As I wrote a few entries ago, about 5,000 voters determined the direction this city of 28,000+ should take for the next two years. A little more than fifty percent of Northampton's voters turned out for the Tuesday election, about the same number as the spring override vote. It turned out to be good political acumen for incumbent Mary Clare Higgins to have both campaigns in the same year as many of the YES team morphed into her reelection effort. Of those who chose to vote for mayor about 51.7% decided to retain her services. To my knowledge, with her victory Higgins dealt Bardsley his first political defeat locally. Though he was not always the top voter getter in the city, he did manage to serve sixteen years on the Council, winning approval from the voters election after election, dividing his time between ward and at-large representation.
I believe the elephant in the room the local pundits are not talking about is the significant financial advantage Higgins had during the campaign (thanks to Jack Hornor according to her). As well endorsements by the two local papers and quasi endorsements from Governor Deval Patrick and radio station WHMP along with negative spins from some of her supporters put her over the top in the end. It remains to be seen how much Patrick is willing to do for the city but some will say Higgins had better deliver. Look for her to endorse Patrick's reelection bid in the coming year, or maybe perhaps she will just sing his praises. As well Higgins had the support of six sitting city councilors and many city board members. Moreover, several leaders from nonprofit and religious organizations crossed over into the political sphere in support of Higgins. These organizations often petition the city and more than likely some of Higgins supporters for funds. Institutional support she has.
This proved to be too much for challenger Michael Bardsley's grassroots supporters to overcome, though they came remarkably close. Clearly Higgins' team has more political moxie than Bardsley's, but its dominance at the polls slipped some. Nonetheless, there were ample smiles and giggles adorning the Higgins crew while Bardsley's team collectively sobbed and shed some tears. If Bardsley had won the roles of each candidate's supporters would have been reversed. As in baseball, it doesn't matter if you win by one run or ten or how you do it, it matters only if you win. Bardsley has nothing to hang his head over, but there is no joy in finishing second in a two-person race.
The Gazette last reported Higgins had about a 2-1 financial advantage over Bardsley, about $40 thousand to $20 thousand. Based on these figures Bardsley spent roughly a litte more than $4 per vote garnered and Higgins about $8 though the final numbers will be higher for both candidates once final financial reports are in. To this end Higgins spent heavily on Gazette advertising in the closing days and I expect some Bardsley supporters will cancel their subscriptions to the local paper, which, like my hair, seems to be growing thinner with each passing week.
People vote not only at the polling booths but also with their dollars so local business owners might see some shifts in their customer bases depending on who they supported for office, losing some customers while gaining others. I have had people tell me they will no longer patronize advertisers of Bill Dwight's WHMP radio show. Perhaps the same can be said of the patrons of Valley Advocate advertisers. I doubt these businesses will see much of a difference in general but people often change their behavior over political issues.
Several years ago Gazette editors decided to grant endorsements, but with that comes the risk of losing readership and perceived objectivity. Some would say the Gazette lost objectivity long ago. This year it withheld from its readers the story regarding alleged racial discrimination and security lapses at Northampton Housing Authority properties in a report brought forth by Casa Latina, Inc. Bardsely raised this issue at the JFK Middle School Gazette debate with Gazette reporters and editors present, yet nothing has appeared on its pages. Instead, today (Thursday, November 5) the Gazette runs a guest editorial praising the NHA.
As well the editors decided not to publish an editorial on the landfill submitted by Water Not Waste. One candidate reported to me that letters of support to the editor were not printed in past elections. I expect the Gazette to run reaffirming stories in the coming months, praising Higgins' in order to reassure voters they made the right choice. But some voters will not be placated.
During the NCTV broadcast of the results on election night (BRAVO!) Higgins said into a microphone she thinks there are no divisions in the city, save for the landfill issue. She won four wards while Bardsley won three. Though I acknowledge winners say just about anything in the heat of the moment, that does not mean their off-the-cuff statements are true. Retaining just about every advantage Higgins won by only about 3.5% or 344 voters, which is hardly a mandate. Had only 173 voters voted differently we would have a new mayor elect today, albeit by two votes.
If Higgins does not see the close margin as an indicator of a divided city, well, she might need new glasses. I expect Higgins to adopt some form of, "we must now work together," rhetoric in an unlikely attempt to metaphorically, "heal," the populace, as if it is a single ailing being. But I would not count on Bardsley's supporters to be forgiving at this point. It will be awhile before they join hands in unison with the winner, if they ever do. I suspect many will sign off from electoral politics leaving the spoils to the victors.
Nor was the election a clean sweep for the incumbent. Two of her supporters lost their bids to sit on the Council. One, Ward 3 incumbent Robert Reckman, was unseated after one term by Angela Plassman in a very close race that turned a little nasty at the end. The other, Deb Jacobs, was defeated by Gene Tacy in Ward 7 for the late Ish LaBarge's old seat. This means the solid Higgins majority on the Council is effectivley reduced from six to five. It is too soon to tell how the new Council will behave but on controversial issues Higgins is less likely to prevail with the same ease she has grown accustomed to.
In addition, one of Higgins' signature policy proposals which is to expand the Northampton Regional Landfill was stiffly rebuked by city voters, attaining more than 63% of the vote. It amazes me how Higgins and people like lame duck City Councilor Jim Dostal can imply the ballot question was too simplistic for voters to fully comprehend, while at the same time they trumpet the wisdom of the same voters in returning Higgins to office. Higgins credits her debate performances for her victory in part. Yet she and Bardsley spoke on the landfill issue at nearly every one of their countless debates. During those skirmishes Higgins repeatedly expressed her reasons why the landfill should be expanded saying more than once she is comfortable with the science. Yet the voters did not buy it and their message to Higgins and the Council is clear. If Higgins and Dostal, et al. choose to ignore it and expand the landfill, they do so at their own political peril.
While Mayoral challenger Michael Bardsley's insurgent team consoles itself, Bardsley will have to determine if he wishes to continue soldiering on with his grass roots efforts for the next municipal election in 2011. It seems like a long way off but it will be here before you know it. The puzzle for Bardsley is how to retain the nucleus of his team, a team whose members will for the most part go back to their ordinary lives as private residents. During Revolutionary War times in the Colonies soldiers returned to their homes after battle to sow and to heal while wealthy landowners made the rules that today govern this country. I believe Bardsley and his supporters will need time to do the same. If he does not return to the political fray, an opportunity exists for another to take on the mantle of populist leader in the city. The people are here, they just need a leader they can believe in.
As the top vote getter for any office in the city, At-Large City Councilor elect David Narkewicz is likely to run for and be elected to the City Council Presidency in 2010. The vote total is slightly deceptive because people could vote for their first and second choices. Though I think it unlikely, theoretically Narkewicz could have been the second choice for many of Adams and Silva voters. In any event, Narkewicz has both the time and the ambition to take on this task as he continues with his climb in local politics as like Higgins he has institutional power behind him. Thus far he also appeals to many grass roots folks, but that could change as his record either evolves or devolves. If the Mayor and Council follow through and amend the City Charter to disallow the Mayor from chairing Council Meetings, Narkewicz will take the gavel as both the literal and figurative leader of the city's legislative body. He might succeed in becoming the city's next Mayor if Higgins leaves midterm or decides not to run again in 2011. If successful after that, since Narkewicz does not challenge encumbents, he might examine the tenures of other elected officials in the region if he has not already done so. These offices include the positions of State Representative and State Senator and of course longer term, U.S. Representative and perhaps even U.S. Senator. Like all good politicians, Narkewicz does not get his hands dirty by slinging mud publicly.
Speaking of mud, this election season served as notice to would-be candidates in the city. If one is going to run for office in Northampton be prepared for the worst. While allegations of racial discrimination and security lapses at the NHA went largely ignored, charges of racism and classism based on hearsay evidence hit Democrat Andrew Vidal-McNair broadly in Ward 1 as he was crushed by the Carney/Dwight/Delano-Davis team. In Ward 3 Angela Plassman came under fire as well from opponents like Caty Simon, formerly of Poverty is Not a Crime, who criticized the candidate's family issues in an effort to slow down her drug fighting pledges. Though Simon apologized damage was done and Plassman's victory must be especially gratifying as she narrowly took both precincts in Ward 3. Bardsley supporters were referred to as, "angry white men," and "homophobic," even though he is an openly gay liberal. Kathleen Silva was called a, "tea bagger," and an "angry yeller." Higgins was maligned on Masslive.com's anonymous online Northampton forum over her appearance and weight with someone referring to her as, "Piggins." Of course that could have been a Higgins supporter merely sowing the seeds of sympathy. Several candidates had lawn signs damaged or stolen and Dwight had an, "88," smeared in paint on his home's front door.
Because of the vitriol some longstanding friendships will suffer irreparable harm while new ones will form. In my view the electorate shows itself to be more polarized than at any time in recent memory. Higgins' assertion there are no divisions in the city speaks to Tom Vannah's recent Valley Advocate editorial in which he describes her as tone deaf. Some things do not change.
For my part I attempted to express my opinions during the election season sans Ad hominen attacks and I am encourgaged, more or less, by the rising level of community discourse if not always by its tone. To Higgins people I tip my cap and say, enjoy the ride. To Bardsley's I say get up and dust yourselves off-there's no crying in politics. An election is but a snapshot in time while politics and policy making are ongoing and fluid processes. There will be other opportunities to make yourselves heard. Simply put, Higgins won what may prove in time to be nothing more than a phyricc victory. You need not retreat from the values and beliefs that drove you throughout this election season but rather you should embrace them.
I believe Bardsley's dual themes of changing times and of ushering in a new political culture in City Hall resonates. His overmatched candidacy represents the high water mark of Higgins' opponents to date but only time will tell if his defeat will result in an ebbing of the tide that brought him to within 173 votes of victory.
For me it is time to hit the books, tend to my other job and pick up the leaves in the yard.
