BONUS: Eric Scott Campbell provides this useful analysis in Thursday's editions of The Tribune. I'm still not sure why Campbell believes that newly drawn council districts for the next election have any impact on voting or representation. It is possible that someone like Mr. Price would be less inclined to listen to people who can't vote for him in the next election, but I doubt it. He represents those precincts that elected him. His successor will represent those who elect him or her. What's the problem? Yes, tampering by the city council during an election year may have depressed turnout, but maybe that's what the council wanted all along. As I understand it, the plaintiffs were unable to get a court date prior to this election and unless the court overturns this one on Constitutional or statutory grounds, any new districts, whether drawn this month or imposed by a judge, will only affect the 2011 races.
Enormous props to the 202 wise souls in council District 1 who elected to follow the advice of Tribune publisher John Tucker and leave the ballot blank when faced with the choice of Dan Coffey or no representation at all. As much as Mr. Coffey may believe he acts in the best interests of his constituents, the evidence shows otherwise.
Ironically, the Republicans had a quite respectable candidate on Tuesday's ballot who met all the requirements to take on the incumbent: He lives in the First District, has the ability to reason, and had demonstrated a certain amount of discernment. As for life experience, he was well-traveled, educated, and familiar with the concept of learning. He was neither afraid to confront the future nor unwilling to consider ideas generated later than the administration of U.S. Grant. Alas, he chose to run for council at-large and went down to defeat.
Now, it's difficult to know how many of the "undervotes" recorded in Coffey's re-election were actually write-in votes for the beloved Skittles. But we do know that the undervotes in the District 1 council race (incumbent unopposed) dwarf the total of undervotes in all five of the other districts.
The First District, suffering under its last election day in its present configuration, is not irredeemable. It clearly is NOT "similar" to the Third District, as goes the theory put forward by Democrat Steve Price when challenged about his 98% plus voting lockstep with Mr. Coffey during the past four years. But it is demonstrably not without a certain number of informed voters.
It also, unfortunately, recorded the lowest turnout by percentage - 20.91%.
John Gonder, newly elected as one of three at-large council members, topped all his competitors in capturing the highest vote totals in 14 of the 34 city districts. Kevin Zurschmeide, incumbent but being elected also for the first time, was tops in 11 other districts and failed to demonstrate quite so much geographic strength. And Jack Messer returns to the council with the highest council vote, edging Gonder by one vote overall. Messer inherits a much-deserved position of leadership as a consequence of his first term excellence, outreach, and willingness to obtain consensus.
Speaking of consensus, the next four years will call for plenty of that if New Albany is to progress. And that goes for the whole citizenry, not just the elected representatives.
Randy Hubbard, the losing Republican offering for mayor, showed strength in about 1/3 of the city, but didn't have coattails at all. Jeff Gahan (D-6, Incumbent) lost two precincts of six. Rookie Diane McCartin Benedetti (D-5, Rookie) lost one precinct of five. No other Democrat lost a single precinct.
We'll be parsing the numbers again later. For those of you looking to 2011, we encourage you to stay logged in for more numbers.
The serious numbers aren't who got how many votes, but rather which precincts contain the richest veins of disillusioned voters - those registered but finding no compelling reason to cast a vote. Some say its the only way to send a message. The other way is to organize, advocate, and serve those who don't believe city government is relevant to their lives.
Imagine a 2011 election where twice as many people vote. Not because they are mad or sad, but because they believe that government can be effective. No vote total measured in 2007 will be at all relevant if 16,000 New Albanians turn out that November.
Coming soon: What to expect from the England administration and what to expect from the new council.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
A request has been made to Linda Moeller to verify the number of write-in votes for Skittles the cat in his insurgency against Dan Coffey.
More information when it gets to me.
Whether or not the "new" redistricting plan had any bearing voter turnout, I have no idea. I do disagree with the statement that the people elected will be representing the precincts that elected them, not the "new".
If the "new" redistricting plan, as currently drawn, goes into effect, I am one that will change districts. I will move from Mr. Caesar(2nd) to Mr. Gahan(6th). If, for some reason, I need help or advice from a Councilperson, who should I go to? In reality?
I'd suggest both, as both a rational, but your representative for the next four years is Bob Caesar, no matter what The Tribune says.
I don't disagree with you on a technical basis. Take the actual reps out of the equation and substitute 2 and 6. Which one really has the incentive? Who would get my street sign spelled correctly? Actually in this case, I would go to At Large Zurschmiede, since he would know how to spell it.(Notice that you also spell it wrong)
Post a Comment