Elections and Endorsements

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!

Regardless of your political views, as long as you can legally do it, EVERYONE needs to vote Tuesday, November 4, 2008. I’ll be disappointed if you vote against my opinions, but I would rather see you vote and disagree with me than agree with me and not vote. Whatever your inclination, you need to vote! I can’t stress this enough – VOTE!


Vote of Confidence

Speaking of voting, Precinct 6 voters came out on Thursday in a show of strong support for Town Councilor Janet Joakim. Joakim’s supporters easily foiled the COG-backed recall effort by over 100 votes. Congratulations to Councilor Joakim and the residents of Precinct 6!


Endorsements

Before I give out my yearly endorsements and the reasoning behind them, I do have a small rant to make. Cape Cod’s Republicans should be ashamed of themselves. That they were unwilling or unable to find candidates to run against US Rep Bill Delahunt, State Senators Rob O’Leary and Therese Murray (who is the Senate President) or State Rep Demetrius Atsalis is a travesty to the concept of a two-party system. I know that this is liberal Massachusetts, but the Cape is one of the few places in the state where people consider voting Republican. Not bringing candidates to the table in these races is a disgrace.

Now, on to the good stuff… Contested seats and ballot questions discussed from local to national…


State Rep (2nd Barnstable District)
Demetrius Atsalis (Incumbent) vs. Carl Yingling

Atsalis has served for many years in this seat. He is a wonderful person who gets more grief than he deserves from the local blogosphere. Granted, Atsalis has not helped himself with incidents that have earned him bad airtime on the Howie Carr Show. However, credit goes to Demetrius for calling in to the show and defending himself.

Local resident Carl Yingling deserves an award for doing something the local Republicans could not do – have the guts to run against Atsalis. The problem is that Yingling is not qualified to be State Rep. He should have some time on local boards or maybe the Town Council before considering a run for State Rep again…

VERDICT: All in all, Astalis has been fine as State Rep. However, he hasn’t been exceptional or note-worthy. Sometimes the best thing politicians can do is nothing, but in Atsalis’ case, it seems that he has little to show for his time in the State House. I have to agree with The Barnstable Patriot that Demetrius Atsalis should be a leader in the State House with his long incumbency. I also have to agree with the Patriot’s bold and unorthodox decision to recommend a blank ballot in this race.


Barnstable County Register of Probate
Anastasia Welsh Perrino (R) vs. Eric Turkington (D)

Eric Turkington is a name well-known in Cape politics. He has been around for a while. Anastasia Welsh Perrino does not have Turkington’s name recognition, but she has something more valuable – experience.

While Turkington has a wealth of experience in the State Legislature, he has no experience in this office. On the other hand, Welsh Perrino has had a career working in and around the office. Welsh Perrino can hit the ground running and already has plans to do so, but Turkington would need help to get the job done.

VERDICT: Anastasia Welsh Perrino is the candidate with real experience dealing with this office, and she deserves the opportunity to prove it.


Barnstable County Commissioner (2 seats)
Ric Barros (R) vs. Brad Crowell (R) vs. Mary Pat Flynn (D) vs. Sheila Lyons (D)

Barnstable County’s government is larger than most residents realize. Barnstable County’s 3 elected County Commissioners make up the county’s Executive Branch. Two of those seats are up for election with a clean slate of candidates, as soon-to-be-former commissioners Lance Lambros and Mary LeClair are leaving.

The four candidates (2 Republicans & 2 Democrats) for the seats all have excellent qualifications and experience.

VERDICT(s): Brad Crowell’s experience as chairman of the Cape Cod Commission has given him excellent insight into the Cape’s needs. He is able to look ahead to the future and plan with precision, while preserving the present. Ric Barros’ passion, fiscal responsibility and insistence on accountability will help the County in this economic downturn.


The 3 Massachusetts Ballot Questions
Income Tax repeal, Decriminalization of possession & Greyhound Racing initiatve

I'm not going to bother giving a history on these questions, so on to the verdicts...

Question 1 VERDICT: Send a message to Beacon Hill and vote YES. Will the State Legislature dare defy the people?

Question 2 VERDICT: is ILLEGAL. We should not be making it easier for people to get it and possess it. Vote NO.

Question 3 VERDICT: This blogger takes a hard line against gambling in all forms – from the Lotto to Casinos. Greyhound racing has managed to somehow survive in this state. Now is the time to end it… not for the dogs, but for the families destroyed by gamblers addicted to betting on racing (horses or dogs). Vote YES.


U.S. Senate
John Kerry (D-Incumbent) vs. Jeff Beatty (R)

If there was ever a case of needing a change, simply for change’s sake, this is it. Other than running for President four years ago, Kerry has accomplished little of note during his extended tour of the Senate. With rumors that he is seeking a Cabinet position, should Barack Obama be elected, re-electing Kerry is an even worse idea (if that is possible).

Jeff Beatty is an excellent candidate to serve our state. His combination of military, CIA/FBI and business experience make Beatty a well-rounded option. His ability to think outside the confines of normal politics is a breath of fresh air in today’s partisan politics.

VERDICT: 24 years is more than enough time to serve as Senator. Serving as a US Rep or Senator was never supposed to be a career. It’s time for John Kerry to move on. Whether now, or later, Jeff Beatty is an excellent choice to serve in the US Senate.


President & Vice-President of the United States of America
John McCain & Sarah Palin (R) vs. Barack Obama & Joe Biden (D)

John McCain is known for being “mavericky” and Obama is known for wanting “change.” The fact of the matter is that neither of these buzz words describe these candidates or their views at all.

John McCain has been a “maverick” during his career in the U.S. Senate. He has broken from his Republican ranks repeatedly and worked/voted with Democrats. However, this version of McCain has been non-existent on the campaign trail, as he has pandered to conservatives in an attempt to convince them that he is one of them. Count me among the unconvinced…

Barack Obama continues to talk about “change”, but, other than NOT being George W. Bush, Obama truly offers little change from business as usual in Washington. He lacks any true experience, and would have been a much better candidate in 4-8 years. Obama also has some highly questionable character issues. Whether really bad people as family friends (Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers) or family members living in the USA illegally, Senator Obama has been unable to show that he is trustworthy for the job.

VERDICT: One year ago, anyone who thought about the Presidential race, wondered whether they would vote for Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney. It’s amazing how things change. I am forced to reluctantly endorse McCain/Palin, but sure that Obama will be a major player in the political scene for years to come.

This Does Matter

The COGers have been nice enough to further illustrate their desire to recall more Town Councilors than just Janet Joakim.

One well-known COG commenter has now threatened further recalls of the "maggots who call themselves 'councilors'"... He also went on to expand their headhunting list to include Councilor Tobey. The list now tentatively is Rugo (Precinct 2), Munafo (Precinct 3) and Tobey (Precinct 8)... with Crocker (Precinct 5) and Barry (Precinct 7) as strong possibilities, too... Add the those possible recalls to Joakim's recall (Precinct 6), and you have current or potential recalls in Precincts 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8. YIKES!

(By the way, the targeting of Councilor Tobey is nothing new. Eric Schwaab started threatening Tobey's seat the very same night that Schwaab lost to Munafo, almost one year ago. Check out this post for more info - Congratulations to James F. Munafo, Jr..

That post is yet another example of info that I have had to rescue before that infamous "Post Deleter" struck again and tried to hide his true intentions...)


Recalling Joakim was NEVER about the issues... It was NEVER about Joakim... It was about the COGers trying to force their personal and political views on the rest of the town... It was payback for standing against COG... It's really all about COG... That's why it shouldn't be supported...

Having these COGers around may start getting real expensive, real soon... Let's send them the message that we don't want them around. Go to the polls tomorrow (THURSDAY OCTOBER 30) in Precinct 6 and VOTE NO ON THE RECALL...

Told You So...

I don't want to rub it in, but I warned my readers that there was more to the Joakim recall than met the eye. The Joakim recall was never going to be limited to Joakim, especially if they win on Thurday. Now, the talk of COG and Cape COG Living is a recall of Councilor Tom Rugo in Precinct 2.

The COGers have larger goals that are not being disclosed to the public... It's interesting to see them play out...

To help stop the COGers and their multiple plans, make sure everyone that you know in Precinct 6 shows up to Vote "NO" on the recall. The election is this THURSDAY, October 30, at the Marstons Mills East Horace Mann Charter School. Visit www.sevenvillagesblog.com to support Council President Janet Joakim.


In other news, it seems that Bugsy the Pug still can't get over his election loss from last year. In a recent comment by the former politician, I counted at least three blatant lies that he proposed as legit examples of intimidation and reasons why he lost the race. He seems to enjoy throwing conspiracy theories against the wall to see if anything sticks...


Let's take a stand, let's make sure that this attempted Joakim recall doesn't stick... Vote NO on the recall on Thursday!

Having a Nice Blogosphere Vacation

Sometimes, I just have to drop it all and take a vacation from Barnstable's blogosphere. This place takes so much more out of a person than it should. Blogs should be about sharing ideas and opinions, not what we make it here in Barnstable.

For the past few weeks, I've been enjoying a very nice vacation from all of the blogs... Not having to read about the Joakim recall, Doc Mosby and the Barnstable Airport, more accusations against elected officials being blown way out of proportion, absolutely absurd fearmongering about Hyannis water, etc... It's been really nice...

Anyway, I'll try to be more frequent in my postings here again...

We now have a date set for the Joakim recall election. October 30 at the Marstons Mills East Horace Mann Charter School. Should be interesting...

What are your opinions about the recall election? The primaries that just took place? The general election that's coming up? Are you an Obama fan or a McCain person? What do you think?

How Exactly Does A Recall Election Work in Barnstable?

I raised a question in my post back on July 19 - "Another Recall Attempt?".

Having read and reread the section of the town's charter dealing with recalls, I have to wonder exactly how a recall ELECTION process works in Barnstable. Maybe one of Barnstable's town attorneys could fill me in, but I'm still unclear on how the process works. I have a pretty good idea, but am always open to other suggestions.

The highest profile recall election in recent years occurred back in 2003. Governor Gray Davis of California had presided over some bad economic times in California - the state budget was a mess and electric rates had tripled. All necessary steps were completed to result in a recall election. When voters went to the polls to vote on the recall, they had TWO things to do - Vote YES or NO on whether or not to recall Davis AND Vote for his replacement IF he ended up being recalled.

A number of high profile candidates ended up on the ballot as possible replacements, and when the dust had settled, the people had voted to recall Davis and the replacement candidate with the most votes was selected as the new governor. That is how former actor (and alleged Republican) Arnold Schwarzenegger became Governor of California.

California placed the recall question and the replacement election on the same ballot. However, after reading Barnstable's charter, I am pretty sure that there has to be TWO SEPARATE elections. Here are some quotes from the charter:

Section 8-8 Recall of Elected Office Holders
(c) Recall Election
If the petition shall be found and certified by the town clerk to be sufficient, the town clerk shall submit the same with such certificate to the town council within five working days, and the town council shall forthwith give written notice of the receipt of the certificate to the officer sought to be recalled and shall, if the officer does not resign within five days thereafter, order an election to be held on a date fixed by them not less than forty five and not more than sixty days after the date of the town clerk's certificate that a sufficient petition has been filed; provided, however, that if any other town election is to occur within sixty days after the date of the certificate the town council shall postpone the holding of the recall election to the date of such other election.

The recall election for any officer elected by precinct, shall only be held in the precinct that the officer represents.

If a vacancy occurs in said office after a recall election has been ordered, the election shall not proceed as provided in this section.

(e) Office Holder
The incumbent shall continue to perform the duties of the office until the recall election. If said incumbent is not recalled, the incumbent shall continue in office for the remainder of the unexpired term subject to recall as before. If recalled the officer shall be deemed removed and the office vacant. The vacancy created thereby shall be filled in accordance with this charter. Any person appointed to fill the vacancy caused by such recall shall hold office for the unexpired term of the officer recalled.

How does the charter say that a vacancy on the Town Council shall be filled?

Section 2-5 Filling of Vacancies
If a vacancy occurs in the office of councillor occurs during the first forty-four months of a term, it shall be filled by a precinct election. If a regular town election is scheduled to be held within 120 days, but more than fifty days, after the date vacancy occurs, it shall be filled by a special election within that regular election; otherwise, the council shall schedule a special election to be held as soon as is practical to fill the vacancy for the balance of the unexpired term. The provisions of the charter governing regular elections shall, so far as they are apt, apply to said special election, provided no preliminary election shall be held.
(Amended by Town Council item 91-03-02 on 6/20/91; amendment approved by voters 11/5/91).

Perhaps, one could read Section 8-8(e) that says "Any person appointed to fill the vacancy caused by such recall shall hold office for the unexpired term of the officer recalled" as saying that we should have a recall like California's - recall question and replacement election on the same ballot. BUT that comes AFTER the section says that "The vacancy created [by a successful recall] shall be filled in accordance with this charter."

Now, as I read that section, I am left to conclude that we have a two-part recall election process. Section 2-5 specifically deals with vacancies in Council office. It says that IF a town/precinct election is already being held 50-120 days AFTER the vacancy occurs, then a special election will be piggybacked on it OR if that doesn't exist, then a special election shall be held as soon as practical. It does not seem to allow for a vacancy to be filled on the same ballot as a recall designed to create a vacancy.

A vacancy can NOT possibly occur until a recall election has happened. Then, IF the Councilor has been recalled, a special election (or special ballot question added onto that precinct's ballot for an already occurring election) can occur. That's the way I read the charter.

Now, maybe I'm wrong... but if I am, could you please fill me in with the facts? Comments are open... and frequently monitored... or email @ dedicatedprecinct3voter@yahoo.com

Another Recall Attempt?

COG is reporting that it has completed the first step in its latest attempt to recall Precinct 6 Town Councilor Janet Joakim. It found 50 or so people in Precinct 6 willing to sign anything. The affidavit these people signed allows the recallers to take out a recall petition. Recallers have 10 days from the issuance of the petition to get 10% of registered Precinct 6 voters (around 250) to sign the petition. If they obtain the correct amount of signatures (as certified by the Town Clerk), there will be a recall election scheduled for between 45-60 days after the Clerk certified the petition (unless Councilor Joakim were to resign, which is HIGHLY unlikely). In that election, AT LEAST 20% of Precinct 6 must show up for the results to count AND the majority must vote that she be recalled.

The recall process is not a simple one and is another good example of things that were done correctly in the construction of our current charter. A recall is an important voter tool and a serious matter, and (because of how the charter was written) it cannot be done on a whim.

The ironic matter of this recall is that it will cost between $7,000-$15,000 to perform the recall election (should the recallers succeed in reaching the election). Considering the EXTREMELY poor turnouts at Barnstable elections, it would not be surprising to see LESS that 20% of Precinct 6 show up, which would nullify the results. So, between actually LOSING the election (which is what COGers do best) and not getting enough voters to show up, there is a very good chance that they could be wasting a good amount of OUR money.

Now, I am not an expert on recalls, but the way that I read the charter makes this even more interesting. As I read it, IF a recall election is successful, then ANOTHER separate election must be held 50-120 days later to fill the vacant slot. Which means that a successful recall costs between $14,000-$30,000. YIKES!



Here's a good article from The Barnstable Patriot's archives describing the recall process.

Here's an article from the Patriot in 2007, that details the start of last failed attempt to recall Councilor Joakim and in which Town Clerk Linda Hutchenrider estimates that "a single-precinct recall election would cost between $6,000 and $7,000".

TJ, over at The Barnstable Beat puts the cost of a recall election at up to $15,000.

Back to Old Habits

I was amazed, simply AMAZED, when Gary Lopez actually shut down his COG site earlier this week after the election. He had promised to do it SO many times in the past and never went through with it, that I never thought he would go through with it...

But, lo and behold, go take a look-see at Lopez' site now... It is back up and running... He's back with just as much gusto as before... telling us how the recently elected candidates were "bought" by the business community... and telling us how much of an impact he and his COGites had on the election...

I think he must have been following some other town's election.

His COG candidates ALL got SMOKED at the polls (except for Greg Milne, who can only legally take 1 of the 2 slots he was elected to)... His buddy Schwaab, who was supposedly drumming up TONS of interest in this election, not only lost, but was only able to bring 21% (439 voters) of the precinct to the election. I think that Schwaab's campaign tactics actually kept people AWAY from the polls!

In 2005, with NO Council race, NO contested town-wide races, and 3 Non-binding Ballot Questions, 20% (or 440 voters) showed up in Precinct 3. There was actually one LESS voter in 2007 than 2005...

In 2003, WITH a Council race (every precinct was electing a new councilor because of redistricting), A $9.2 Million Override, and NO contested town-wide races, Precinct 3 had a turnout of 40% (or 891 voters)...

Precinct 3 shows up when there's a reason...

Apparently, they didn't view voting for Schwaab as a reason...

More on voter turnout later next week...

Back to Lopez and Schwaab - I couldn't stop laughing when I saw Lopez' site back up and running... It's what he does - he says he's shutting down his site, but simply can't follow through...

And, as far as Mr. Eric Schwaab P.D. ("Post Deleter") is concerned, it looks like he's shutting down his Cape Cod Living blog... From what I've been reading, he's going to start over again and he is going to choose what he puts on the new site... Sounds to me like he's going to be doing some wholesale post and comment deleting... That's what he does...

One final note - To my friend @ Barnstable Beat, you might as well drag out those posts about Lopez that you were about... Looks like he's back (AGAIN).

Congratulations to James F. Munafo, Jr.

I would like to congratulate the Precinct 3 Barnstable Town Councilor - James F. Munafo, Jr. - on his reelection to the Council.

In the Precinct with the highest percentage of voters showing up at the polls, Munafo defeated challenger Eric Schwaab by a tally of 240-188 to reclaim his seat.

It was a tight race by all accounts. Mr. Schwaab helped drum up support among the citizens, but the lousy weather kept many from the polls and the turnout was lower than many anticipated. I am disappointed that after all the hoopla surrounding this heated contest that only 21% of the precinct showed up to vote. We need to do better than that Barnstable.



In a related development, the "Post Deleter" struck again. I'm not going to back off his case just because the election is over. When he backs off and stops spouting off ridiculuous things and then deleting them, I'll stop posting them...

Anyway, on Election Night, instead of a Thank You to his supporters... he went onto his last post (which was trashed with comments from both sides of the aisle) and posted this comment (before taking it down this morning):
Now, I thought Schwaab said he just wanted to "be friends" with everyone once the election is over... If that's the case, then why did he write this? Honestly, please let it go...

Anyway, kudos to the citizens of Barnstable who showed up to vote, voted down the COG slate and elected excellent School Committee Members, Town Councilors and Charter Commissioners.

Charter Commission and Ballot Questions

I decided that since everyone else seemed to be doing it, I might as well throw out my endorsements and recommendations.

I reserve the right to change my mind @ any time, but here's what I think right now:


Ballot Questions

Question #1 - BINDING - Should the Town (Tax) Collector position be changed from an elected position to an appointed one?

Personally, I believe that electing people is a good idea. I tend to be more suspicious of appointed positions. That's why, unless I hear a REAL good argument, that I say to vote NO on Question #1.


Question #2 - NONBINDING - The Council Review Committee suggested the reorganization of the council into 9 positions - 5 District Councilors and 4 At-Large Councilors. Do you agree with the opinion of the Council Review Committee?

I will never vote for a "nonbinding" question again. They are marketed as non-binding and as a "good indicator of voter interest". They end up being a mandate for a particular course of action. Suddenly, the "non-binding" question is now the basis for binding legislation. Furthermore, I'm not a real big fan of the 9 Councilor plan (I'll explain more later). I say vote NO on Question #2 or leave it blank.


Question #3 - BINDING - Should a 9-member Charter Commission be formed for the purpose of reviewing Barnstable's Charter?

I have been an avid supporter of the formation of previous charter commissions. I support a review of our current charter. I am in favor of a mayor. Yet, I simply cannot endorse Question #3. Something just does not feel right about this. My gut says to vote NO. The timing of this review and the forces in the background of this push just give me a bad feeling about this. I say vote NO on Question #3.


Charter Commissioners

IMPORTANT NOTE - REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU VOTE ON QUESTION #3, YOU ARE STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR VOTING FOR UP TO 9 CHARTER COMMISSIONERS! So, even if you vote NO on Question #3, still vote for up to nine commissioners!

Absolutely Vote For These People:
I wholeheartedly endorse these candidates as the best candidates for Charter Commission.

Lucien Poyant
Lucien has served the town well for many years and has been active in past Charter Reviews.

Dennis Guyre
A fresh voice in Barnstable politics... he's willing to listen...

Michael Daley
Michael was the Chairman of the last successful Charter Commission in Barnstable.

Marcy Dugas
Marcy has been an advocate of village representation on the Council.

Richard Clark
I never thought I would endorse Clark, but I find that his support for a mayor and fresh outlook on Coucil makeup nicely compliment the fact that he doesn't want to completely do away with the current charter.

Deborah Shiftlett-Fitton
As she mentioned in her Barnstable Patriot capsule she is one of the few candidates not related to some past charter review or the Council Charter Review Committee. She sounds as if she will remember the villages when determining Council make-up.


Good Candidates (Strongly recommend voting for these candidates)
There are nine seats on the Charter Commission (if it is voted in)... These two should be strongly considered.

Allen Goddard
Charles Haggerty


Vote For These People Only because you have to vote for NINE:
You should be picking only 3 candidates from this list and the one directly above, in addition to the first 6.

Peter Doiron
Even though Peter is associated with the COG movement, I cannot help liking a lot of what he has to say compared to some of the other 21 candidates. I don't think he would be that bad of a choice. Certainly the only COGer I could even think of voting for.

Royden Richardson
Roy is another former Councilor I didn't think I'd ever be endorsing. I think he is a better option that anyone else not mentioned yet.


Vote for these candidates only if you have a MAJOR beef with any of the higher ranked options:
These are desperation picks... only to be used in emergency... Alphabetical order...

John Alden
John Brennan (*Also running for Town Council)
Sheila Cullinan-Geiler
William Elkins
Robert Jones
Susan Rohrbach


DO NOT VOTE FOR THESE CANDIDATES UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES:
Alphabetical order - these candidates all have EXTENSIVE ties to COG!

Oliver Cipollini
William Cronin
John Julius
Gregory Milne (*Also running for Town Council)
Bradley Ouimette
Taryn Thoman


MY VIEWS ON THE CHARTER

My views on the charter are complex. Personally, I don't think that the current charter is that awful. On the other hand, I do want a mayor. I really like village/precinct representation on the Council.

Is the current charter broken?
I honestly do not believe that the current charter is "broken". While it is not a perfect document, it has worked pretty well - AAA Bond Ratings and All-America City Awards do not come to crappy towns. There is definitely room for improvement, but the situation is not dire, as some would have you believe.

Mayor/Town Manager
I definitely want a mayor. I want the town's top official to be accountable to the voters. It does not matter what we call him - an elected Town Manager is fine with me. However, if people think that a mayor is a fix-all for every problem they see in the town, I have two words for them - Buddy Cianci.

Council Make-up
There has been a lot of complaint that having 13 Councilors is too many. I believe that 9 is way too few. I might be willing to compromise at 11, but I really do not think that 13 is too many. It seems to work well enough.

As far as At-Large Representation is concerned, I am against a large amount of it. I could see a working system that had a total of 13 Councilors - 9 District Councilors and 4 Councilors At-Large. However, I believe that, in general, the accountability that village representation gives cannot be replaced by At-Large Councilors. It would be too easy for one section of the town to dominate the Council.

The legislative bodies of the State and Federal governments have many more local representatives that regional ones (senators). I think the same logic applies here. Having many more local Councilors helps keep a higher level of accountability and keeps the village identies alive and well.

Automatic Review
Another charter option getting a lot of attention is an automatic review process. Many candidates are recommending that the next town charter include a provision ordering mandatory reviews every five years. I think this is a bad idea. Why mandate review if it is not necessary? Then, when review is needed, people will say "We just had a review" or "We have one scheduled in a couple of years, so it can wait". I think this measure will only hurt future reform.


Closing

Frankly, it doesn't matter what I say, if you don't vote. So, please, get out and vote. Bring your neighbors. Be involved. And check out the candidate profiles for yourself @ the Barnstable Patriot's Dotcommons site. Some candidates even have videos there. Read up, Watch up and be and Informed Voter!