of the Village 14 blog, I feel that it is inappropriate for you to post negative stuff when the candidates and their supporters have little time to be aware of your remarks let alone formulate an adequate response.
It would have been better for you to hold your comments until Wednesday when the results are tallied and you can then do your analysis of who won/lost and why.
Please, in future elections, commit yourself to refraining from posting negative stuff in the last few days before the election.
Use your power as key moderator of the blog wisely.
Thanks.
Richard: Village 14 is not a news site. As I said at the beginning, these are my “observations and predictions.” Besides, it would serve no use to post my predictions after the election; although I’d look a lot smarter if I did.
I also don’t think I’m being negative or positive to offer my analysis of any given race or contests. I’m just calling them as I see them, just as political observers do on blogs, opinion columns, cable TV, etc. leading up to elections of all sizes. And everyone is able to join in the fun and offer their predictions and observations in the comments section.
And if I’m wrong, you and City Councilor Elect Coletti can come back and gloat!
Greg:
Thanks for the explanation.
@Greg, your headline makes it very clear that you don’t support either Paul or Allan. I have no problem with you voicing your opinion.
Peter my headline doesn’t have anything to do whether or not I like them, it’s a reference to whether or not I predict they will will stage successful comebacks.
I predict they won’t.
Ward 6 is a horse race, @Greg. Greg Schwartz seems to have fallen on the wrong side of some influential folks in the ward, but citywide is well regarded. Alicia seems to have deep support from those who’ve worked with her. The candidate who seems to draw the least passionate support “on the street” is Vicki–even though she is very strong on constituent services–so it will be interesting to see how the votes come down. It may well be the case that Bowman and Schwartz will prevail.
Overall context: We’re so lucky to have three great people to choose among.
Paul,
Vicki losing her seat would be unusual. As noted in this post, the top at-large vote getter has not lost their seat in a subsequent election in any of the elections for which we have online records (back to 2001). Vicki got more votes than Greg in 2017, suggesting that he’s the more vulnerable.
But, forget about the temperature-taking and the predicting, who do you think deserve the seats?
There are three contested School Committee races. And there has been a lot of discussion about those races. I think there will be many voters who aren’t aware of the three contested races and unless you follow local politics.
Greg Schwartz was a key player in trying to undermine the electorate’s 2016 cannabis vote. In my opinion, he’s also been the worst Chair of Land Use in recent times. If he retains his seat, the city will no doubt come out on the short end of any Special Permit deal with Northland.
@Mike, Marc Laredo may face a challenge to retain the Council Presidency. If a challenger is successful you may see a change of some Committee Chairs.
“If Humphrey prevails, it will be because Getz syphoned just enough votes away from the more moderate Winters.”
Might I suggest a different interpretation?
Bill has worked incredibly hard to connect with Ward 5 voters, both to make it clear to us what his values are, and to understand what we want and need from our City Council. My vote for him tomorrow (and I know I’m not alone in this) will reflect how impressed I’ve been by his thoughtful positions on city issues, his dedication and hard work during this campaign, and my expectation that those qualities will make him an excellent councilor.
JenAK,
Without polling, it’s tough to know much about the Ward 5 race, but I generally agree: Bill has been clear, thoughtful, and determined. If he wins, he will have earned it. You win or lose according to the circumstances in front of you.
That said, electoral politics is a zero-sum game, at least until we have ranked-choice voting. Rena Getz running a write-in campaign is likely going to siphon votes from Bill and Kathy in unequal measure. If I’m Kathy, I’d be upset (and she was, at the debates a week ago Sunday).
Above Andy Levin said: “Schwartz was targeted because he was anti-charter reform.”
Rhanna Kid-well said: “Schwartz was not targeted”
So, lets’ follow the money to see who’s right here:
1. Bowmans donors gave $20,240 to Yes (40% of local $)
2. Yes donors gave $8300 to Bowman (37% of local $)
3. Yes activists gave another $5350 for a total of $13650 to Bowman (60% of local $)
So the same 30 or so folks behind nearly half of the charter funding are also behind well over over half of Alicia Bowman’s funding.
Alicia may not be targeting Greg, but one might draw the conclusion that angry Yes on Charter activists are.
There is a similar pattern in donations to Emily Norton’s opponent.
Sources: OCPF, Newton Campaign Finance, and the (now deleted) Yes on Charter website & facebook page.
@Jack: Here’s a research project for you. Tell us how many people give money to candidates and local ballot questions each year, or nearly every year (maybe go back ten years?). Is it 100? More? Less? That would help put those 30 people you cite into some context.
Bullet vote for Greg Schwartz.
Amy,
Bullet vote for Alicia Bowman.
I’ve been wondering if many people will bullet vote in this contest, either for Schwartz or Bowman.
or not
@Greg: Is your concern regarding candidates in general or regarding developers donating to specific candidates or specific parties?
Not concerned. Just curious and Jack seems to enjoy doing this kind of thing.
I’m wondering if there’s a core group of Newton citizens who can be counted on year after year to support our local candidates and how big that group is.
And to be crystal clear, I don’t think there’s anything nefarious going on. And you know Amy, it’s expensive to run. The folks who donate consistently help make this process possible.
What does bullet vote mean? Like he has a target on his back??
Here is what I know. There is an element out there to replace Schwartz with Bowman.
I plan on voting for Schwartz and passing on Danberg and Bowman as I don’t want to cancel out my vote for Schwartz in what I suspect will be a very tight vote
Claire: That’s what bullet voting is. While each voter can select up to two candidates in each at large contest, some savvy voters choose to bullet (i.e. color in just one of the ovals on the ballot) with the hope of helping that candidates’ chance of winning over both opponents.
@Jack (and @Greg), please repeat after the election, but include a cross-tabulation with PAC donors.
Well there you go!! I am actually voting a recognized strategy.
@Greg — I’d have to check some lists to write that manifesto. As I recall from looking at this prior to this year, out of a city of 85,000 people, about 10% of political donations come from just 0.01% of its households. Chuck T posted the work of some researchers who did some graphical analysis of the patterns last cycle. Perhaps they could revisit. In this case, the Venn diagram of local-elected-representation opponents and Greg opponents has a pretty big overlap.
Thanks Jack, although I strongly disagree with your positioning of charter supporters as “local-elected-representation opponents.” If you’re being honest about it, you’ll admit that charter reform wasn’t that black and white.
Also, just to be clear, when you say “Greg opponents” you’re not talking about the many folks who don’t like me, right?
@Claire — If I could make just 1 tiny edit to our charter, it would be to designate our at-large seats as “A” and “B”. We don’t vote our US senators as pick 2 of 4 — there are 2 defined seats, and up or down contests. Our current at-large system is dysfunctional, as was the pick-4 portion of the charter commission’s proposal.
Of course with the 8-8 proposal that Greg supported and Yes shot down after the last election, the problem could have been addressed with 1 seat per ward and head to head contests.
Yes, there will be bullet voting for Greg Schwartz tomorrow. I remember 2011 when Charlie Shapiro was elbowed out now there is an effort to do the same to Greg.
@Greg — What more was there to “charter reform” than elimination of ward-elected representation? Unconstitutional term-limits?
The Charter Commission and its supporters did sincerely want to reduce the council size, and there’s a strong case to be made for that, but they couldn’t reconcile that with a portion of the commissions and the YES group’s dislike of ward-elected representation. Even double-ward mega-districts wouldn’t fly as a consensus, because heaven forbid that ward 1 & 2 might become a district together. And no major supporter beyond Councilors Lipof and Auchincloss were ready to seek the 8-8 compromise. As a result we have a council today this is 50% bigger than it might otherwise be.
In any case, I promise to give the 2017 charter debate a break after tomorrow. It is highly relevant to tomorrow’s election choices given the contested races and players involved, but it will be time to move on.
Haha Jack. I’m not going down the charter debate rabbit hole again. Been there. Done that. The truth is the proposed revisions offered many good reforms. Oversimplification of the motives is disingenuous.
Greg – I would say overcomplicating the essence of the proposal is disingenuous. The truth is the remainder of the charter was reviewed, brought forward, and ultimately rejected by a supporter of the charter – the mayor.
its not tomorrow yet…
I didn’t get around to posting my takeaways from last Sunday’s Ward 5 and Ward 6 debates, but I did find an answer to a question that had been bugging me: why is Paul Coletti running? He finally made it pretty clear. He wants to restore (or protect, I don’t know exactly) the city’s AAA bond rating. Which explains a lot. We are suffering the effects of an austerity approach to maintenance and city services, the result of over-focusing on the bond rating. Thanks to the good management of people like Deb Crossley and Andreae Downs, we’re getting our infrastructure problems under control. But, we’ve got a ways to go. We’re just now undoing the Coletti effect.
Vicki is terrific and I hope she wins.
I make only one prediction though. When it is all over, the City Council will swing towards a more progressive way. So much attention has been paid to just a few races, when really it is some of the more low key races (Julia and Carolina anyone?!!?) that will tell the tale of the night and the next two years.
And finally let’s stress number 11. Thankless job, so much time to run for these positions, and a contested election is insanely stressful and a huge time commitment. The city is better due to all of these people. All of them. Win or lose.
And a number 12, I hope everyone who is posting on this forum returns next week to talk about how to improve the city, site the senior center, make fun of Greg, criticize Sean for something, etc. You know. The usual. 😉
May the election road rise up to greet all of us.
Cheers,
Figgy
@Sean, I’m going to decide on the at-large positions in the voting booth. I love having a good choice. They all “deserve” it. But Brenda, for sure, as ward councilor.
Just above this post, @gail posts about taking down @ted’s post about Horace Mann as it was “not fair” to a candidate prior to the election.
https://village14.com/2019/11/04/removal-of-horace-mann-post/
Yet @greg gets to rip a bunch of candidates he does not favor a new one.
Classy move.
Matt,
Unfair =/= critical.
PS. Watched the Noel/Gordon debate 2 this morning while working out (yes, I’m officially weird). Brenda’s “question to opponent” of, “what’s the last show you binged on Netflix” was a nice touch.
Thru all this BS, we are still neighbors!
Matt,
What was the question Lisa asked Brenda? Do you remember? Lisa repeated the ugly innuendo about Brenda having a conflict because her non-profit received a donation from Robert Korff.
Brenda was the bigger person — the much bigger person — and dropped the mic on Lisa. (Brenda didn’t actually drop a mic and she didn’t drop anything on Lisa. It’s a metaphor.)
Lisa doesn’t get to bask in the glow of Brenda’s willingness to ignore Lisa’s smear job. Lisa wasn’t neighborly.
@sean, the Netflix question was Brenda’s and while I don’t align with her views, appreciated the move. Very nice!
Matt,
Agreed.
A boss move.
Yay!! Emily Norton wins!!