A gadfly is not the same as a candidate

I'm a gadfly -- I poke, I question, I wonder about flaws in the New Paltz political class.  This is not a unique pastime, and plenty of people with a lot more smarts than yours truly have embraced the hobby.  Some, myself included, have even run for office in the hopes that we could speak truth to power from within the power base itself.  And that is where most local gadflies fall flat.

When you're a gadfly, by definition you focus on the negative.  What's the point of questioning something if it works and everyone is happy with it?  This is a dangerous mindset, because you only get noticed when you're complaining.  People in New Paltz mock the gadfly that they disagree with, or call him rude or bombastic, or stop returning his calls.  Some of us are well-qualified for the role because we're already rude and abrasive, but others have those traits thrust upon them.

Being a gadfly isn't a terrible basis for becoming a political candidate, but once you make the decision to run for office, New Paltz voters are pretty clear that they want you to switch gears.  Complaining about the opposition is nothing new, because at least 75% of the politically engaged citizens are doing that already.  Sure, a small sliver of people who hate your opponent will nod their heads and pull the lever on that basis alone, but New Paltz voters often want something more.

What they want is substance.  What is your vision for the office?  (Saying that you think having a "vision" for position X is a load of pretentious crap counts as a vision.)  Do you have any thoughts on the problems facing the incumbent?  (This is a popular question, but one I don't give much weight to, because armchair quarterbacks don't have enough information to make meaningful decisions.)  What do you feel the big challenges ahead are?  What attributes do you possess that will help you tackle these still-unknown issues?

Contrasting oneself to one's opponent is necessary, but it's part of a bigger package.  You can't sell yourself as the "everything sucks guy" and expect to win the votes of more than a couple score of curmudgeons.  Moreso than the country at large, people in this community are thoughtful and engaged.  In 2011 two candidates got lackluster returns largely because they focused too much on what was wrong with their opponent and not enough on succinctly summarizing their own assets.

There are always going to be people that cast a vote based on gut, or personal relationships, or the malleability of the candidate.  I'm not one of them; I've voted against friends and for people who are self-righteous jerks.  My personal feelings about you have little to do with your ability to serve the community.  My sense is that New Paltz has a lot higher percentage of folks who, like me, vote based on qualifications other than the ability to be a gadfly.

TPW endorses: town races

I have a pretty harsh view on voting these days - if you don't know anything about the candidates, I don't think you have any business voting.  I've gone so far as to suggest we run pure write-in elections to force people to pay attention, or stay home.  It's as much about beating myself up for ignorant voting as anybody else . . . I mean, how many people do you know who have a clear idea who they want as a Surrogate's Court judge?  Why have I ever found it okay to cast an uninformed vote?

A lot of people vote anyway, either by party line, or based on incumbency ("throw the bums out" or "I know that name").  Voting is important, but finding the time to be informed is not easy.  To that end, I continue to share my personal endorsements.  I hope that by sharing my reasons for supporting one or another candidate, it will help others cast more thoughtful votes.

Today, the New Paltz town races.

Supervisor and highway superintendent

These are easy:  we're down to one candidate each, so it's just a question of which line you want to vote on.  No endorsements necessary.

Town justice

I am not voting in this race.  There is only one candidate, and I think we can do better.  A decade into the 21st century we have a court staff that doesn't know how to use email (a problem they resolved by taking the email addresses off of the town's court site), and yet Justice Bacon is lobbying to raise their pay.  He doesn't know how to run an office, his courtroom is always loud and disorganized, and he doesn't appear to know criminal law.  I wish we had a better choice, but he's not getting my vote.

Town council

Four candidates are running for two seats this year, making this a big deal.

• Kevin Barry is best known for his opposition to the Middle School project and the town's wetlands law.  He is passionate about property rights and controlling taxation, neither of which I have a problem with.  However, he has to learn to rein those passions in a bit.  He can be downright aggressive when he's talking to people who disagree with him, and he has shown a lack of decorum at public meetings, blurting out comments at inappropriate times.  I have been told by people I trust that they've felt physically threatened and nearly come to blows with him at times.
• Jean Gallucci spent many years working for the town and village, and then served on the village board.  Her financial acumen is above and beyond that of anyone on or running for the town council.  Her judgment concerns me . . . she got her husband a job with the village as the parking meter guy while on the village board, and doesn't see a conflict of interest there.  She also has a poor attendance record as an elected official.
• Randall Leverette gets flack as being "anti-police" because of how demanding he is for information as a police commissioner.  I know this is not the case - like me, he likes the idea of being safe from crime.  Also like me, he doesn't believe that this means just writing a blank check to the department; if you can't measure it, you can't manage it.  It's the same kind of common-sense approach that has been used in the highway department.  No matter how much we love or hate a particular governmental service, the only way to fairly evaluate it is with hard data.  There is nothing wrong with expecting more data from our police, firefighters, clerk, assessor, or any other department.
• Ray Lunati is best known for his vocal opposition to laws restricting development on the flood plain.  I was on the planning board, and I disagree with him.  Notwithstanding the environmental concerns, every inch of asphalt and building we add to our town makes the flood plain more likely to flood, which imperils people on that side of the river.  Ray has shown that he is extremely focused on that issue, nearly to the exclusion of all else.

My vote is for Leverette alone.  I think Barry will let his passion get the best of him, Gallucci has questionable judgment, and Lunati is simply too focused on one narrow aspect of town governance.

A view from the table

My second Republican caucus I got to sit at the table - and what a view it was!  Politics never gets boring in New Paltz.  I went in believing that my remarks as a candidate would be the most memorable part of the night to me, but the place really heated up, and it wasn't because the room was packed.

Although outnumbered by the Democrats in the room, the Republicans were mostly hesitant not to vote for one of their own.  Randall Leverette and Ray Lunati got the nod for Town Council over Jean Gallucci and Kevin Barry, both former Republicans who switched registration to Democrat because that's how non-thinking voters in this town usually vote.

The nomination of Peter Cordovano for supervisor came as a surprise to many, although more than one person told me that they believed it was orchestrated some time ago.  I thought Peter looked genuinely surprised, but the theory was that his nomination was made to protect Toni Hokanson.  Peter would win because Republicans prefer GOP candidates, and then after he declined the committee to fill vacancies would appoint Toni to the line.

I don't buy it.  Why?  Because if Peter is that convincing an actor (he really seemed stunned), he would not have waffled when he was asked if running and serving would have an impact on his law practice.  That waffling was honest, and I'm sure it cost him at least the one vote he fell short.  If this had been rehearsed, he would have acted shocked, then recover, and speak with confidence when he accepted instead of saying, "I think I'll do it."

It may well be that Peter would have decided running on short notice was foolhardy, and that the committee (of which he was a member, as well as chairman of the caucus, before his nomination) would have selected Toni.  Maybe Diane Lucchesi even had that in mind, although she said she nominated him out of a desire for a Republican candidate for the job.  But I don't believe he was in on it.

Politics?  Sure.  Conspiracy?  Bah!

New Paltz Republican Caucus Results 2011

New Paltz Republican Caucus Results -unofficial

Contested races:

Town Supervisor
Democrat Susan Zimet 28
Republican Peter Cordavano 27
Democrat Toni Hokanson 14

(personally, I thought in the spirit of democracy they should have done a two-way run off)

Town Board
Winners: Republicans Randall Leverette & Ray Lunati
Losers - Democrats Kevin Barry & Jean Galluci

2011 Democratic Caucus Results

Supervisor
Zimet 167
Hokanson 56

Town Council (2)
Gallucci 162
Barry 148
Leverette 81

Highway Superintendent
Marx 97
Johnson 64
Takacs 54
Lecesse 6

Uncontested:

Town Clerk
Roseanne Mazzacarri

Town Judge
Jim Bacon

Democrats fire their engines

The race for town supervisor is starting to shape up for registered Democrats in New Paltz.  Mid-Hudson News reports that the New Paltz Democratic caucus will take place August 23.  In the past it's been held at the high school, so I'm guessing they'll try for that location again.

Once again, the local Democratic party committee is apparently opting not to back the party member who is already in office.  In the spirit of "what's old is what's new," they will be supporting former supervisor and current county legislator Susan Zimet for the job over incumbent Toni Hokanson.

I don't know who else will be trying to get the party nod, but here's a tip:  be prepared to bring a couple hundred of your registered Democratic friends to secure any nomination from the party.  You can be sure that both Zimet and Hokanson will.