Ten Story Building by the Charles River: P&S Reached on Charlesview Relocation

Harvard University and Charlesview Inc. now have a purchase and sale agreement for the transfer of the Charlesview apartments in North Allston to Harvard in exchange for a newly-constructed housing development at the former K-mart, and additional land north of Western Avenue, in North Brighton.

This arrangement has been discussed throughout the past year, where the trustees of Charlesview Inc. supported the move -- based on their assessment that the apartments needed substantial renovation -- while many of the tenants, many of whom are low-income, have been increasingly opposed to the idea.

Features of the new housing development:

• 6.9 total acres replacing 4.5 acres at current site
• Former K-mart building, plus land to the north of Western Avenue
  
• Mostly four-to-six story buildings, rising to ten stories closest to the Charles River
• Ten total buildings
• 400 units of housing:
• 213 units to replace the mostly low-income housing currently at Charlesview
• 118 condominiums (I'm guessing higher-end units sold at market rates -- or could these end up as Harvard-affiliate housing, say, for junior faculty?)
  
• 69 affordable housing units
  
• 450 parking spaces, mostly below ground
• Community center for use by residents and neighbors.

If I were placing a wager in the Deval Patrick Casino at Suffolk Downs, I would bet that the 10-story building will become the target of outrage by the neighborhood. There just ain't nothing remotely close to that tall in the North Brighton neighborhood now, although there are some such erections on Watertown's side of the river.

Harry Mattison notes that they plan to submit initial plans to the BRA within a month!!! Yet the neighborhood has yet to be included on the planning or details of the development.

Mayor Thomas Menino, however, is already a convert and a vocal proponent of the plan:

"It's really great," said Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino. "Residents of the 1971 urban renewal project are going to be moved to well-landscaped units. It's going to be a wonderful new life for them."

Note to future Mayoral contenders: here's your chance to pick off votes in North Brighton / North Allston, but only if you act quickly!

Keeping Score on McGrory

Brian McGrory, City/Region Editor of the Boston Globe, was recently forthcoming in describing why his news desk deliberately did not cover the Boston City Council election.

Now I wonder how aggressively his news reporters will be covering the Mayor, given that McGrory seems to be one of Mayor Thomas Menino's golf buddies, according to Boston Globe business columnist Steve Bailey.

Earlier this year, one such "Menino Golf Pal" told me that, as a result, he/she had to keep a low profile when addressing anything related to city issues. If so, then how can we expect a Boston Globe editor to keep such a low profile on the Mayor?

"Dirtiest Campaign Money Can Buy"? No way. Check Out "Citizens Opposed to Politicians Who Pander to Perverts"

Two weeks ago, Mark Trachtenberg wrote in the Allston-Brighton TAB an opinion piece that referred to the anonymous campaign mailings in the 2007 Boston City Councilor-At-Large race -- two of which Councilor-elect John Connolly later admitted to sending out -- as the "dirtiest campaign money can buy."

Dirty? Sure. But the dirtiest? Not by a long shot.

Howie Carr dug some mud out of his brain describing worse mailings from local political history. But we don't have to rely on Carr's memory. There's plenty of other campaigns to look to.

Saugus had an anonymous mailing this year smearing incumbent Selectman Stephen Horlick who, like Councilor Stephen Murphy here in Boston, got re-elected anyway.

The Framingham area saw an ugly mailing in 2004:

The mailing, which asks, "Who's Working in Our Children's Schools?" and includes a photograph of a crying child, criticizes [Karen] Spilka for voting against a Republican-sponsored amendment to a municipal relief package approved by the House last year. The Senate did not adopt the plan and it did not appear in a compromise bill later approved...

"Vote NO on Karen Spilka. She won't protect our children at school," reads the postcard-sized mailing.

Her opponent, Republican Jim Coffey, denied responsibility for the mailing. Another Framingham election in 2004 continued the trend:

During the Democratic primary for the Seventh Middlesex District between Ginger Esty and write-in candidate and eventual winner Tom Sannicandro, the pro-same-sex marriage group MassEquality, sent mailings to residents that read, "Ginger Esty would divide our community."

Esty does not favor allowing same sex-marriage and Sannicandro supports it.

The mailing also pointed out that Esty as a selectman voted against a proclamation stating Framingham would stand "against bigotry, prejudice, intimidation, and hatred of any kind."

Oh, and that vote was taken out of context, as you can probably imagine. Demonstrating that there really is something funky in the water out west of Boston, Framingham resident Harold Wolfe put up a website skewering the opponent of a candidate he supported:

The website features [State Representative Deborah] Blumer's picture complete with glowing and blinking eyes.

Wolfe said the glowing eyes addition was inspired by a sci-fi character who is evil.

Littleton Town Meeting had its own anonymous attack mailing back in May, although not centered on an election campaign.

But the cream-of-the-crop is definitely Philadelphia politics, where one Councilman running for re-election was attacked for his position on raising the lease from $1 to $200,000 for Boy Scout use of a city building:

The "VOTER ALERT," printed on a yellow index card, reads: "Councilman Jack Kelly voted with the homosexual lobby to remove the Boy Scouts from their city rent-free headquarters. The Scouts can remain only if they agree with the homosexual agenda which would promote sodomy to our youth. Not too long ago this would have caused Jack Kelly to be tarred and feathered for contributing to the delinquency of minors. Today, all we can do is to retire him from City Council. Distributed by COPPP - Citizens Opposed to Politicians Who Pander to Perverts, P.O. Box 57040, Philadelphia, PA 19111. ANYONE BUT KELLY."

Now those words -- "promote sodomy to our youth" and "Citizens Opposed to Politicians Who Pander to Perverts" -- are real down-and-dirty politics, not the comparatively tame mudslinging by Connolly against Councilor Murphy for wanting a job promotion (to some other job).

The COPPP appears to be under suspicion under Pennsylvania law because it is an unregistered committee making expenditures advocating for the election or defeat of a particular candidate. Sound familiar? Oh, and that Councilman Kelly appears to have won the race, too, albeit by a very narrow margin.

Legal Trouble for Another BC Football Player

While the Boston College football team has impressed the ACC with their 10-2 season record and a birth in the ACC championship game this Saturday, they will be playing without backup running back A. J. Brooks, who has been suspended indefinitely from the school.

Brooks has been charged with "assault and battery with a dangerous weapon (his shoe)" stemming from an incident Sunday night in which he allegedly kicked a visitor to BC in the face. (The Boston Globe and Boston Herald erroneously reported earlier that the victim was a residential adviser/assistant.)

Brooks's legal problems add on top of two other BC football players -- DeJuan Tribble and Gosder Cherilus, who were arrested over the summer after a fight in a North Station bar, and later charged with assault and battery. (The Boston Globe article strangely only notes their arrest but not that they were charged.)

Neither Tribble nor Cherilus were suspended for their actions over the summer, while Brooks was suspended without delay. All three were charged with the same assault and battery. The Greatest Bar incident at North Station led to the victim, Sean Maney, needing emergency spinal surgery a couple of days later. (Maney was also charged in the incident, as was off-duty State Police Sgt. Joseph Boike.) BC football coach Jeff Jagodzinski did not respond to the Globe's request to describe why (backup running back) Brooks was suspended, while (starters) Cherilus and Tribble were not; Jagodzinski only said that each case is treated separately.

Methinks it smells suspiciously like the star players getting preferential treatment over the expendable backup player.

Brighton Tree Lighting: Saturday in Oak Square; Monday in Brighton Center

The annual tree lighting (and trolley tour) events are coming to Allston-Brighton during the next week. These are a chance to meet Santa Claus, drink cider, eat candy canes, watch the holiday Christmas tree be lit -- and, for Oak Square only, go on a trolley tour. You know, that thing that rides on train tracks down the middle of Washington Street...

Oak Square: Saturday, December 1st, 5:00 pm. Annual Trolley Tour and Tree Lighting.

Brighton Center: Monday, December 3rd, 6:00 pm. Tree Lighting.

Jackson-Mann School / Community Center (Allston): Thursday, December 6th, 11:30 am. Tree Lighting.

For more information, contact: Paul Holloway, Office of Neighborhood Services, 617-635-2678, Paul.Holloway@cityofboston.gov

This Saturday: Dueling Christmas Bazaars

Annual Christmas Bazaar at St. Columbkille's 10:00 am - 4:00 pm

The annual Christmas Bazaar at St. Columbkille's parish will happen this Saturday, December 1st, at 10:00 am - 4:00 pm, 25 Arlington Street, Brighton, 02135. Lots of arts and crafts for sale, silent auctions, and, presumably, the Cookie Room Bag Stuffing Contest (as many cookies as you can fit in one bag for a fixed price).




Christkindlmarkt at the German International School 1:00 - 5:00 pm

This is a "traditional" German Christmas fair being held by new North Allston neighbors, the German International School, at the former St. Anthony’s School, 57 Holton Street, Allston, MA 02134, from 1:00 - 5:00 pm.  "Santa, lots of kids activities, gluehwein (hot mulled wine, the real thing!), beer and nonalcoholic beverages, all kinds of food, a kids raffle, traditional holiday crafts, and more!"  The Christmas sausages are no doubt "Blutwurst" (red) and vegetarian (green).

Brighton High School Football to the Super Bowl

It wasn't many years ago when the Brighton High School football team had seasons where they fought to avoid a winless record. No longer. In Tuesday evening's semi-final game, the Bengals defeated Manchester Essex 28-7 to gain a berth in the Division 4 Superbowl game on Saturday at Stonehill College.

The Boston Herald and Boston Globe both come through with more coverage of Brighton High School football than they gave to Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council elections. The A-B TAB chimes in, too... albeit with historically more balanced coverage.

Brighton Challengers for Mayor Menino?

Mayor Thomas Menino has been flexing his fund-raising muscle this fall, despite the fact that he was not on the ballot. Many are viewing this as a sign that he wants to run for re-election in 2009. More evidence? David Bernstein of the Boston Phoenix couldn't get anyone to speak on -the-record, but provides this nugget ("Menino's Hit List"):

Sources also say that Menino’s people — particularly former chief of staff David Passafaro — are warning off anyone who provides aid and comfort to a potential rival. Those who contribute to a rumored mayoral candidate’s campaign committee, or who make introductions at ward committee meetings for a rumored candidate, these sources say, receive a reproachful call from Passafaro.

Who is poised to take on an incumbent Mayor Menino in 2009? Bernstein has a top-40 list. A number of Brighton residents show up in the list -- some real possibilities, others unlikely (Brighton residency given in the Phoenix article, not by my research):

6. Peter Meade, 61, Executive Vice President, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts
11. Steven Tolman, 53, State Senator
12. Joe Kennedy, 55, Chairman, Citizens Energy; former Congressman
18. William Galvin, 57, Secretary of the Commonwealth
37. Kevin Honan, 49, State Representative
38. Michael Moran, 36, State Representative

It is a big step to go from a local district to a city-wide Mayoral race, so I find ranking our local representatives as quite a leap. On top of that, both Rep. Honan and Rep. Moran appear genuinely devoted to local issues and constituent services, as opposed to constantly aspiring to higher and higher office. That said, Secretary Galvin made the leap to state-wide office quite effectively.

Senator Tolman is an intriguing possibility: connections from brother Warren could be very useful for the vast fund-raising required by a city-wide election. But why hasn't Senator Tolman been raising much money in recent years? He had only $88,677.63 in his account as of year-end 2006, less than you would expect for someone thinking about getting a bigger office and poised to take on a powerful Mayor. Those connections of Tolman's may not be as profitable as you might think at first.

Former Congressman Kennedy and Secretary Galvin would be strong contenders if they had any interest in being Mayor; the Phoenix provides no evidence of such interest, so I find their inclusion in the list as odd. Secretary Galvin's associates may also be stinging a bit from their inability to throw a local election to their favorite candidate.


How About Flaherty?

My odds-making? The Phoenix's #1 pick, Councilor Michael Flaherty, has a shot only if he can knock off the Mayor neighborhood-by-neighborhood by aggressively adopting those residents' key local issues as his own.

He has to go to East Boston and take the residents' side by fighting hard against the Mayor on having a casino at Suffolk Downs. Go to Allston-Brighton and take the residents' side by fighting hard against unchecked expansion by Harvard and Boston College and their facilitator, the BRA. Walk the streets of Dorchester and Mattapan every night, arm-in-arm with community leaders, railing against rising violent crime rates and how City Hall isn't doing anything about it. Help South Boston residents replace garbage cans in the streets, after City workers remove them, thereby reserving their shoveled parking spaces. (OK, maybe a bad example.) Blame every major woe in every neighborhood on the Mayor, even if it isn't quite true.

That's the only way someone like Councilor Flaherty could take on incumbent Mayor Menino in 2009: on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis, standing alongside the local residents on their biggest issue, and all-the-while blaming it everything on the Mayor. It would be a fun election to watch, but bound to be immensely negative.

Bloggers 1, Mainstream Media 0

Not really about Brighton, but follows along on issues that have been discussed here at Brighton Centered about whether or not (some) bloggers practice journalism.

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee recently held two telecons with journalists -- one for mainstream reporters, another for bloggers.  The bloggers' questions were far more substantive (albeit many of them were also Huckabee supporters), while the mainstream reporters' questions were far more superficial.

Read about it at Slate (via Adam Reilly of the Boston Phoenix).

Bulk Mailing Permits: Not Much Evidence There

The Boston Herald has been focusing on the apparent link between Councilor-At-Large-elect John Connolly's campaign mailings and the anonymous attack mailings sent the week before the election that he has denied sending -- but which share the same bulk mailing permit number (out of North Reading) as at least some other bulk mailings sent by the Connolly campaign.

How unique is such a match for the bulk mailing permit?

I've been shoving some of the mailings I received during the campaign into a yellow envelope, so this gives me the opportunity to pull them out to inspect the bulk mailing permit numbers. I got two other packrats in town to help out. We all braved the silverfish while reporting for this story. The numbers in parentheses gives the number of unique mailings the three of us received from that candidate. (There might be some duplicates among us.)

#231 (No. Reading, MA or zipcode 01864): Alex Selvig (6); Mark Ciommo (1); Rosie Hanlon (2)
#315 (Brockton, MA): Greg Glennon (3)
#396 (Boston, MA): Steven Tolman/Kevin Honan/Michael Moran [not campaign literature] (1); Steve Murphy (1)
#755 (Boston, MA): Mark Ciommo (4)
#52955 (Boston, MA): Steve Murphy (4)
#54162 (Boston, MA): Tim Schofield (1); John Connolly (5)
#54302 (Boston, MA): Sam Yoon (1)

I'm not sure if permit #231 is the same one out of North Reading on the anonymous mailing the Herald referred to, but it looks like a reasonable inference.

Does the bulk mailing "evidence" mean that Selvig, Ciommo, and/or Hanlon are the real culprits who sent the anonymous mailing(s) with the North Reading bulk mailing permits? Or that the bulk mailing permit line of evidence just isn't a unique piece of evidence all by itself? I'll bet on the latter.

The Herald's linking of Connolly to the remaining anonymous mailings via the evidence of bulk mailing permit numbers is not a unique match: many mailings from various campaigns may use the same permit numbers. Instead, the Herald's reporting should be focusing on the other factors that they are really using to assess a possible link between Connolly and the mailings: motive, means, and opportunity. That's where the discussion should be focused.

New Poll on Low Voter Turnout in Election

I've posted a new poll on the Brighton Centered Blog:

"What do you think was the biggest reason for the low voter turnout in the November 6th election?"

To see the poll, you must load the blog's full website in a browser and look at the upper-right-hand-side. Voting ends Thursday night at midnight.

Student Death on Allston's Glenville Avenue

The mainstream media has been covering this story, hence I'll just provide a summary and links here.

Early Saturday morning, November 17th, there was a large fight at 14 Glenville Avenue in Allston, MA 02134. Police officers responded and found a 21-year-old photography major at the Art Institute of Boston, Shawn Dow, lying in a back alley. He later died. He apparently fell off of the roof of the building. The coroner later determined that he died from the fall itself, but no police or coroner statement has been made about what caused him to fall off the roof (accidental or intentional); this last element of the story is yet to be resolved.

BPDnews 11/17/07: death investigation
Boston Globe 11/18/07: police interviews indicate faller from building and brawl inside building were separate incidents
BPDnews 11/18/07: deceased identified as Shawn Dow, 21, of Peabody
Blog comment from "pierce" 11/18/07: Dow had "footprints all over his chest" (note: unconfirmed report, taken from a now-removed, second-hand EMT report of a not-fully-specified fatal party fight. EMT report probably removed for legal reasons.)
Boston Herald 11/18/07: broken bottles litter building's stairwell, bannister poles missing
Boston Globe 11/19/07: story on Dow, friends, and family
Boston Herald 11/19/07: Dow's mother suspects foul play causing Dow's fall, since police photo of Dow's face, she says, looks like "someone hit him"
BPDnews 11/19/07: death is not listed as a "homicide" as of this date
Allston-Brighton TAB 11/19/07: Conway Cahill-Brodeur Funeral Home in Peabody is handling funeral arrangements; Art Institute planning a memorial service
Salem News 11/19/07: interviews with family, friends in Peabody area
BPDnews 11/19/07: cause of death consistent with a fall, as opposed to injuries sustained as the result of assault; interviewed 20+ witnesses which don't place Dow at the scene of the brawl
boston.com report on the same 11/19/07
BU's Daily Free Press 11/20/07: anonymous witness says that Dow had severe injuries to his face, despite being found near-dead on his back after falling from the roof. Brawl reported to have included breaking bottles over people's heads.
Salem News 11/20/07: "Witnesses quoted in some media reports said Dow had been beaten in a fight."
Allston-Brighton TAB 11/20/07: details on the wake, funeral, and burial of Dow

Boston Police "Citizens Alert" 11/20/07: "On Nov. 17^th 2007 the Boston Police responded to a large fight at 14 Glenville Avenue where a party was being held and found a male lying on the asphalt in the rear alley of 14 Glenville Ave. Autopsy reports indicate that this male sustained injuries consistent with falling off the roof. Anyone with any information relative to this incident is advised to call the Boston Police @ 617-343-4256 and speak to the Detectives."

Boston Police are looking for tips in the investigation: Crime Stoppers at 1-800-494-TIPS where anonymous tips can be placed.


On an unrelated note: three young men were arrested on gun charges in the area of Tremont Street and West Newston Street on Friday night, November 16th.

Another unrelated note: the two Brighton bank robberies on Friday, November 16th, were accompanied by two others in the Boston area. Some of the suspects have physical features that do not match each other. Since this year has seen 118 bank robberies in Massachusetts thus far, it is unusual to see four on the same day.

Robberies at Two Citizens Banks in Brighton

Two robberies, one armed, occurred Friday morning at different Citizens Bank branches in Brighton.  The armed robbery was at the bank next to Whole Foods at 35 Washington Street, while the second robbery (where no weapon was shown) was at the bank in Brighton Center at 414 Washington Street.

BPDnews, the Allston-Brighton TAB, and the Boston Globe have short stories up already.  Neither robber has been apprehended yet.

Brighton-Allston Bicentennial Jubilee Saturday Night

The Brighton - Allston Bicentennial Committee Members
Cordially Invite You To The Bicentennial Jubilee

At The New WGBH Building
1 Guest St., Brighton, MA 02135

Featuring “Herb Reed” And “The Platters”

Saturday, November 17, 2007
6:30 pm to 12:00 am
Gourmet Hors D’oeuvres & Cash Bar

Tickets:   $50 per person [CORRECTED]

Contact Terri Weida (617) 254 1950 -- no tickets available at the door, call by Friday

Tickets can also be purchased at http://www.brighton-allston200.com

Governor Patrick to Announce Affordable Housing Bond Bill at Honan Apartments

This release/invitation comes from the Allston Brighton Community Development Corporation:


Please join Governor Patrick and Mayor Menino, Rep. Kevin Honan and the Allston Brighton CDC at the Brian J. Honan apartments at 33 Everett Street in Allston tomorrow, Friday November 16, at 11 AM. Governor Patrick has chosen the site for the release of his Affordable Housing Bond Bill.

The Brian J. Honan apartments are 50 units of affordable rental housing for families, developed and owned by the Allston Brighton CDC. The housing was named in honor of the late Allston Brighton City Councilor Brian J. Honan who was instrumental in securing the site for the homes that now bear his name.

The Brian J. Honan Apartments were made possible by a unique partnership including suppport from the City of Boston, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Harvard University, the Home Funders Collaborative, Massachusetts Housing Partnership, Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation, Bank of America, the Massachusetts Life Insurance Community Investment Initiative, Mass Development, Boston Community Capital and the Renewable Energy Trust of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative.

Contact:
Allston Brighton CDC
320 Washington Street
Brighton, Massachusetts 02135
617-787-3874
info@allstonbrightoncdc.org
www.allstonbrightoncdc.org

"Ironic Plea" from the Boston Globe Editorial Board

Adam Reilly has a hard-hitting story in the Boston Phoenix this week about the mainstream media's virtual failure to cover the Boston City Council campaign and election:

...in the run-up to elections, the Globe had helped foster the very apathy [the Globe's editorial] was now lamenting — ignoring some campaigns, skimping on candidate profiles, and generally signaling that the election didn’t matter much.

Reilly calls the Globe's editorial an "ironic plea."  Is this the making of a news room vs. editorial page divide like that in the Wall Street Journal?

Reilly got Brian McGrory, the news editor, on-the-record about his paper's lack of coverage:

“What you saw this year isn’t really Boston politics,” argues McGrory. “We had an incredibly lackluster campaign, with a field of candidates who weren’t campaigning all that hard. This cannot be in any way confused with what would happen in a mayoral election in which we had two candidates offering sharply divergent views on how to run the city.

“The council hasn’t exactly distinguished itself with accomplishments over the last 16 years or so, since [Menino] has been in office,” he continues. “If the council proved to be a major policymaking body — if they had incredible enthusiasm for the campaign — we would have covered that very enthusiastically.”

Those words are pretty similar to what McGrory wrote in 2003 as a metro columnist in the Globe, thereby indicating that it was an affirmative managerial decision not to cover the race.

Reilly lectures McGrory by describing six news stories that the Globe could have run during the election, were he to think slightly deeper about the race:

1) Does Flaherty have the guts to challenge Menino for the mayoralty in 2009?
2) Steve Murphy’s cultivation of Governor Deval Patrick and dalliances with employment in the Patrick administration.
3) What Yoon learned, and didn’t, during a bumpy first term on the Council.
4) What’s lost when Boston doesn’t have an at-large female councilor?
5) Why don’t more African-Americans run for the Council?
6) Who are Greg Glennon and Mark Ciommo, the two candidates for the District Nine seat? (The District Nine councilor represents Allston-Brighton, and could have inordinate influence on Harvard University’s future expansion; Ciommo won the race.)

As I showed previously, in 2007 the Boston Globe ran no news stories about the District 9 candidates, while they ran two such news stories during the 2002 campaign.

Heroin Bust Near Monastery Road

Heroin bust near corner of Washington Street and Monastery Road (near St. Elizabeth's Medical Center and Fidelis Way public housing):

Two Arrested On Drug Charges

Yesterday at 4:01pm, members of the Drug Control Unit from District D-14 (Allston / Brighton) were in the area of Washington Street and Monastery Road when their attention was drawn to two males sitting in a black vehicle looking down onto their laps. Officers walked by the vehicle and observed the passenger with a folded scratch ticket and a q-tip on his lap. Officers approached the vehicle and identified themselves and observed the driver drop an uncapped hypodermic needle to the floor. Officers recovered a dollar bill from the floor, which contained one open plastic bag of tan powder believed to be heroin.

Mathew Baldwin, 26, and Michael Baldwin, 22, both of Cotuit were arrested and charged with Possession of Class A and Possession of Class C.

Did the Mass Turnpike Authority Violate the Open Meeting Law When Approving Recent Toll Hikes?

During the October 29, 2007 meeting of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority's Board, they voted to approve toll increases on the Massachusetts Turnpike, including an increase of $0.25 in the Allston-Brighton tolls as of January 1, 2008.

In so doing, however, the MTA Board may have violated Massachusetts's Open Meeting Law by meeting privately ("back-room meetings") with lawyers during a break in the public meeting. The nature of the Board's public meeting changed after the private meetings occurred, highlighting how substantive and key the private meetings appear to have been to the subsequent Board vote.


Boston Globe Story on MTA Board Meeting

Mac Daniel, Director of Communications for the MTA, confirmed the accuracy of the reporting in the Boston Globe story about the October 29 public meeting of the MTA Board. That story reported that a break in the meeting occured after two hours but before the Board vote on the toll increase. The story also reported that during the meeting break "several back-room meetings" occured between Transportation Secretary Bernard Cohen, "fellow board members and Turnpike Authority lawyers."

Daniel clarified that the break and the "back-room" meetings were not part of an Executive Session. In particular, he said, the MTA Board did not enter Executive Session at any time prior to the vote on the toll increases, but did enter Executive Session after the vote occurred.

How many people were meeting privately in the "back-room"? The Globe story states it was the Board chairman (Secretary Cohen), "fellow board members" (i.e., plural, so at least two), and MTA lawyers.

What was discussed in the "back-room" meetings? The Globe story does not make it clear, instead only noting the reasons given subsequent to the "back-room" meetings to support the toll increase:

Any delay in approving a hike would risk damaging the authority's bond rating and possibly lead to higher interest rates, authority lawyers said...

But [Cohen] seemed blind-sided when authority staff told him after two hours of debate that a delay would make it difficult if not impossible to begin collecting the new tolls by Jan. 1, the deadline set by bondholders.

Daniel confirmed that, early in the public meeting, Secretary Cohen was considering post-poning the Board vote on the toll increase for a month, but that he was later told that any delay in approving a toll increase could have a negative impact on being able to roll out the increases by January 1, 2008. Daniel also confirmed the Globe story that concerns over the MTA's bond rating factored into the decision to vote on October 29 on the toll increase. "Cohen initially agreed with the rest of the board... that a final vote could wait another month," reported the Globe. Secretary Cohen's position changed in the latter part of the public meeting -- after the "back-room" meetings had taken place -- to supporting the toll increases.

One person present on 10/29/07 has confirmed that the public in general was neither notified that the "back-room" meetings were taking place during the break nor were the public invited to attend them.

(Daniel did not respond to an additional request for information and comment related to the meeting. Official minutes [either draft or final] of the 10/29/07 MTA Board meeting were not available for this story; Eileen Fenton of the MTA explained that the minutes are only released once they are approved at the next meeting of the Board.)


Did the MTA Board Meeting Violate the Open Meeting Law?

The Massachusetts Open Meeting Law applying to state agencies is in Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 30A, Sections 11A, 11A-1/2, 11B, and 11C. The Attorney General has issued guidelines for understanding, interpreting, and applying the OML. Many informational resources about the OML can be found at the Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries site. Discussion about some other OML cases are discussed on the Brighton Centered Blog.

The basic text of the statute reads:

All meetings of a governmental body shall be open to the public and any person shall be permitted to attend any meeting except as otherwise provided by this section.

No quorum of a governmental body shall meet in private for the purpose of deciding on or deliberating toward a decision on any matter except as provided by this section. [M.G.L. Ch.30A, Section 11A1/2.]

Applicability. Does the OML apply at all to the MTA Board? The Law gives the definition of "Governmental body" as:

a state board, committee, special committee, subcommittee or commission, however created or constituted within the executive or legislative branch of the commonwealth or the governing board or body of any authority established by the general court to serve a public purpose in the commonwealth or any part thereof, but shall not include the general court or the committees or recess commissions thereof, or bodies of the judicial branch, or any meeting of a quasi-judicial board or commission held for the sole purpose of making a decision required in an adjudicatory proceeding brought before it, nor shall it include the board of bank incorporation or the Policyholders Protective Board. [MGL, Ch.30A, Section 11A]

As I understand it, the MTA Board is the governing board of an authority established by the State Legislature, so the OML appears to be applicable. (Note: I am not a lawyer, so I have not pored through case law on any of these issues.) A contrary argument might be made, however, based on the Supreme Judicial Court ruling that the MTA Board was "not part of the machinery of the government" when it considered the attempted firings in 2001 by Acting Governor Jane Swift of Board members Christy Mihos and Jordan Levy. It is unclear how that particular ruling of the SJC might impact the applicability of the OML to the MTA Board.

Last year, two unions took the MTA Board to court over allegations that the Board violated the OML when they discussed the issue of removing toll booths. The nature of at least some of Suffolk Superior Court Associate Justice Diane Kottmyer's rulings in the case indicate that the Kottmyer considered that the MTA Board is subject to the OML. Another instance from July 2007 indicates that Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts, believed that the MTA Board was subject to the OML.


Possible Violations of the OML. Assuming that the OML applies to the MTA Board, then the "back-room" meetings during a break in the public meeting of October 29th appear to violate these provisions in MGL, Ch.30A, Section 11A1/2 because:

• The "back-room" meetings were unannounced to the public in advance;
  
• There was no clear indication that the public was invited to join the "back-room" meetings, or was allowed to do so;
• A quorum of members of the MTA Board participated in the "back-room" meetings;
• Issues related to their decision-making authority appear to have been discussed in the "back-room" meetings; and
• The subsequent public meeting showed a change in direction relative to the public meeting prior to the "back-room" meeting.

According to the Globe story, at least three Board members (including Secretary Cohen) appear to have been in the "back-door" meetings, which would constitute a quorum of the five-member Board. Even if fewer than a quorum were present, the possibility of an intent to circumvent the quorum requirement ocould still be a violation of the OML -- as evidenced by recent litigation regarding the Boston City Council.

Did the direction of the Board's public meeting alter after the "back-room" meetings? The Globe reported:

For two hours of the three-hour meeting, the board seemed certain to delay the vote by a month...

Transportation Secretary Bernard Cohen, who chairs the board, reopened the public meeting and shifted course. Any delay in approving a hike would risk damaging the authority's bond rating and possibly lead to higher interest rates, authority lawyers said.

Summary. All said, it appears to me that the OML applies to the MTA Board; it further appears that the MTA Board violated the OML by holding these "back-door" meetings. Since their vote on the toll increase was made subsequent to the "back-door" meetings, a legitimate case can be made for invalidating their vote.


Is Anybody Investigating Possible OML Violations?

The Attorney General is charged with enforcement of the statute. (This differs from the the case of municipalities, where the District Attorney is charged with enforcement.) Complaints of violations of the OML must be made within 21 days of the meeting, i.e., by next Monday, November 19. The obvious first step for any such investigation by the AG would be to establish if the MTA Board is subject to the OML.

I asked the AG's press office whether they have received a complaint about (or are investigating) possible violations of the OML by the MTA Board. The press officer confirmed that no such complaint has been received to date by the AG's office. He could neither confirm nor deny, however, whether any such investigation is currently being undertaken by the AG's office since that information cannot be legally disclosed.


Does Anybody Care About the Toll Increase?

Since the MTA Board vote was taken, legislation has been introduced on Beacon Hill that would block the toll increases by freezing the tolls.

Locally to Allston-Brighton, State Representatives Kevin Honan and Michael Moran are co-sponsoring the House bill, while State Senator Steven Tolman is co-sponsoring the Senate bill.

Senator Tolman and Representatives Honan and Moran wrote a letter to Secretary Cohen on October 12, 2007, requesting a "Resident Discount Program" for residents of Allston-Brighton. The letter read, in part:

Given a long history of hosting this major highway with its negative effects, and recent proposal to increase the toll at the Allston-Brighton turnpike exit, it seems appropriate and necessary to explore some means of mitigating impacts on our community.

Representative Honan also testified before the MTA's October 12, 2007 meeting in Framingham. He argued that the MTA should first provide information on projected potential revenues, and study potential benefits from Governor Deval Patrick's proposal for consolidating parts of the state transportation. He also said he was "disappointed" with the failure of the MTA install sound barriers (e.g., along Lincoln Street) that he had requested previously be done.

Does anybody care about these toll increases? Sounds like a lot of State Legislators do, including ours in Allston-Brighton.

Federal Postal Regulations May Have Been Violated in Anonymous Mailings

Boston City Councilor-At-Large-elect John Connolly was again in the news over the weekend related to the anonymous mailings sent out the week before the November 6th election. Connolly has admitted to sending out two of the anonymous mailings that attacked Councilor Stephen Murphy, but did not claim responsibility for any other anonymous mailings that were sent out -- although one or more of them have printed bulk mailing permits as other Connolly flyers.

Last weekend, the Boston Herald looked into the the legalities surrounding some of these anonymous mailings related to their use of fictitious return addresses. While the State Legislature passed a law in 2006 allowing anonymous mailings in Massachusetts, there are additional federal postal regulations that must be followed. The Herald reports:

...sending bulk mailings with bogus return addresses could be a violation of federal postal regulations if there was “intent to defraud,” according to Doug Bem, a spokesman for the United States Postal Inspection Service.

The article gave no indication if there was an ongoing investigation by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. The legal condition of "intent to defraud" is probably the big hurdle that any such investigation would have to address. As long as no one steps forward to take responsibility for these mailings, then it would seem like the "intent to defraud" hole is, in effect, being dug deeper by the day.

I noted in a previous post that one of the anonymous mailings that no one has stepped forward to take responsibility for could also pose a problem for whomever sent it, because it mentions voting against a particular candidate for public office; such mailings must be declared to the Office of Campaign and Political Finance, yet there is no record of the "South Boston Association" on file at the OCPF's online database.

Connolly's problems just continue to mount. He has chosen not to apologize either for the anonymous nature of the mailings or their content. He will become a colleague with Councilor Murphy, who may not offer forgiveness to someone who hasn't apologized. He appears to be linked to a mailing -- although he denies it, according to the Herald -- that has yet to be fully disclosed under state campaign finance rules. And now he appears to be linked to a mailing -- although he also denies it -- that could be in violation of federal postal regulations.

Connolly's a lawyer. He's got some skills there he may need to use in the days and weeks to come.

Election Urban Legends: Checking Out the Facts

Rain Caused the Low Voter Turnout

Boston's 13.6% turnout was far less than the 23-32% turnout in all previous municipal elections without a mayoral race since 1985. Inclement weather can certainly reduce the turnout for elections, and November 6, 2007 had a good amount of it: half an inch of moderate rain coming down during the day. The rain stopped by 3:00 pm, and the Sun began showing by 3:30 or 4:00 pm.

Did this rain cause the low turnout? Last time I checked, Quincy, Brockton, and Fall River all have weather highly-correlated with Boston; those cities still had around 50% turnout among registered voters for their mayoral elections. You can't tell me that half the people stayed home in Boston, Quincy, Brockton, and Fall River because of the weather... unless the latter three can expect voting rates of 100% -- or more -- when the Sun is shining. Yeah, right.

More likely: voter turnout was depressed a bit by bad weather, but mostly by the blizzard-like-whiteout of horrendously inadequate coverage of the race and issues by the city-wide papers, the Boston Globe and the Boston Herald. Those newspapers could have written their campaign coverage via computer program: IF (not cover the campaign && rainy weather) THEN (write column about low voter turnout on election day and a news story the day after). I wonder if all their news coverage could be coded up like this.

Memo to Globe and Herald city news desks: you got the election you asked for. Brian McGrory is my candidate for local news editor of the year, since he appears to have been the most powerful influence in the election via his reporters' non-coverage in the race.


Allston-Brighton Residents Don't Vote

A staple of Boston election politicking is that Allston-Brighton residents don't vote. You can explain it in many different ways, primarily through the transient nature of much of the A-B population, but the bottom line result keeps coming up. A-B Wards 21 and 22 (which includes Ward 21, Precincts 1 and 2 which are not part of District 9) voted in the 2005 municipal election at 23.6% of registered voters, while the city as a whole voted at 35.6%. In the 2005 preliminary municipal election, Wards 21 and 22 voted at 11.5% while the city voted at 15.1%. Conventional Wisdom of city politics dictates that city-wide candidates shouldn't spend much time campaigning in A-B -- or delivering constituent services -- because the residents don't vote enough to make it worthwhile.

In the 2007 election, we have all learned a lesson: Allston-Brighton electoral interest is resurgent. For the first time in recent memory, voters in Wards 21 and 22 turned out at a rate of 12.6% -- a rate nearly matching the city-wide average of 13.6%.

Why? The open A-B District 9 City Council seat likely motivated voters here to turnout for their favorite between Mark Ciommo and Greg Glennon. This local race also brought to the fore important neighborhood issues on many voters' minds, particularly those of institutional expansion and the exodus of families from the area. The A-B turnout has its silver lining: A-B residents are showing that they want their neighborhood issues dealt with during the next two years. The City Council and Mayor are bound to take note.


Councilor Michael Flaherty So Encouraged by 2007 Finish That He Will Run for Mayor in 2009

Hold your horses! In 2005, Councilor Flaherty got 49,220 votes to take first-place in the Councilor-At-Large race, thereby beating second-place finisher Councilor Felix Arroyo by more than 5,600 votes. This time, Councilor Flaherty got only 25,847 votes, beating second-place finisher Councilor Stephen Murphy by only 2,206 votes. The difference between first and fourth place in 2007 was only 3,867 votes: the first four candidates ran pretty much neck-and-neck.

On a positive note for him, Councilor Flaherty managed to get a vote off of 55.9% of ballots cast in 2007, up from 50.7% in 2005, in a Councilor-At-Large race that allows voters to cast up to four votes. Nonetheless, in 2005, Mayor Thomas Menino got a vote out of 65.9% of the ballots cast (including blank ballots) in a Mayoral race where voters do not have the opportunity to cast more than one vote. Without a massive voter revolt over the horizon, it's hard to reconcile Menino's and Flaherty's numbers to make it look like the latter would have any chance in a head-to-head competition.

While Councilor Flaherty was bringing in the big bucks for his fundraising in an election year, Mayor Menino decided to do a little bit of his own fundraising in an off-year. During September and October, Mayor Menino raised $229,890; in the same reporting period, Councilor Flaherty only brought in $147,480. Does Councilor Flaherty have piles of his own money to throw into his own race like Maura Hennigan did in her failed 2005 Mayoral bid?

Councilor Flaherty needed to win big on November 6th to make his Mayoral aspirations look credible, but he only won marginally, not overwhelmingly. And the Mayor flexed his fundraising muscles to make it clear.


Bullet Voting in West Roxbury

John Connolly's campaign sent out two anonymous mailings attacking Councilor Stephen Murphy in the last week before the municipal election. There were three additional, anonymous mailings that were sent out around the same time (according to the Boston Globe's summary), but which nobody has stepped out to take responsibility for. Two of those were sent to voters in the Parkway neighborhood (i.e., West Roxbury) lobbying for "bullet votes" for a local candidate, presumably Connolly; one of those mailings also included the bulk mailing permit number previously used by Connolly's campaign.

Did Connolly's lobbying for West Roxbury bullet votes swing the election to him?

Ward 20 includes West Roxbury as well as some of Roslindale; Connolly was born in Roslindale but currently resides in West Roxbury. Ward 20 historically turns out to vote at rates well above the city-wide average: in the 2005 municipal election, the Ward voted at 48.4%, compared to the city-wide rate of 35.6%; in the 2007 municipal election, they turned out at 23.8% compared with city-wide 13.6%. In 2007, Ward 20 was therefore disproportionately voting at a higher rate even than is usual even for them. This is exactly the behavior expected in a low turnout election, where neighborhoods with white/elderly/wealthy residents turnout at higher rates than minority/young/poor neighborhoods.

What did this disproportionately high turnout in Ward 20 mean to the Connolly vs. Councilor Felix Arroyo race for the fourth Councilor-At-Large seat? If Ward 20 had voted at 18.5% in 2007 (matching their usual higher turnout) instead of 23.8%, Connolly would have lost only 635 votes out of his 3421 margin of victory over Arroyo. Ward 20's disproportionately high turnout in 2007 was not nearly enough, by itself, to elect Connolly.

Did these Ward 20 voters engage in bullet voting? City-wide in 2007 there was an average of 2.7 votes (out of an allowed four votes) for City Councilor-At-Large; in Ward 20, the average was 2.5 votes per ballot. Compare this to the 2005 municipal election which had 2.9 city-wide votes per ballot, versus 3.0 votes per ballot in Ward 20. While city-wide voters did a little bit more bullet-voting in 2007 than in 2005, West Roxbury and Roslindale voters did substantially more bullet voting in 2007 than in 2005.

Did this bullet-voting make the difference? We don't know for sure, because you would need to know how each and every ballot voted. But we can take two cases: an extreme case, where all the bullet votes took a vote away from Arroyo (unlikely); and an average (and likelier) case, where all the bullet votes took a vote away from one of the other four candidates, taken at random. In the extreme case, all of Ward 20's 0.5 fewer votes per ballot in 2007 than in 2005 removed 3142 votes from Arroyo, almost all of the margin between him and Connolly. In the more likely case, only 3142/4 = 786 votes were taken away from Arroyo, not nearly enough to produce the difference between Connolly and Arroyo.

OK, so the numbers back up that West Roxbury and Roslindale utilized the bullet vote more in this election than previously. But are they the masters of the bullet vote? No! Ward 6 (South Boston, Councilor Flaherty's ward of birth) averaged 2.3 votes per ballot, Wards 1 (East Boston), 7 (South Boston, Councilor Flaherty's home ward), and 22 (Allston-Brighton) all averaged 2.5 votes per ballot, similar rates of bullet voting to the West Roxbury/Roslindale recent converts.

What do we make of all this? Yes, Ward 20 (West Roxbury/Roslindale) voted at a disproportionately high rate and used significantly more bullet voting than in previous elections, but neither effect was sufficient to explain how Connolly beat Arroyo for fourth place. The combination of the two effects only explains around 40% of their margin differentiating the two.

Look elsewhere for bigger causes of Connolly's defeat of Arroyo, such as: Arroyo's failure to raise money; Arroyo's failure to get-out-the-vote; the mainstream media's failure to cover the race resulting in low voter turnout; etc. Those will likely be fingered as the real factors leading to Arroyo's ouster at the polls in 2007.

Why Ciommo Won and Arroyo Lost in the 2007 Municipal Election

Just before the polls closed last Tuesday night, I posted my predictions for the City Council race. I was pretty much spot-on for the Allston-Brighton District 9 seat (albeit missing the turnout numbers by a lot), but got the wrong odd-man-out in the Councilor-At-Large seat. Here is some analysis of what I thought happened on election day.


Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor

I predicted that Mark Ciommo would beat Greg Glennon by at least 900 votes and by at least 57-43% (possibly as high as 60-40%). My prediction couldn't have been closer: Ciommo won by 948 votes by 59.8-39.8%. The full precinct results can be found here.

That said, I screwed up on two points -- one moderate mistake (Wallingford Road) and one a big mistake (voter turnout) -- which magically cancelled each other out to make it look like I hit the lottery.

Turnout. I guessed 6500 voters would turn out, which was at the low end of previous municipal elections. It was far worse at 4745, which was barely over the 4521 votes in the preliminary municipal election.

Why was I so wrong? Not because of the weather. I think that the rank-and-file voters got so little information from the mainstream media (Allston-Brighton TAB excepted), that there was little motivation to vote. I also heard from many voters in the preliminary election who were dissatisfied with the two choices in the final election; I suspect many of them just stayed home, unwilling to be forced to choose.


Wallingford Road. Glennon carried Ward 21, Precinct 13, full of elderly Russian Jewish voters at the Wallingford Road housing project, over Ciommo 303-142 in the preliminary election. I predicted that he would add to that lead by +200 votes, but the forces of arm-twisting pushed it the other way: Ciommo won 333-242, giving Ciommo a net +252 votes. I blew the vote difference by 452. Oops.

But this is a really, really big story in the neighborhood. Tim Schofield told host Joe Heisler on the Talk of the Neighborhood show that the Russians mostly listen to former State Representative Brian Golden and Mayor Menino; to that I add a likely third party, the Mark Alford-Pat Galvin-(and-his-brother) trifecta. Golden, Alford, and Pat Galvin all supported Glennon -- and Ciommo holds progressive social positions incompatible the conservative Russian voters, at least in the conventional wisdom -- so this means that the Mayoral power in A-B is now at the point that it trumps all else in specific cases of arm-twisting (like Wallingford in this election).

The other big feature of the Wallingford Road vote is that it actually didn't matter in the election. Ciommo could have won without a single vote from the Russians. In looking back on this year's election, the message we should all take away is that the Russian vote can impact a preliminary (or three-way) election in an important way by determining the second-place finisher, but their strength cannot dominate over the powerful base of a long-time resident.


Oak Square battleground. I predicted that several precincts in the Oak Square neighborhood would represent battlegrounds between the long-term Brighton residents (Ciommo's base) and socially conservative Irish Catholics (Golden's base, and hence Glennon's). Many people in the neighborhood have one foot firmly in each camp, so predicting how they would swing was the parlor game of the election.

Ciommo carried the combined Ward 22, Precincts 7, 11, and 13 in the preliminary, with Glennon and Schofield in a virtual tie for second. Schofield's voters generally swung heavily for Ciommo, regardless of his endorsement, but this was the one neighborhood where that pattern might have been broken.

In the final election, Ciommo won 22/7, 22/10, and 22/11 heavily, and barely nudged Glennon 102-98 in more conservative 22/13. I predicted, "if Ciommo carries 7, 10, and 11 with big margins, then it's lights out." That it was.

My model was that Schofield's supporters went 80-20% for Ciommo, Selvig's 65-35%, and Hanlon's 50-50%. Using that model on Ward 22, Precinct 7, for example, my prediction was Ciommo over Glennon by 137 to 61 votes; the actual result was 131-67, off by six, but within the margin of error of 14 votes (for 198 cast).


Ward 21 Progressive Precincts. I predicted that you should forget-about-it without a strongly identified progressive in the case (like Schofield). Ward 21, Precinct 8 actually doubled their turnout over the preliminary election -- from 1.6 to 3.2%. In the end, the progressive precincts still didn't show up.


Summary. The bosses of Ward 22 were able to get Councilor Jerry McDermott elected in 2002 (he is the cousin to the Galvins, after all), even though McDermott claimed after the election that he was not the Mayor's candidate. (Ciommo told me earlier in the year that he disputes that characterization of the 2002 race, however, since the Mayor did not formally endorse a candidate.) In 2007, however, the Ward 22 bosses no longer appear to be able to throw an Allston-Brighton election to their favorite candidate -- although they can get him a second-place finish and into the finals.

Councilor-elect Ciommo enjoyed powerful support from middle-aged men who chose to stay in Brighton to raise their families here. He won out over the younger, more transient constituencies -- like former Representative Golden and lame duck Councilor McDermott -- who leave town with their young families.

Long-time Brighton residents and the Mayor's influence ended up winning over the ward bosses and families in transition through the neighborhood.


Boston City Councilor-At-Large Race

While many in the city thought that the race for the fourth seat among the Boston City Councilors-At-Large was between Councilor Stephen Murphy and challenger John Connolly, there were many soothsayers predicting Councilor Felix Arroyo to be the odd man out.

I called the race a toss-up until the last moment, when I thought that Connolly's strategic blunder of sending out the anonymous attack mailings would cost him enough votes to lose out on fourth place. I was obviously wrong, and the Arroyo predictions were right.

Why did Arroyo lose? The pundits have rained in with some pretty convincing reasons: low voter turnout working against minority candidates; Arroyo raised little money, while Connolly raised around ten times as much; Arroyo didn't campaign very hard or send out many mailings, while Connolly campaigned like crazy (and sent out quite a few flyers!); Arroyo's record on attendance at City Council meetings and hearings; etc. None of the reasons seems enough by itself, but, taken together, they seem plenty to explain why he got around 15% fewer votes than Connolly.

This year's City Council election is an important one for data mining purposes in the future, because it shows clearly how low voter turnout impacts voting from ward-to-ward. Connolly's West Roxbury Ward 20, for example, voted disproportionately higher than the rest of the city.


The election numbers, plus analysis on a ward-by-ward basis, for the Councilor-At-Large race can be found at Matt O'Malley's website.  He ran, albeit unsuccessfully, in 2005 for Councilor-at-Large, so he knows the ins and outs of all the different neighborhoods and their voting trends.

Sushi in Cleveland Circle

A new sushi restaurant, Fins, has opened in Cleveland Circle on Market Street.  Boston College sophomore, Meg K., reviews it and thinks that it could become the next, trendy "hot spot" around BC.

Who's the place catering to?  There are two TVs playing inside, and it's located next door to BC perennial hangout Roggie's, so I would guess BC students.  According to Meg. K.'s review, however, larger entrees reach up to $18-20.  The atmosphere and decor sound like they're trying to pull in the (slightly) older, urban crowd:

Very calming with mint colored walls and dark wood tables and chairs. The bright red lights above the sushi bar provided a nice contrast to the lighter walls...

And the floors don't sound like they're sticky, yet.  Sounds like a nice addition to Cleveland Circle which might satisfy a range of clientele -- and worth a visit.

Brighton High School Footbal Team Enters Playoffs Undefeated

While the Boston College Eagles' football team missed out on their perfect season with a 27-17 loss to Florida State last Saturday night, the Brighton High School Bengals' football team finished their regular season Friday night undefeated at 10-0 after a 30-6 win over Dorchester.  The Bengals continue on to the post-season with a division 4 playoff game.

Precinct Results in the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council Election November 6, 2007

Ward	Precinct	Greg Glennon	Mark Ciommo
21	3	9	24
21	4	16	28
21	5	16	27
21	6	35	120
21	7	18	38
21	8	16	30
21	9	43	64
21	10	59	103
21	11	51	54
21	12	125	146
21	13	241	333
21	14	20	18
21	15	12	32
21	16	120	55
22	1	126	206
22	2	99	150
22	3	86	169
22	4	114	118
22	5	64	58
22	6	46	90
22	7	67	131
22	8	106	136
22	9	79	92
22	10	74	211
22	11	48	153
22	12	101	149
22	13	98	102
Total	...	1889	2837

EDIT: Note that the results published in the Allston-Brighton TAB for Ward 21, Precinct 16 (Glennon 55, Ciommo 0) are incorrect.

EDIT (11/12/07): The TAB has fixed those errors online.

Boston Globe: Covering the District 9 Race in 2002, But Not in 2007

It is straight-forward to see how the Boston Globe's coverage of the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council race has changed from past coverage.

2002. In the special municipal election of 2002 to replace District 9 City Councilor Brian Honan after his sudden death, the Boston Globe ran two stories about the race, the candidates, and some of the issues:

• "COUNCIL RACE DRAWS NEIGHBORHOOD CROWD IN ALLSTON-BRIGHTON" [archive fee], by Michael Jonas, City Weekly Page 7, 10/27/02.
  
• "9 CANDIDATES VYING TO TAKE HONAN'S SEAT" [archive fee], by Corey Dade, Page B1, 11/11/02 (the day before the preliminary special municipal election).
  

These stories were followed by an endorsement of Jerry McDermott for the special municipal election, a short story on election day for the special municipal election, and a full story the day after the election saying who won:

• "BRIGHTON REALTOR WINS SEAT ON COUNCIL" [archive fee], by Corey Dade, Page B2, 12/11/02 (day after special municipal election).
  

2007. In the municipal election of 2007 to fill the seat being vacated by District 9 City Councilor Jerry McDermott, who chose not to run for re-election, the Globe ran the following news stories prior to the preliminary municipal election:

[none]

The editorial page ran an endorsement of Tim Schofield on 9/19/07, but no news stories. Nor did they run a story on the preliminary municipal election day saying it was happening or who was running. The Globe followed with a short blurb the day after the preliminary municipal election (page B2, 97 words) saying who ran and who made it into the final election, an editorial endorsing Mark Ciommo in the municipal election (along with an editorial reminder of that endorsement on election day), a single sentence on election day stating who was running, and then a single sentence the day after the election stating who won.


Comparing 2002 and 2007. What was different between the Globe's coverage of the District 9 races in 2002 and 2007?

• In 2002, the news desk ran two stories about the race prior to the election -- one in the City Weekly, and one in the City/Region on the front page (B1). In 2007, the news desk ran no stories prior to the election.
• In 2007, not even a single sentence on preliminary election day to tell you that it was election day today in Allston-Brighton, while in 2002 they did.
• Information on the candidates and some of their positions on the issues was given prior to the 2002 election, but not prior to the 2007 election (with the exception of the summaries in the editorial endorsements).
  
• In 2002, a full story about the election the day after, which included descriptions of some of the major issues in the race (university expansion, housing, bars).

Is this what we can expect in 2007 from the local reporters working under the direction of City/Region editor Brian McGrory? Yes, McGrory, the former Metro columnist who, earlier this year, referred to the "backwater known as the Boston City Council." Yeah, the same guy who, last year, referred to them as the "lapdog City Council."

Sounds like McGrory didn't care for the City Council when he was a columnist, and hence doesn't want to bother covering them as editor.

Am I being harsh and judgmental in making that statement? Am I being unfair in hypothesizing about what city issues McGrory might want to cover? Actually, no. In 2003, McGrory provided a description of exactly what he believed not to be worth the price of the ink:

Exactly one decade ago, after covering Thomas M. Menino's first election as mayor, I set a lofty journalistic goal. My goal was to never spill a drop of ink writing about the Boston City Council, because no reader with even the hint of a normal life could possibly care about the collection of political mis creants and misfits who make up that perenially underachieving group. [italics added]

No, I'm not making this up. This guy's in charge of the local news desk since May. With such leadership at the helm, it's no surprise the City Councilor-At-Large campaign barely got mentioned in the Boston Globe, and the District 9 City Councilor campaign not at all. It was the logical extension of a goal he set back in 1993.

The Boston Globe's editorial page thinks that we should consider re-vamping the election of Boston City Councilors in the wake of this week's election. No, no, no. What we need to do is make the job of Boston Globe City/Region Editor an elected position. And then let's see if he'll cover the race.

Peek Underneath

What does a Cardinal wear under his robes?   It's not often you get to peek underneath:



I don't believe it is a bloody sock. It looks more cardinal than red, but close enough.

Halloween Taser Incident at Jackson Mann School

The Daily Free Press, the student newspaper of Boston University, conveyed a police report on an incident of a student with a taser at an elementary school in Allston.  Sgt. Bill Fogarty of the Community Service Office of the Boston Police Department District D-14 Station confirmed that the incident occurred in the Jackson Mann School, 40 Armington, Street, Allston.

The report in The Daily Free Press reads:

"Don't tase me, bro"

Just after noon Oct. 31, police responded to a call for assistance from the Boston Fire Department at an elementary school in Allston.

When police arrived, the BFD and school administrators told them a student had set a fire in the cafeteria. The student told police he had been eating lunch with friends when a bottle of rubber cement caught fire at their table.

Upon investigation, police determined the student had been playing with an electroshock weapon and had ignited the rubber cement. The student claimed he did not have a taser.

Further questioning determined the student had stashed the taser in the men's bathroom when the school was evacuated.

The school principal spoke with the parents of the students involved and will determine disciplinary measures.

Residential vs. Commercial Taxes in Boston

Shirley Kressel, of the Alliance of Boston Neighborhoods, has written a nice blog posting about the competing proposals by Governor Deval Patrick and Mayor Thomas Menino to address the relative burdens shared by commercial and residential property taxpayers in Boston.

The 2004 state law temporarily raised commercial property taxes a bit by raising the commercial tax cap from 175% to 200%, thereby allowing residential property taxes to increase at a slower rate. The temporary increase is currently slowly decreasing back to its original level. As I understood it, Mayor Menino's proposal (HD 2717; see also PDF linked here) is to return the commercial tax rate back to 175%, while Governor Patrick's proposal has a two-year freeze at 183%; the Mayor's proposal results in higher residential property taxes, while the Governor's proposal results in lower residential property taxes.

Kressel uncovers all the layers of the mess, however, noting the hidden secrets of the 2004 law and Mayor Menino's proposal to repeal it. She finds some "dirty tricks":

Menino’s bill would help residents in one way: it would repeal two harmful “dirty tricks” slipped into the 2004 legislation by business interests after the original “deal” was set. The first trick drops the commercial tax rate down to 170% in 2009 – lower than the pre-existing 175% -- permanently shifting more of the city’s tax burden from businesses to residents. The second, and far more devastating to residents, permanently prevents the mandatory residential portion of the tax burden from ever going back down from its highest level, no matter how low housing prices go or how high commercial values go. This portion used to be 30% of the total levy; it is already up at 42%.

My understanding then is too simplistic: Mayor Menino's bill would lower residential property taxes in the long-term by repealing the 2004 law's reduction of the previous 175% rate to 170%, but would keep residential property taxes high in the long-term by fixing the 42% residential property tax burden (rather than letting it lower back to 30%). Here's a case where we need some solid guidance from an independent analyst, like the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation's Michael Widmer, projecting the future costs of these various competing elements of the Mayor's and Governor's proposals, and the 2004 law left unchanged.

Tax law is usually pretty boring stuff. But when so many people throughout Boston keep asking for property tax relief, understanding in detail the issues involved can be more interesting than you might expect. And it could tell you something about your elected officials' prioirities.

Where are these different proposals in the process? The State Legislature just passed Mayor Menino's bill, so it awaits Governor Patrick's signature. This would be a good time to contact the Governor to tell him if you approve or disapprove of the bill.

Municipal Elections Results for November 6, 2007

Final unofficial results of the District 9 City Council election on November 6, 2007, with all precincts reporting:

DIST. 9 CITY COUNCILOR
		Total
Number of Precincts		27
Precincts Reporting		27	100.0 %
Vote For		1
Total Votes		4745
Number of Uncast Votes		160
MARK S. CIOMMO		2837	59.79%
GREGORY J. GLENNON		1889	39.81%
Write-in Votes		19	0.40%

CITY COUNCILOR-AT-LARGE
		Total
Number of Precincts		254
Precincts Reporting		254	100.0 %
Vote For		4
Total Votes		125614
Number of Uncast Votes		59186
MICHAEL F. FLAHERTY		25847	20.58%
STEPHEN J. MURPHY		23641	18.82%
SAM YOON		23210	18.48%
JOHN R. CONNOLLY		21980	17.50%
FELIX D. ARROYO		18559	14.77%
MARTIN J. HOGAN		4003	3.19%
MATTHEW GEARY		3025	2.41%
WILLIAM P. ESTRADA		2432	1.94%
DAVID JAMES WYATT		2377	1.89%
Write-in Votes		540	0.43%

Ciommo and Connolly In, Arroyo Out

In today's municipal election, Mark Ciommo has defeated Greg Glennon for the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council race by 948 votes, corresponding to 59.8-39.8%. Turnout was significantly lower than expected -- in fact, barely 5% more voters casting ballots than in the preliminary election. I estimate voter turnout at 13.1%.

The surprise of the evening was hearing Tim Schofield read off the Wallingford Road vote as 333-241 for Ciommo over Glennon, meaning that Glennon actually lost votes from the Russian Jewish elderly vote since the preliminary (when he won over Ciommo 303-142). Some mighty strong arm-twisting was going on there.


In an even more awfully low-turnout vote city-wide -- 13.5% -- challenger John Connolly knocked off sitting Councilor-At-Large Felix Arroyo by around 3000 votes, according to preliminary results. Councilor Arroyo just wasn't running in the same league: he only managed to raise around $30,000 this year, far less than Connolly and Councilor Flaherty, who each managed to raise more than $300,000. Many pundits were right when they put Councilor Arroyo as the one most at risk of losing his seat.

Councilor Michael Flaherty took first, Councilor Stephen Murphy second, Councilor Sam Yoon third, and challenger John Connolly fourth.

In the Councilor-At-Large race it is amazing how few votes separated first-place from fourth-place: fewer than 4000, where Flaherty took 25,700 and Connolly 21,800. In 2005, with a bit more than twice the number of votes cast, first and fourth place were separated by more than 13,000 votes.

Challenger Carlos Henriquez, a former aide to Councilor Flaherty, did poorly in District 7 against incumbent Councilor Chuck Turner. Between the low vote total for first place and the result in District 7, Councilor Flaherty will find little to justify a run against Mayor Menino in 2009. Flaherty needed to win big, and he didn't. There's always 2013.

Bullet voting was big in this race compared to 2005. In the Councilor-At-Large race today, the average ballot had 2.7 votes out of four allowed, while the 2005 race had 2.9 votes on average per ballot. It will be interesting to see where those bullet votes occurred -- West Roxbury, anyone? -- since Councilor Arroyo's defeat indicates that they weren't generally for him.


District 2 Councilor Bill Linehan won the prize for the "least-liked unopposed Councilor," getting only 60.1% of the vote; all the other ballots either had a write-in candidate or no vote, meaning he beat out "anything but him" by only 3:2. District 8 Councilor Michael Ross was the "most-liked unopposed Councilor," garnering 76.1% of the vote, thereby beating "anything but him" by more than 3:1.

Predictions for the Boston City Council Election

These predictions are being submitted at the close of the polls on Tuesday, November 6th. If I'm totally off-mark, then please take every opportunity to laugh at me without end.

Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor

Mark Ciommo will carry the election in what approaches a landslide, predicted at 57-43% -- but possibly as high as 60%-40% -- and a difference of at least 900 votes.

Turnout. With lots of rain forecast and a city-wide (non-Mayoral) City Councilor-At-Large race with only one strong challenger, the turnout will be lower than expected, probably close to 6500 votes in Allston-Brighton. Those 2000 votes of people who didn't show up for the preliminary election are Glennon's best -- and only -- chance to pull out a win today.

Russian Jewish elderly vote. They vote in large numbers in preliminary and primary elections, which means that there's not a lot of room to grow into the final or general election. Glennon picked up 302 votes in Ward 21, Precinct 13 to Ciommo's 142. Look for, at most, 200 more votes among these Wallingford Road -- and that the forces of darkness will twist both Ukrainian arms to turn it into a true voting bloc. Probably another 50-100 votes in the less-Russian, but still elderly, Precinct 12. Glennon +200 votes relative to Ciommo.

Who will Schofield-Hanlon-Selvig supporters vote for? In the preliminary municipal election on September 25th that saw 4500 total votes cast, Tim Schofield took third with 965 votes, Rosie Hanlon fourth with 576 votes, Alex Selvig fifth with 293 votes, and James Jenner sixth with 28 votes. That comes to 1862 votes up-for-grabs, or 41% of the overall vote. On September 26th, all these voters were looking hard at Ciommo and Glennon to figure out who to vote for.

All four candidates who finished out of the running have since endorsed Ciommo.

I haven't met a single Schofield supporter who admits to now being a Glennon supporter. There must be some, there really must be some... so I'll make a conservative estimate that Ciommo picks up Schofield's votes 80-20%.

Selvig supporters congregated around Boston College's new Brighton Campus area in Ward 22, Precinct 8 where Glennon supporters Patrick Galvin and Mark Alford are long-time and influential residents. The Selvig supporters I have spoken to, however, are breaking Ciommo, so I'll put it at 65-35%.

Hanlon supporters come from all over the district and have a variety of constituencies: business owners, long-time residents, more conservative Irish Catholics, etc. She took a long time to decide to support Ciommo, and I think her supporters will show similar difficulty choosing between the two: 50-50%.

What do these numbers mean? Ciommo picks up 1250 votes from the other candidates' supporters, while Glennon only picks up 600. Advantage Ciommo, +650. Big, big advantage which more than neutralizes Glennon's elderly pick-up.

Ward 21 progressive precincts. Forget-about-it.

Irish Catholic vote near Oak Square. Ciommo walloped Glennon in Ward 22, Precincts 7, 10, and 11, while Glennon tied him in 4 and 6. These precincts will be the bell-wether of the election: if Galvin, Alford, and former State Representative Brian Golden call up every single person they have ever remotely heard ever came within three miles of this neighborhood, then Glennon may get close here and make the race overall relatively close. But if Ciommo carries 7, 10, and 11 with big margins, then it's lights out. In one of Governor Patrick's casinos I would bet on the latter.

Other new voters in final election. This leaves 1600 new voters in the municipal election who didn't vote on September 25th. They haven't been following the race as closely, so they base their votes on the limited information coming from the mainstream media and other factors (like endorsements).

Glennon picked up the Boston Herald endorsement, but virtually nothing else aside from a former Mayor who lives elsewhere, a former State Representative who lives elsewhere, and the gentlemen of Lake Street.

Ciommo cleaned up on the endorsements, getting the Boston Globe and Allston-Brighton TAB, all the other (defeated) candidates, all the unions, and the only two local elected officials who made endorsements (current State Representative Michael Moran and current State Senator Steven Tolman).

Up until these last 1600 votes, Ciommo was winning 56-44%. Give Ciommo 60-40% among these final-election-only voters, which is Ciommo +300.

All told, that's Ciommo by 900 votes out of 6500 total votes cast, or 57-43%.


Boston City Councilor-At-Large

I don't pretend to understand the nitty-gritty voting patterns of the city-wide race. Let me say that again, so that you don't misunderstand.

I was quoted last week as saying that this race is too close to call. More specifically, Councilor Michael Flaherty will easily top the ticket again, as he did in 2005. Other than that, I believed it to be a toss-up between Councilors Felix Arroyo, Stephen Murphy, Sam Yoon, and challenger John Connolly.

The election-eve hijinks of Connolly with his campaign's anonymous mailing attacking Councilor Murphy threw a wrench into the machine. While I am active in the blogosphere -- and the blogosphere was totally abuzz with establishing the links between the mailing and Connolly, as well as expressing negative comments afterwards -- the web probably only could managed to move hundreds of votes, or maybe a thousand, from Connolly to Councilor Murphy. It could've been the margin in a very close race... but probably not enough.

Councilor Murphy's rapid response mailing, however, extended the reach of the escapade to people who had no idea that any of this had been going on all weekend. He'll get extra sympathy votes from all over town. On top of that, Connolly got the bad press of a story on the Boston Globe City/Region front page on election morning. Yuck.

A race that was too close to call isn't quite anymore. Connolly takes fifth place, again, by a few thousand votes. All the incumbents are re-elected. Matthew Geary gets a nice, but distant, sixth place: he showed far more understanding of local political issues than any other 22-year-old you could dream up.

Spending Like Crazy At the Last Minute on City Council Campaign

I have been carefully trying to keep track of all the money that the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large have -- not just their standard checking accounts, but also the money that they transfer to savings and/or money market accounts.

By my accounting, John Connolly did not have money in savings accounts at the end of 2006, but had transferred $90,000 to savings between June and October 2007. Combined with his checking account ending balance of $25,916.52 as of 10/15/07, he had a good amount of cash on-hand for last minute spending.

Between October 16st and 31st he pulled in another $23,428.10 in contributions, such that I think he should have had nearly $140,000 on-hand at the end of October. His campaign did not itemize the transfers from savings to checking in the expenditures on their 10/31/07 filing, but they do give the total in receipts during 10/16/07-10/31/07 as a whopping $220,279.73! The $220,000 should include the $23,428.10 in contributions above, plus any additional savings account money transferred into checking; since I thought they had another $90,000 in the savings account, that leaves around $106,000 mysteriously showing up in their receipts in the 10/31/07 report.

Where did that extra $106,000-plus come from??? I'm bamboozled. I knew he had a lot of money lying around, but not that much. I hope to see some clear accounting of this money beyond the mere itemization of around $23,000, because I really cannot figure out where the extra $106,000 came from. Then again, maybe I'm just dumb. That must be it: stupid me.

On the expenditure side, Connolly spent like crazy during the second half of October, making two wire transfers totalling more than $200,000. Past campaign finance reports indicate that such expenditures are usually updated later to indicate that they are media buys -- which can include mailings, radio advertisements, and television advertisements. (Councilor-At-Large finance reports get audited at some level, which appear to result in the OCPF requesting the campaign to clarify such expenditures with an amended report.) We also know that Connolly has been sending out some mailings city-wide in the last week, which probably account for some of the total. (Councilor Michael Flaherty lists two different expenditures on mailings of $27,000 and $28,000 during the second half of October, so this gives an indication of the cost of a city-wide mailing.)

Connolly has now spent more than $330,000 on the campaign to-date this calendar year, according to my calculations. Councilor Flaherty has topped him with $350,000 this year, spending nearly $60,000 in the second half of October. During late October, Councilor Stephen Murphy spent another $52,000, Councilor Sam Yoon only spent $10,000, and Councilor Felix Arroyo spent $4,600.

My estimates have the total in expenditures currently around $957,000 by all candidates in the Councilor-At-Large race.

Is this a quiet City Council election? Not with that kind of money being spent.

When it's all over, I will assemble the reports and figure out the total expenditures. I'm predicting the 2007 City Councilor-At-Large will be by far the most expensive race on record. With predicted low voter turnout, the expenditure cost per vote cast will also undoubtedly be a record for Boston.



Campaign Finance Year-To-Date to 10/31/07
Boston City Councilor-At-Large

NAME	END DATE	BEGIN BALANCE	RAISE	OWN MONEY	SPEND	END BALANCE
Felix Arroyo	10/31/07	3720.04	29878.49	0.00	32498.19	1101.30
John Connolly	10/31/07	35926.65	309174.77	10000.00	334722.83	20378.19
William Estrada	10/31/07	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
Michael Flaherty	10/31/07	447262.56	337821.15	0.00	350947.80	434135.91
Matthew Geary	10/31/07	0.00	3672.01	0.00	3147.35	524.66
Martin Hogan	10/31/07	0.00	1621.13	0.00	1601.80	19.33
Stephen Murphy	10/31/07	43710.09	100000.00	250.00	96192.66	47767.43
David Wyatt	10/31/07	0.00	363.00	0.00	341.78	21.22
Sam Yoon	10/31/07	47636.17	209257.33	0.00	138422.17	118471.33
TOTAL	10/31/07	578255.51	991787.88	10250.00	957874.58	622419.37

Last Story on Anonymous Mailings

OK, OK, OK... I promise, the last story on anonymous mailings.

David Bernstein of the Boston Phoenix's Talking Politics blog thinks that John Connolly gave an "early Christmas gift" to Councilor Stephen Murphy by not putting his name on the Parkway Package Pummeling. But Bernstein still can't understand why everyone is all worked up about it:

Others in and around city politics are also expressing their shock and dismay over this dastardly scheme -- because Lord knows nobody in Boston politics has ever anonymously criticized another pol. As a journalist, I can personally attest that all of our local officeholders and their staffs insist on being named and fully identified whenever speaking ill of their colleagues; you should hear the umbrage when I suggest hiding their identities behind vague sourcing! No, never such cowardice for me!, they cry.

Har! The sin wasn't attacking an opponent anonymously: it was doing it so sloppily that he could be tracked down right away. More smoke and mirrors! Better deception!

Last night, Connolly's campaign sent out a robo-phone call to supporters noting that there's been some name-calling in the campaign of late, but that everyone should instead try to stay focused on the election. The fallout from the Maul Murphy Mailings has gotten to the point that Connolly's campaign is valiantly trying to re-group after a full-out retreat.

EDIT (8:30 pm): A supporter got four Connolly calls.

New Questions About One Anonymous Mailing Attacking Councilor Murphy

The anonymous mailings attacking Councilor Stephen Murphy continue to be in the news today as the subject of a story in the Boston Globe. This makes the fifth news cycle for the mailings, a public relations mess.

While Connolly's campaign has admitted to sending out two of the mailings, the Globe reports that there are three additional mailings around town, and that Connolly has declared he is not responsible for any of them.

As a result, one of those other three mailings may be subject to declaration as an expenditure under state campaign finance law, yet nobody has declared it to date.


Anonyous Mailings Sent Around Boston

Residents city-wide began receiving two anonymous mailings last Thursday attacking Councilor Stephen Murphy in the City Councilor-At-Large race. The Boston Herald (here and here) and online bloggers (here and here at Brighton Centered) established links between the anonymous mailings and challenger John Connolly. In a statement released Saturday, Connolly's campaign admitted they sent both mailings, although they did not apologize for either the content or the anonymous nature of them.

The Globe story writes:

In an interview yesterday, Connolly defended the mailings on legal grounds, saying that state law permits anonymous campaign literature against another candidate.

"In retrospect I should have put my name on it, and I wish I did," he said. He did not explain the change of heart and did not apologize, nor would he accept responsibility for other anti-Murphy mailings that were sent around the city late last week.

...

Three other anonymous mailings about the race have been sent out in recent days, one attacking Murphy in South Boston and the other two urging voters in West Roxbury to elect a councilor from the neighborhood. No one has accepted responsibility for those.

Connolly stated his defense, on legal grounds, of the city-wide anonymous mailings attacking Councilor Murphy. As long as his campaign is taking responsibility for them, the mailings will eventually appear on his campaign finance reports when he declares them as expenditures. Nothing illegal there: free speech in campaigns is perfectly illegal, and basically everything in those two flyers appears accurate. (In the Globe piece, Councilor Murphy split some hairs: "There's a difference between lobbying for a state job and ones being offered," Murphy said. "His stuff is false on that regard.")

Of the other three mailings sent out -- two in West Roxbury advocating for bullet voting for a local candidate (but not naming one), the other in South Boston attacking Murphy, according to the Globe -- no one has yet admitted to sending them out.


One Other Mailing May Be Subject to State Campaign Finance Disclosure Law

One of those three mailings -- sent to South Boston and attacking Councilor Murphy by name, according to the Globe -- is now the issue, because failure for anyone to come forward and therefore declare it on campaign finance reports might violate state campaign finance law.

Expenditures in Boston municipal political campaigns are governed by Massachusetts law and overseen by the Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF). In their FAQ, OCPF offers guidance. Basically, if the Connolly campaign took responsibility for the Parkway and SBA mailings, there would be no issue -- the expenditures for the mailings would be detailed on the Connolly committee's regular campaign finance filings.

According to the Herald's Howie Carr, two of the additional three mailings have "return addresses to two nonexistent groups, 'the Parkway Coalition' and 'the South Boston Association.' " The Parkway mailing apparently has the same "bulk mailing permit out of North Reading as the Connolly committee," according to Stephen Murphy as quoted by Carr. Both appear to encourage voters to use their bullet vote in the Councilor-At-Large race, but at least one appears not to mention Connolly by name.

The West Roxbury mailings encouraging bullet voting do not mention any candidate by name, and therefore are classified as "issue ads" or "independent expenditures" which do not have to be reported by any candidate or committee under state law. If, however, they are made with "the cooperation of, in consultation or in concert with, or at the request of any candidate or campaign (or their agents)," then these mailings would have to be reported under state law. As long as Connolly continues to claim that he had nothing to do with them, and assuming that his statement is factually accurate, then no law appears to have been broken.

But the Globe notes that the other anonymous mailing, sent to South Boston residents, attacks Councilor Murphy by name. It may not therefore constitute an "independent expenditure," because it mentions a specific candidate related to an election. The key wording as to the applicability of the law lies in whether they have the "purpose of expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate"; if they do, then they must be reported under campaign finance laws.

One of the anonymous mailings Connolly has admitted to sending out contains the following line:

On November 6th, tell Steve Murphy that if he doesn't want the job he has, you'll elect someone who does.

If the South Boston mailing, which nobody has claimed responsibility for, includes language like that advocating the defeat of Councilor Murphy, then it would likely be subject to full disclosure under the state's campaign finance laws. If no one makes the disclosure, then OCPF might need to investigate further.

Attorney Connolly stated in the Globe piece that "state law permits anonymous campaign literature against another candidate." Correct, as long as the expenditure related to the anonymous campaign literature naming a candidate is fully declared.

The OCPF website lists no registered committee named the "South Boston Association," or anything like it. (Nor is the "Parkway Coalition" listed, although, as noted above their mailing advocating bullet-voting is not at issue.) No one appears to have declared this particular expenditure. Will the SBA file papers with the OCPF declaring themselves a committee under state campaign finance law? We'll be watching.


Analysis

The failure of the Connolly campaign to get out in front of the anonymous mailings on the first day indicates horrendously bad public relations work on the part of the John Connolly campaign. They only admitted on Saturday to having sent out the two city-wide mailings; if they are also behind the other three neighborhood-specific ones, they should have admitted so early on to limit the damage. We are now in the fifth news cycle for this story, which could have died out after one or two if it were handled properly.

Connolly's defense of the mailings on legal grounds misses the point: weren't they something that was just-plain wrong to send out anonymously? If so, apologize for sending them out anonymously in a carefully-crafted statement that doesn't apologize for the content of them. It would be easy for attorney Connolly to draft such text. Furthermore, rather than parsing legal arguments about the mailings, wouldn't the public be better served by full and open disclosure?

In the Globe story, Connolly did not take responsibility for the anonymous mailings sent to West Roxbury advocating bullet votes. Yet one of them appears to have the same bulk mailing permit as other Connolly campaign literature, according to Councilor Murphy. If I were a betting man in one of Governor Deval Patrick's casinos, I would bet on the Connolly campaign's involvement with that mailing. It ain't illegal to advocate for bullet votes anonymously, so what's the downside to accepting responsibility for it?

The deeper problem, however, is that Connolly is now on record with the Boston Globe as not taking responsibility for the South Boston mailing attacking Councilor Murphy. Whomever is responsible for that one mailing -- be it Connolly or somebody else like the "South Boston Association" -- would be well advised to come forward with their involvement, and make sure that all state campaign finance laws are followed. Otherwise, an investigation by OCPF might be in order.

BRA Meeting on BC's Renovations to Library and Bishop Peterson Hall

Boston Redevelopment Authority Public Meeting

Topic:  Boston College's Institutional Master Plan Amendment filing to renovate two buildings.

Wednesday, November 7, 2007
6:00 - 7:00 pm

Brighton Marine Health Center
77 Warren Street, 3rd floor
Brighton MA 02135

For more information, contact:
John FitzGerald
Project Manager
Boston Redevelopment Authority
617-918-4267
John.Fitzgerald.bra@cityofboston.gov

Note that this meeting does not appear on the BRA website for Allston-Brighton meetings.

Also note:  this is not a meeting of the BC Task Force, but is a public meeting organized by the BRA as part of the public comment period on the IMPA Notification Form.


Institutional Master Plan Amendment

Boston College  filed an IMPA on 10/12/07 to provide for use of two buildings, Bishop Peterson Hall and the St. John's Library, that BC purchased in the late summer from the Archdiocese of Boston.



They announced that the IMPA would cover:

1. Extension of the BC master plan zoning overlay to include these two buildings;
2. Renovations of the two buildings; and
   
3. Occupancy of the two buildings for institutional use beginning in late 2008.

Election Day and Night

Tuesday, November 6th is a municipal election in Boston. On the ballot for residents of Allston-Brighton: (1) District 9 City Councilor [open seat]; and (2) four City Councilors-At-Large.

Polls are open 7:00 am - 8:00 pm.

After the polls close, you can head over to the campaigns' after-election parties. The Ciommo campaign provided the location for their event, but the Glennon campaign did not respond to email or a ...  but, aha!, the TAB's blog has the information.

Mark Ciommo post-election party
Tuesday, November 6th
Starts around 8:15 pm
Corrib Pub, 396 Market Street, Brighton, MA 02135

Greg Glennon post-election party
Tuesday, November 6th
Start time:  ???
Cafe Brazil, 421 Cambridge Street, Allston, MA 02134



Voter Information Guide. In case you haven't seen all the Election 2007 related voter information, load the full website of the Brighton Centered Blog and look at the links at the right-hand-side of the page. Transcripts, audio recordings, questionnaires, interviews, campaign finance reports -- as well as analysis and critical commentary. There is literally no shortage of information about the candidates in this election.

League of Women Voters has a thorough guide detailing everything you need to know about voting.

Note:  if the precinct doesn't seem to have you on their list of registered voters, then request a provisional ballot.  If they won't give you a provisional ballot, then call the City of Boston Elections Department at 617-635-3767 and they will "gladly assist you."


Who to vote for? For the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council seat there are two final candidates: Mark Ciommo and Greg Glennon.

For Boston City Councilor-At-Large, you may vote for up to four candidates among: Felix Arroyo, John Connolly, William Estrada, Michael Flaherty, Matthew Geary, Martin Hogan, Stephen Murphy, David Wyatt, and Sam Yoon.


Where to vote? Just go to "Where Do I Vote (MA)?"

Note that a few A-B precincts have changed their poll locations. If you go to a polling place and your name is not on the list of registered voters -- but you believe that your registration may still be current -- then request a provisional ballot. You vote now, and then the elections officials will sort it all out later.


When to vote? Polls open 7:00 am -- 8:00 pm. Usually, voters who are in line by 8:00 pm are allowed to vote, no matter how long it takes to process through the queue.


Election Results? Probably at the City of Boston's Current Elections website.


How often to vote? Once per registered voter, please.

From Anonymous Attack Mailings to Online Ballot Box Stuffing

There's a poll running in the upper-right-hand corner of Brighton Centered about whether or not John Connolly, candidate for Boston City Councilor-At-Large, should apologize for sending anonymous mailings attacking opponent Councilor Stephen Murphy.

The results have been neck-and-neck for the last 24 hours between "Yes," "No," and "I don't care" (politics as usual), with "Yes" ahead by a small margin.

That is, until now.

As of a couple of hours ago, one of my browsers has a snapshot of the interim results. I just looked at them a minute ago... and somebody has been voting like mad with "I don't care" answers.

	Few Hours Ago	Currently	Difference
Yes, he should also apologize for it	17	20	+3
No, admitting his campaign was involved was enough.	14	18	+4
I don't care -- this is just the way politics works.	13	39	+26
Who's John Connolly?	5	7	+2

I've highlighted in bold-face the statistically implausible increase in votes.

Ummmm... anyone care to guess who's behind this ballot box stuffing? And why does he want to make it look like people online "don't care"? You would think whomever is behind it has better things to do -- like making phone calls to get out your vote -- than scheming to vote multiple times on some two-bit blog's poll.

Post comments below with your guesses as to who is behind it. Please no profanity or offensive statements.


EDIT: and in the few minutes since I put up this post, he keeps adding more votes to the "I don't care" column. Methinks "Mr. I don't care" is named Pierre (copyright Maurice Sendak):

Damn! I Forgot to Get the Money First!

Dan Kennedy of Media Nation finds a profitable business model for community newspapers, including online versions:  "charge city-council candidates for covering them."

The Cambridge Chronicle reports:

Neil McCabe, who edits and writes for the monthly North Cambridge newsletter The Alewife, refused to print a candidate profile on Jonathan Janik written by McCabe’s staff after Janik decided not to buy advertising in McCabe’s newsletter...

[Wrote McCabe in an email:]  "The truth is that I am not in the news business, I am in the real estate business. I have 24 pages of real estate that I have to collect rent on every month."

I've just managed to put up an awful amount of campaign-related stories and information right here at Brighton Centered.  Every time I did so, the candidates told me the check was in the mail...  but I have yet to see one measly buck.  I should've insisted on the cash up front.  Damn.

Councilor Murphy Strikes Back at Challenger Connolly in Councilor-At-Large Race

Councilor Stephen Murphy has managed to get a mailing out attacking challenger John Connolly for the latter's anonymous mailings late last week attacking Murphy.

It reads, "We deserve better than cowardly attacks by a desperate campaign... Call John Connolly and tell him you won't stand for this Mud-Slinging! 617-327-5646" The adjectival choice of "cowardly" represents a bit of mud slung back at Connolly.

The anonymous mailings came out Thursday, and Connolly's campaign on Saturday admitted to being behind them. That Councilor Murphy was able to produce a response mailing, get it printed and mailed, and then have it appear in mailboxes today (Monday) is amazingly fast and nimble. Based on the information on the Murphy mailing, it was produced before Connolly's campaign admitted they were behind the anonymous mailing. Murphy's mailing gets into people's mailboxes the night before election day. I never received the original Connolly mailing -- but I got Murphy's mailing -- so I think the Murphy mailing's reach will go far beyond the Boston Herald and the blogosphere to connect with the electorate city-wide.

Score: Murphy 1, Connolly 0.


On other news, I got an automated message from Tim Schofield today asking me to vote for... Councilor Sam Yoon, not law partner John Connolly, in the Councilor-At-Large race.

I have also been informed that Governor Deval Patrick not only endorsed Councilor Stephen Murphy in the Councilor-At-Large race, but also Councilors Felix Arroyo and Sam Yoon.

New Poll: Should Connolly Apologize?

I've put up a new poll on the Brighton Centered Blog:

John Connolly's campaign admitted to sending anonymous mailings attacking opponent Stephen Murphy, but offered no apology. Should Connolly also apologize for the mailings?

The background story on the anonymous mailings can be found here.

For readers of this blog who use the RSS feed, you will have to load the full webpage of the Brighton Centered Blog to see the poll (e.g., in a browser).  The poll is on the top-right of the webpage.

Former Councilor Larry DiCara on City Council Race

Former Boston City Councilor and candidate for Mayor Larrry DiCara spoke about the Boston City Council race on WBUR-FM's Morning Edition this morning.

DiCara thinks that Councilor Felix Arroyo is most at-risk of losing his Councilor-At-Large seat in tomorrow's election. DiCara talked about "Felix being Felix" -- akin to "Manny [Ramirez] being Manny" -- by doing the politics thing his own way. DiCara said that not many sounds have been coming from Councilor Arroyo lately, but DiCara apparently hasn't been in the middle of Brighton lately himself.

But, you know, if Councilor Arroyo can hit as many end-of-the-season home runs as Ramirez... he won't have much to worry about. He finished second in 2005, after all.

DiCara also stressed the important of Governor Deval Patrick's support for Councilor Stephen Murphy lately, including a big fundraiser last week.  Why would Governor Patrick do so?  Councilor Murphy came out early to support Governor Patrick in last year's gubernatorial race at a time when "not many people named Murphy from Hyde Park" were doing so.  Governor Patrick is returning the favor.

Maybe Murphy supported Patrick because the name sounded Irish?

Mayor Menino Dangles a Toe Into A-B City Councilor Waters

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino has not openly endorsed any candidate for Tuesday's election of a new Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor. Like any election campaign in the city, word constantly swirls about the neighborhoods, wondering if the Mayor is pulling strings behind the scenes for this candidate or that. Maybe some rumors are true, others not, but without a clear endorsement, the Mayor isn't making a major move to support his favorite candidate -- if he had one.

A week ago at the Brighton Main Streets annual gala, the Mayor spoke briefly about the race. He said that he wasn't making any endorsements, but then said of candidate Mark Ciommo, who was in the crowd, that he would do a great job if elected. Ciommo's opponent, Greg Glennon, wasn't there that night.

Is Ciommo the Mayor's candidate? He was asked this in the September 17, 2007 candidates forum, when two of the other candidates nominated him as the Mayor's candidate. (Both have subsequently endorsed Ciommo following the preliminary election.) Here's what Ciommo had to say:

QUESTION: Since the other candidates also closely associate you with the Mayor, is this a blessing or a curse?

CIOMMO: All I can say is that for the past 20 years in this community, I've been in an executive position for the better part of those 20 years working on the behalf of the citizens of this community -- first, as the assistant director of the Jackson-Mann Community Center, and for the past 14 years, at the Veronica Smith Senior Center. And I have to work with the Mayor. He helps provide services that I deliver to the seniors in Allston-Brighton. I have to work with the Mayor as president of Little League, to make sure our parks and playgrounds get cleaned and the fields get mowed. As a Hobart Park Neighborhood Association founding member, I had to work with the Mayor to re-design the park, organize a community build, find funding from the grounds funds to erect the ornamental fencing and the historical markers. So, I will work with the Mayor, but I've always been a strong and independent voice on behalf of the citizens of this community, and I will continue to be that as your next City Councilor.

I'm not sure that the Mayor makes sure that the grass in the parks gets mowed, but that's beside the point. Instead, Ciommo was eager to connect anything to he could between him and the Mayor -- even mowing the grass -- to make it look like he was working with the Mayor. Methinks Ciommo counts the Mayor's good words as a blessing, no matter how well the Mayor might pretend it is a non-endorsement. (wink-wink)

(In the City Councilor-At-Large race, it sounds like Councilor Stephen Murphy has received similarly nice words from the Mayor this weekend.)

Why hasn't the Mayor come out more strongly with a full-fledged endorsement of a candidate? One City Hall insider told me, "What's the upside?" After the Mayor endorsed a candidate in the East Boston special election for State Representative last month, and his candidate tanked, he must have been leery of making two bad endorsements in a row and looking like a liability. Another possibility is that the Mayor thought that Ciommo's position in the election is strong, and so he didn't need to intervene. Nonetheless, if a sitting Mayor can only think of downsides for endorsing a candidate, then how strong a position must the Mayor think he's in?

New vs. Old Boston in the Councilor-At-Large Race

Some pundits are predicting a low turnout in Tuesday's municipal election, which would favor "old Boston over the new, white over minority, and seniors over younger voters."

People generally put Councilors Felix Arroyo and Sam Yoon in the "new Boston" typecast, and there is little question that they are also minorities. Councilor Stephen Murphy, on the other hand, is clearly white and most would associate him with old Boston (cf. David Bernstein's case made in the Boston Phoenix). Councilor Michael Flaherty makes a more difficult case: many perceive him as blocking Team Unity's proposals in his former role as Council President, while the Phoenix claims that, since losing the Council President post, he has "become a more vigorous, daring, and thoughtful Councilor."

Putting aside the incumbents, let's ask the questions: Where lies challenger John Connolly? He is clearly white and young, but does he represent old Boston or new?

The mainstream media thinks Connolly represents new Boston. The Boston Herald thinks he would bring a "fresh approach," the Boston Globe quotes Connolly as promising to be "a voice for people who want to build a life in this city," and the Boston Phoenix says Connolly pitched himself as a progressive in 2005 -- he may be trying to be even more progressive this time around -- and has "thought deeply about a host of urban issues."

Is their combined assessment on target?

In what has probably been the most clever part of the 2007 municipal election campaign, Connolly has convinced the powers-that-be that he represents new Boston, when in reality he doesn't.

Old Boston Political Lineage. The obvious argument for Connolly as old Boston insider focuses on lineage: his father was the Secretary of the Commwealth, his mother is currently a Superior Court judge, and his uncle used to be Boston City Councilor. The Irishman doesn't seem to have the background of an urban progressive.

His connection to the Boston politics of old became all too clear in the last week as his campaign sent out two anonymous mailings attacking Councilor Stephen Murphy, and may have sent out another two "anonymous" mailings (supposedly from the "Parkway Coalition" and the "South Boston Association," both of which don't exist, according to the Herald's Howie Carr). Vicious, anonymous attack mailings are lore of old-time politics, not YouTube or internet-savvy young 'uns. Embarrassing thing (for me) is that Howie Carr seems to agree with this assessment: "Just when you think the old Boston is dead and buried, things like these farcical flyers pop up."

Casino Gambling. Connolly has come out solidly in favor of casino gambling in the state -- and in Boston itself -- although he notes that he wants East Boston residents to have some kind of say in the matter. Putting Governor Deval Patrick aside, gambling as revenue generation is usually more a conservative position than a progressive one: conservatives who don't want to raise taxes instead support raising "voluntary" taxes through gambling, while progressives express strong opposition to the terrible human cost gambling inflicts on the under-priviliged classes. It's no coincidence that Councilor Arroyo strongly opposes casino gambling and Councilor Yoon expresses strong reservations about it based on the human costs. Connolly mostly sits on the other side of the aisle from new Boston Councilors Arroyo and Yoon.

City Planning. The formation of the Boston Redevelopment Authority in the 1950s gave every Mayor since then a cover to undertake large-scale urban renewal (like razing the West End), thereby keeping his hands clean. What has made the situation far messier now than then is the breadth of land ownership by tax-exempt institutions, and their massive proposals to develop on those lands. The BRA regulates their development proposals while simultaneously promoting economic development in the city and undertaking city planning. Those three functions of regulation, promotion, and planning often conflict on a fundamental and unresolvable level.

Recent years has seen a surge in the interest in splitting off at least the planning arm of the BRA into a separate city planning department; Councilor Arroyo proposed the current ordinance. These are the realities of the new Boston: dealing with the complicated and messy problem of planning a city's redevelopment while simultaneously regulating the developers. Connolly favors the status quo to keep the half century-old BRA as has been since old Boston times.

Public Schools. More than anything else, Connolly's stance on schools betrays his old Boston roots. He's 34-years-old, so when he grew up Boston was already under court-ordered desegration and mandatory busing. He told me he did not attend the Boston Public Schools himself, and he also strongly favors returning to neighborhood schools. In fact, he sat down with me in August and lectured for probably a solid 10-15 minutes on why neighborhood schools were the key towards improving the public schools.

The problem with wanting a return to neighborhood schools is that the city may revert to pre-1970s battle lines with schools segregated based on neighborhood demographics, and uneven school quality from neighborhood-to-neighborhood. It's not a surprise that new Boston Councilor Arroyo opposes continued movement towards neighborhood schools. Councilor Yoon summed up a progressive take on the issue by ensuring equality of schools for all: fix the schools first so that every neighborhood has a good school, and only then can overhauling the school assignment system occur. Connolly instead thinks doing the latter will accomplish the former, which sure sounds like an old Boston approach to me.


In the end, voters on Tuesday may well choose Connolly's ideas over one of the incumbent Councilors-At-Large. Good arguments can be made on both sides of each of these issues in the election. But somehow Connolly has convinced the mainstream media that these ideas are new and even urban progressive, when they sure seem like they are old -- and sometimes even conservative.

Candidate for City Crooner-At-Large

For those who missed the Boston City Councilor amateur talent night, here's a little something from last year: Felix Arroyo singing La Despedida (in Spanish) on YouTube. What a crooner!

I couldn't find any other YouTube videos of the other candidates, other than a 2005 commercial for John Connolly previously noted.

City Council Candidate Connolly Sent Anonymous Mailings Attacking Councilor Murphy

People all over town have begun receiving two different, but related, anonymous mailings about the Boston City Councilor-At-Large race which expresses negative comments about Councilor Stephen Murphy, who is running for re-election. The nature of the negative comments are given in a humorous way using a shopping cart and a deliveryman.

I received my first phone call about it on Thursday, November 1st. The first blogged report of one of these mailings was later that day from Adam Rosi-Kessel (via UniversalHub):

Today’s mailing attacked Stephen Murphy for repeatedly trying (and failing) to win some other office or get some other job than City Councilor. The return address was 31 Milk Street, which is the address of many different businesses.

One non-business at 31 Milk Street is a U.S. Post Office.

Murphy-attack-mailing #1 has a front cover the photo of packages in a shopping cart zooming down a store aisle: "Steve Murphy is always shopping for another job. Trouble is, he isn't very good at the one he has." Murphy-attack-mailing #2 shows a deliveryman with a stack of cartons: "Steve Murphy spends a lot of time shopping for a new job. But when it comes to the job he has, he isn't carrying the load." Both were mailed 9-5/8" x 8" glossy card stock. Both are stamped, rather than using a permit which would allow you to easily track down the sender.

The Boston Herald picked up the story in the November 2nd edition, quoting one flyer as saying:

“You know it’s election time when Steve Murphy is out looking for a different job that [sic] the one he already has,” states the flier. “On Nov. 6th, tell Steve Murphy that if he doesn’t want the job he has, you’ll elect someone who will.”

The Herald noticed that the printer "bug" on a Murphy-attack mailing matched that of other mailings from challenger John Connolly. Here is the "bug" on a previous Connolly mailing sent to me:


where the fine print on the right-hand-side reads "GCIU 274C". It stands for Graphic Communications International Union, where the tag "274C" identifies the printer as Standard Modern Company of Brockton, MA. A Brighton resident who received both of the Murphy-attack mailings informed me that both carry the same "GCIU 274C" bug as this previous Connolly mailing. The Herald considered this identical "bug" as evidence sufficient to write a story:

The mailing has a Milk Street return address and was printed by a Brockton company that produced another flier [sic] for John Connolly, one of Murphy’s opponents in Tuesday’s election. Connolly and his aides did not return repeated calls.

Nowhere on Connolly's campaign finance reports is there an expenditure referring to either a Brockton printer or the name Standard Modern Company. Other candidates for public office in Massachusetts, such as Christy Mihos, Governor Deval Patrick, Joanna Gonsalves, and Thomas Reilly, have recently listed this company in their expenditure on campaign finance reports; none of them appear to be directly linked with Connolly.

Adam Gaffin of UniversalHub further discussed the similarity between the attack mailing and a previous Connolly flyer by comparing the shape of the "Boston Globe" cutouts on the two: amazingly similar scissors work, although it is quite possible the the creator of both flyers downloaded a graphic from the same source. He also notes that the mailing addressee name, "The Gaffin Household," is identical between the two, and that both are the same size and card stock.


New Evidence Linking Attack-Mailings to John Connolly

I asked a Boston resident with direct expertise in writing software for campaign mailings to inspect the attack mailings and a previous Connolly flyer to determine if they were similar. His experience in the field provides a nuts-and-bolts approach to the technical aspects of such campaign mailings.

He confirmed most of the above points raised by the Herald and Gaffin: similar size and card stock; similarly structured name for the addressee; and same GCIU bug.

He also found one much more compelling similarity between the attack mailing and the Connolly mailing: the computer entry line, sandwiched between the addressee's name and the postnet code, was a direct match in one case. The computer line likely originates from the sender's computer database of addresses.

In particular, the "Shopping Cart" attack flyer has the same prefix characters "S125 P6" as a flyer previously sent to the same addressee by Connolly. These numbers appear on the line above the address with the ECRLOT number (which is the Enhanced Carrier Route, Line of Travel) code. The whole line is like this: "S125 P6 *********************ECRLOT**C006."

The "Delivery Man" attack flyer has a slightly different pattern for the beginning of the database entry line, "S166 P7"; these prefix characters are nonetheless very similar to the "Shopping Cart" flyer ("S" followed by three digits, then "P" followed by one digit) and very different from the database lines coming from other candidates' mailings.

Locally in A-B, Greg Glennon has had flyers printed by the same shop carrying the "274C" bug. The computer database entry line for two identical mailings sent to me and my wife by Glennon show a different line from the Murphy attack mailing, "****************ECRLOT**C033 S22 P1"; another one sent a while ago reads, "*******AUTO**5-DIGIT 02135 T3 P1". Clearly, all recent mailings sent out by Standard Modern Company do not carry the same ECRLOT line.

All told, the mounting evidence -- particularly the exact match of the ECRLOT line -- appears quite strong in pointing towards Connolly's campaign having sent out these two flyers as anonymous attacks on Councilor Murphy.


Connolly Campaign Admits Involvement

Connolly's campaign did not return calls and emails seeking comment on whether or not they were behind the mailings attacking Councilor Murphy. (I had set a deadline in my request for comment for 4:00 pm, after which I would go to press.) As noted above, they also did not return repeated phone calls from the Herald on Thursday seeking comment.

As I was "going to press" Saturday afternoon, the Connolly campaign issued a statement to the Herald and UniversalHub that they are responsible for the mailing. (The Herald's website indicates they published it around 3:00 pm.) The Connolly campaign issued no apology, nor did they explain why they went to great lengths (anonymously sent, USPS return address, stamps instead of permit for postage) to hide their involvement; instead, they defended the nature of the statements made in the mailings attacking Murphy.


Motivation?

What was Connolly's motivation in sending out these attack mailings? The obvious reason is that Councilor Murphy finished took the fourth and final Councilor-At-Large seat in the 2005 election, while Connolly finished out of the money in fifth place. Some pundits think that Councilor Murphy is therefore the most vulnerable sitting Councilor to being unseated by Connolly.

A deeper reason might be that Connolly sees the close synergy between him and Councilor Murphy: the two share more than just Irish surnames. Despite recent arguments to the contrary, they both appear to share some positions that are more socially conservative than the other competitors (particularly Councilors Felix Arroyo and Sam Yoon). Connolly and Councilor Murphy are pro-casino, anti-Planning Department, vocal proponents of more police officers, etc. If Connolly wants to unseat Councilor Murphy, he has to figure out a way to differentiate the two of them. Reminding voters how Councilor Murphy keeps running for other offices is one way to do it.


Connolly Campaign Enters Slow Burn Phase of Bad Public Relations

The inability of the Connolly campaign to get out early, on Thursday, in front of the story puts them into a repeated news cycle problem that will likely get worse before it gets better. Early on, they should have been returning phone calls and emails from the media and issuing strong statements of admission or denials; instead, they didn't return phone calls or emails, and only issued a statement after two days. Good PR officials time-and-again recommend getting out in front of a story quickly in order to limit damage.

Their failure to apologize for the anonymous nature of the attack mailings was another big blunder by their campaign. If I made a statement like that to my wife after making a big mistake, then I would be sleeping on the couch for a long time... if I were so lucky not to have the locks changed first. Does politics mean never having to say you're sorry? Obvious answer: no.

A series of comments posted on the Herald site, plus Gaffin's personal opinion, suggest that many voters who believed Connolly to be connected with this attack mailing will not vote for him on Tuesday. One Brighton poltical insider, who up until now has supported Connolly, responded negatively towards Connolly with a Bronx cheer when confronted by the increasingly likely possibility that Connolly is responsible for the attack mailings. The damage is mounting; we'll see if their statement, continuing the attack on Murphy rather than apologizing, can stem the tide. I doubt it.

It would be a sad outcome for Connolly if, after running such an effective campaign all year, he then gets clubbed in the end by making a lousy decision to send out these attack mailings a few days before the election. Nobody would be raising a stink about this if the attack mailings had carried his name on them. But politics is all about standing up for your actions, and Connolly took quite a while to take responsibility. I predict he will undergo a slow burn over the next couple of days -- and he might also be greeted by an unsurprising and unfavorable result on Tuesday night as a result of both his delay in taking responsibility and his refusal to apologize.


I don't normally link to attack-meisters like Howie Carr, columnist of the Boston Herald. But he ran a column in today's Herald containing relevant information (amidst Carr-like foaming rants) that was filed before Connolly's statement was released; the Herald website promises another column from Carr tomorrow. (EDIT: it can be found here.) Remember that the Herald editorial board endorsed Connolly, as did the Globe; it will be interesting to watch if either editorial page comments on Connolly's stupid mailings, or even retract their endorsements. I doubt it.

When all those newspapers, plus the Allston-Brighton TAB and sort-of the Boston Phoenix, endorsed Connolly for all the new and fresh ideas that he might bring to the City Council, was this what they meant? If so, the constables guarding City Hall might not be sufficient to contain the fighting that will break out inside among the Councilors themselves.

Will Team Unity Fall to Team Low Turnout?

The last week or so has seen the politics punditry a-flutter with speculation that there will be low turnout in Tuesday's municipal election that might result in the defeat of Councilors-At-Large Felix Arroyo and Sam Yoon. Wrote blogger Marry in Massachusetts, "Will Team Unity survive a low-interest contest?"

The argument goes like this. Tuesday's election will have low turnout because: (1) it is an off-year municipal election because the Mayor is not up for re-election until 2009; and (2) the mainstream media has not covered the race, totally ignoring the preliminary municipal election, for example, until only after it had taken place. Low voter turnout emphasizes "reliable" voters -- elderly, wealthy, and white -- while de-emphasizing the opposite. On BNN's Talk of the Neighborhood show last Tuesday, David Bernstein of the Boston Phoenix told host Joe Heisler that a low turnout vote emphasizes old Boston over the new, white over minority, and seniors over younger voters.

Minority candidates like Team Unity's Councilors Arroyo and Yoon will get hit hard by the low turnout, while majority candidates -- like Team Irish's challenger John Connolly and Councilors Michael Flaherty and Stephen Murphy -- will fare well. Wrote the Boston--Bay State Banner:

For Arroyo and Yoon, success depends largely on who will turn out. In the last off-year election in 2003, Arroyo garnered 75 percent of the vote in predominantly African American Ward 12. Flaherty got 25 percent of the vote.

In South Boston’s Ward 6, Flaherty garnered 86 percent of the vote to Arroyo’s 25 percent.

While people of color make up more than half the city’s population, the whites in Flaherty’s voting base turn out in greater numbers.

But that article then contradicted the story line by noting that Connolly and Councilor Murphy are both courting people of color in this election; if they, too, are reaching out to minority voters in order to get elected, then why would low turnout work in their favor? More likely is that Connolly and Councilor Murphy have far less support in minority neighborhoods than their supporters would like you to believe, reinforcing the point that they would benefit from low turnout. Retired school teacher Bob Marshall was quoted by them as saying, "I’m not voting for anybody else," he said. "These Councilors [Arroyo and Yoon] have been on the front lines when it comes to dealing with communities of color."

Bernstein argued on BNN that city politics are steadily moving towards to the point where no one can run city-wide unless they appeal to minorities and urban progressives. He predicted a voting bloc on the City Council to develope in the next 4-6 years, representing the new Boston -- whether explicitly minority, like Team Unity, or not.

Allston-Brighton may buck some of these voter turnout trends, since we have a lively race for the open District 9 seat being vacated by Councilor Jerry McDermott. Turnout of 4500 voters at last month's preliminary municipal election may have been a little lower than expected, but may very well set the stage for proportionately higher voting in A-B in the municipal election November 6th as compared with the rest of the city. (A-B historically turns out the vote at lower percentages of registered voters than most of the rest of the city, so I am referring to A-B potentially delivering a larger percentage of the overall number of voters than in past elections.) That all of the active candidates for Councilor-At-Large showed up last month for our Brighton candidates forum speaks not only to their renewed interest in the issues of our neighborhood, but likely also to a political calculation that A-B turnout this year could be more important than usual to the Councilor-At-Large election.

A-B TAB Package on A-B City Council Race

The Allston-Brighton TAB has published a nice package of information this week related to the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council race.

Candidate Profiles: Mark Ciommo, Greg Glennon
Questionnaire: Ciommo, Glennon
Campaign finances -- also see original stories at Brighton Centered and A-B Community Blog
Editorial Meeting with the Candidates: Public schools, institutional expansion, housing and taxes
Various people's endorsements (of Ciommo, not Glennon), Ward 21 committee (also see original story at Brighton Centered), and former opponents endorsements
Editorial Endorsement of Ciommo

The Allston-Brighton TAB compiled a comprehensive collection of information about the election that will help to inform Allston-Brighton voters of their choices. The TAB is to be commended on a job well-done!

Boston Globe Covers City Council Race (on Page B4)

The Boston Globe has exploded onto the scene with 3/4 of a page of coverage of the issues in the Boston City Councilor-At-Large race! Toss aside the front section! Pick up the City/Region section -- and flip through to page B4! Marvelous... I'm delighted that the Globe's newsdesk has chosen to cover some of the issues in the race.

The article actually notes which District City Councilors face competition for re-election, although it fails to name any challengers. Shame on you, Globe!

The article manages to name both finalists for the Allston-Brighton Distict 9 seat, Mark Ciommo and Greg Glennon, although the Globe newsdesk continues in their dogged insistence of not once giving either candidates' position on any issues. The Globe once previously mentioned District 9 race on September 26th, the day after the preliminary municipal election.

The Globe also previously devoted one article to the Councilor-At-Large race in their Sunday City Weekly section, although that article consisted mostly of a discussion of bullet-voting -- not the issues -- and included a print-only set of contact information for the candidates.

Their latest article continues that tradition of print-only content: the wonderful table containing the responses of all nine candidates for Councilor-At-Large to three different questions, is not included in the online version of the article. Sigh. They were so close -- and yet so far -- from delivering information to the online masses!

Since the Globe can't figure out how to deliver this (sidebar) content on their website, I've scanned and provided the thing below.

A-B TAB Endorses Ciommo, Arroyo, Connolly, Flaherty, and Yoon for City Councilor

The Allston-Brighton TAB has endorsed Mark Ciommo for Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council. Their editorial page writes:

In the time we’ve been observing Ciommo, he’s shown himself to be a consistently reliable advocate for the people of Allston-Brighton. He’s regularly attended community meetings and, again in contrast to his opponent, never skipped a community debate. When local activists have asked candidates to fill out election-related questionnaires for publication on local blogs, Ciommo has always taken the time to answer them.

On the issues themselves, the TAB highlights Ciommo's stance on improving the Boston Public Schools through advocacy of the K-8 model, while contrasting it with opponent Greg Glennon's support for state-chartered schools and school vouchers.


In the Councilor-At-Large race, they picked "[Councilor] Michael Flaherty over [Councilor] Stephen Murphy, because we hear from him more – and that’s significant since all of the at-large incumbents could probably stand to pay a bit more attention to A-B than they do"; I have heard from a lot of people in the neighborhood who have the opposite view altogether.

Their other endorsements are for Councilors Felix Arroyo and Sam Yoon, for providing "a voice in government for people who might not otherwise have one," and challenger John Connolly, because he "would bring a fresh, new, intelligent perspective to the council" even though his positions on some of the issues "are different from those of some of the other candidates we’re endorsing."

Tax-Exempt Status and the Knights of Columbus

The Knights of Columbus 121 Brighton Council hall at 321 Washington Street in Brighton Center has recently mounted two signs in the front of their building advocating for Greg Glennon for City Council (see photo at end of that post).

This "Catholic fraternal benefit society" appears to be organized, at least in part, as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt institution under Federal tax law as the Knights of Columbus Charities, Inc. Their property at 321 Washington Street is listed by the City of Boston as "exempt" from property taxes.

Under Federal law, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organizations "may not publish or distribute printed statements or make oral statements on behalf of, or in opposition to, a candidate for public office. Consequently, a written or oral endorsement of a candidate is strictly forbidden." Harvard's Office of General Counsel further advises that "section 501(c)(3) organizations are strictly prohibited from participating in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. This means that organizations that are tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) cannot endorse or advocate for political candidates or parties." Engaging in such activity could lead to loss of the organization's tax-exempt status.

I wonder: are the Knights of Columbus 121 Brighton Council aware that posting candidate signs on their property might be putting their organization's tax-exempt status in jeopardy? It seems like a very high price to pay just to support a candidate for City Council. You would think that attorney Glennon would realize the legal implications of that political activity.

I bet they could put both those signs to equally good use by moving them to the front yard of somebody's (private) house...


EDIT:  L. B. Jefferies has told me that the signs now seem to be gone.

Abortion, Gay Marriage, Glennon, and the Ambassador

Mark Ciommo, candidate for the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council seat, has been open on his positions on major social issues of the day. He is openly pro-choice and supports marriage equality, and wrote to me that he opposes the death penalty. Four of his opponents in the preliminary municipal election all openly answered questions on social issues, such as gay marriage, when asked.

Ciommo's opponent in the final municipal election, Greg Glennon, has, on the other hand, been remarkably quiet on these issues in this campaign. An audience question at the October 23rd debate asked him his personal position on abortion, and Glennon declined to answer the question. (Listen to the audio under "audience questions".) When given the same question, Ciommo instead chose to answer it (albeit in the fewest possible words)... and off we went to the next question.

Both Ciommo and Glennon expressed the opinion that these issues are not particularly relevant to the job of a City Councilor. But when asked if he thought these issues do matter to voters in the City Councilor election, Ciommo told me he thinks they might. "I think voters may consider these issues, however, I believe voters care most about having someone who has a record of service and experience and of proven results."

There is a clear disconnect between the two remaining candidates in their approach to addressing these major social issues of the day. It isn't really much about their particular stances on the issues -- although that does factor into the equation. Instead, their eagerness or unwillingness to address the issue with Allston-Brighton voters is the story.

Three particular points have been difficult for me to get my arms around in this election: (1) Where does Glennon stand on these social issues? (2) Does it matter to voters? and (3) Why won't he answer the same questions that other candidates will?


Where Does Glennon Stand on the Social Issues?

Where does Glennon actually stand on these social issues? Nearly everybody I have spoken to expresses certainty that Glennon opposes gay marriage and is pro-life. Is this accurate? I went to the public record to find out. (Glennon did not respond to the request to provide his positions on gay marriage and abortion for this article, or to describe how his position might have changed since 2005.)

Many stories in the last few years which have tried to categorize Glennon's political positions have called him "conservative." In general, however, the articles give no direct reference to a position paper or a quotation from Glennon himself. A simple example from the 2005 race for State Representative was in the Boston Globe's coverage (categorizing Glennon without quoting him):

Gregory Glennon... seems poised to make a play for more conservative voters who will respond to the anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage views he shares with Golden.

As best as I can tell, the paper-less trail seems to go back to one event in Brookline in 2005. Adam Reilly of the Boston Phoenix reported:

Greg Glennon, a former legislative aide to Golden, represents the district’s conservative constituency (Brighton is also home to the Boston archdiocese’s headquarters) and wears his views proudly. During a recent candidates’ debate in Brookline, Glennon declared himself pro-life and, after acknowledging that Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land, plugged "reasonable restrictions" on abortion rights (e.g., "informed consent" and parental-notification rules). He also denounced the Supreme Judicial Court’s Goodridge decision, which legalized gay marriage, as bad jurisprudence, and suggested that freewheeling popular debate on the subject would be healthy for Massachusetts...

Another media report I have found about the event, but which is not available online, was a column by Mark Trachtenberg in the now-defunct Allston-Brighton Bulletin:

Glennon knew he was walking on eggshells on the issue [of gay marriage] and his comments reflected it. He was the only candidate in the [2005 state representative race] field who opposed the Supreme Judicial Court decision legalizing gay marriage.

[Glennon said:] "I believe the voters deserve the chance to voice their position on the issue by way of the [state constitutional] amendment. I believe the amendment is a fair, thoughtful amendment that respects the concerns off those who believe that consensual adult relationships deserve legal recognition."

Trachtenberg's column continues on with the issue of abortion:

As a devout Catholic, Glennon disapproves off abortion but regards a woman's access to most reproductive health services as a matter of "settled law."

The qualification "most reproductive health services" is a hole wide enough to drive a truck through, but the "settled law" statement is also a strong respect for legal precedent.

In the October 15, 2007 candidates debate, Ciommo asked Glennon about whether or not evolution should be taught in the schools. According to two people in attendance, Glennon initially seemed ready to respond -- like he did to the aborion issue in the October 23rd debate -- that the social issue was not within the purview of a City Councilor, and so that he wouldn't answer it. But the attendees said that he appeared to change his mind early in the answer; Glennon then said that it was OK to teach evolution in the public schools. (Ciommo might be cut out for the job of journalist should the election not go his way: that was a clever question he wrote, designed to pull a candidate out of his shell. It succeeded.)

There we seem to have it. Glennon is quoted as personally opposed to abortion, considering it to be a matter of "settled law," but supporting "reasonable restrictions" on it. He disagrees with the SJC's decision on gay marriage, possibly on legal grounds (he is a lawyer, after all), but has not spoken on whether or not he personally supports gay marriage; instead, he wanted a popular referendum on a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage (a position also generally taken, it should be noted, by outspoken opponents of gay marriage).


Are These Major Social Issues Relevant to a City Councilor?

A Boston City Councilor has virtually no jurisdiction over any of these three issues -- abortion, gay marriage, or the death penalty -- so his position is unlikely to lead to changes in the law. There are three ways I can think of, however, in which the issues might impact voters.

First, the Boston Police Department has a significant influence over enforcement of laws related to abortion: anti-abortion protestors, such as those outside the Planned Parenthood clinic on Commonwealth Avenue just outside the District 9 borders, could be impacted by either aggressive or lax enforcement of the law. Changes in state law are currently making their way through the legislature, which would increase the buffer zone from six to 35 feet and re-define where the buffer zone originates, make enforcement an issue that is likely to crop up within the next year or two. City Councilors do have influence over police enforcement issues.

Second, getting elected City Councilor could provide an "entry point" or springboard for a politician who eventually may seek a higher office where his views could actually create an impact. Elect someone now with whom you disagree on fundamental issues, and that person could be the next Congressman.

Third, while the Legislature voted this past year not to send a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage to the voters, they may vote yet again in the future to do so. If Governor Deval Patrick gets his casinos, then I would bet in one on such a referendum passing and reversing the SJC decision. The City could be in the position to re-consider providing domestic partner benefits to city employees, an issue on which a Councilor might vote.

Of these three arguments, the first one is current and relevant on Commonwealth Avenue -- just across the boundary of District 9. The second and third arguments are, admittedly, more and more of a stretch.

What do some voters think? One undecided voter recently told me that the "entry point" argument was relevant in choosing a candidate. Many other undecided voters -- supporters of Schofield, Selvig, and Hanlon -- have told me since the September 25th preliminary election that they are considering the candidates' positions on these social issues when deciding who to support for the November 6th municipal election, with abortion and gay marriage being the key two issues.

Should these social issues matter in a City Council election? Probably not. Are voters considering these issues in this election? It sure sounds like they are -- and Ciommo suspects as much. (Glennon did not respond to a request to comment on whether or not he thinks that voters are considering these issues in this election.)


Former Mayor Flynn Supports Glennon for City Council

Former Boston Mayor and former Ambassador to the Vatican Ray Flynn supported Glennon in the preliminary election with a $200 check; he was also seen on election day, September 25th, outside the Oak Square YMCA, a polling location, wearing a Glennon campaign button. Flynn is well-known for his strong advocacy of the pro-life position on abortion, particularly through the organizations Catholic Alliance, Your Catholic Voice, and Catholic Citizenship. Under a photo of Ambassador Flynn and Sean Cardinal O'Malley, Catholic Citizenship expresses its goal "to get to the point where all candidates are pro-life."

I asked Ambassador Flynn recently why he supported Glennon's candidacy for A-B District 9 City Councilor. The first reason, he said, was that former State Representative Brian Golden's office -- which included staffer Glennon -- was "one of the best state representatives for delivering constituent services," an important function which was "getting short-changed in an age of institutional expansion." The second reason was the friendship that Glennon had developed with the Ambassador's son, Ed Flynn, in recent years.

I asked Ambassador Flynn if Glennon's position on abortion factored in as a reason for his support based on the Ambassador's own well-known advocacy for right-to-life causes. He said that "there's not much a City Councilor can do on this issue." But then he added, "I admire [Glennon's] position on the respect for life."

While Ambassador Flynn's response indicates that the main reasons for his support of Glennon are a past record of delivery of constituent services and a personal relationship through his son, his answer nonetheless shows that he is aware of Glennon's stance on abortion and "admires" it.

Glennon may not have wanted to answer publicly the audience question on abortion during the October 23rd debate, but he appears to have answered the question privately with at least one of his prominent supporters.


Why Would Glennon Avoid These Social Issues?

The obvious question keeps coming back to me: Why is Glennon avoiding stating his position on these social issues while his opponent -- and all the other opponents in the preliminary election -- were perfectly happy providing their positions?

One conclusion: Glennon's perceives that his position on these issues is at odds with the bulk of the electorate in Allston-Brighton. The 2005 race was a very close three-way contest between Glennon, Michael Moran, and Tim Schofield; now-State Representative Moran eeked out the win. In an election where social issues did matter, less than 1/3 of the electorate voted for the conservative candidate on these issues.

An alternate conclusion: Glennon's actual position on abortion (and/or gay marriage) is not quite conservative enough that he might fear alienating his conservative supporters. Note his statement about abortion being "settled law": this is close to heresy to the religious right, since many conservatives would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned altogether.

One Brighton political insider told me that in 2005 Glennon confided to him that he was worried what his conservative supporters might do if they heard his comment about "settled law." If this one person's account of a conversation in 2005 is accurate, then this just might provide the key to understanding Glennon's 2007 campaign strategy not to answer questions on these social issues.

Glennon appears to be walking a tightrope when he declines to answer questions about abortion: not wanting to alienate his conservative supporters with a more measured view of abortion, while also not wanting to alienate the broader A-B community who rejected a social conservative candidate more than 2-1 in 2005.

Are Glennon supporters like Ambassador Flynn aware of Glennon's somewhat nuanced position on abortion that acknowledges it as "settled law"? I cannot tell. But it is also possible that some people who were considering voting for Ciommo based on Glennon's perceived stance on abortion may take a second look at Glennon.



Caption: One of two campaign signs for Greg Glennon recently mounted outside Brighton Center's Knights of Columbus Hall. The middle line on the sign on the brick wall reads, "PRAY FOR THE UNBORN." The Knights of Columbus is a Catholic fraternal benefit society that is active in pro-life causes.

Arroyo Stopping Traffic in Brighton Center

Nearly two weeks ago, Councilor Felix Arroyo was in Brighton Center for a "visibility": holding signs up on the sidewalk during rush hour to raise awareness of his re-election campaign for Boston City Councilor-At-Large. Most of the candidates do this on occasion at the corner of Washington Street and Market Street / Chestnut Hill Avenue.

Sure, the couple of guys Councilor Arroyo had along with him were standing on the sidewalk. But not Arroyo...

No, he was in the middle of the street, walking along the double yellow lines handing out campaign literature to drivers through their driver-side window, maybe even a few kisses on the cheek. It was apparently quite a scene, a little bit of fun partying for Friday morning commuters. Smiles all around. This guy has boundless energy, and knows no boundaries. The police at D-14 station two blocks away didn't even think to interrupt Arroyo's one-man, populist machine.

By the time I got a camera over there, though, Councilor Arroyo was nearly -- but not quite -- back on the sidewalk about to pack it in for the morning and head back to City Hall.



In a city where politicians try to be calm, cool, and collected, Councilor Arroyo comes across as someone who seems to break the rules -- and the traffic laws.


Mark Ciommo's Sugary Visibility

During Wednesday's Brighton Business Trick-of-Treat, Mark Ciommo, candidate for Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor, was running his own visibility in the heart of Brighton Center.

Ciommo and his campaigners were not just holding up signs, but also giving out candy to the young, costumed revelers. Cute move. No, I did not see him trying to register voters among the under-18 crowd.

Ciommo was himself disguised as a pirate superman Dumbledore teenage mutant ninja turtle politician. Sorry, no photos.

Boston Phoenix Endorses Ciommo and Re-Election of All Councilors-At-Large

The Boston Phoenix has endorsed Mark Ciommo for Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor, and the re-election of all four Boston City Councilors-At-Large -- Felix Arroyo, Michael Flaherty, Stephen Murphy, and Sam Yoon.

Actually, they tried to endorse a fifth candidate for Councilor-At-Large, John Connolly, by writing, "If Phoenix readers looking for guidance in next week’s election disagree with one of our endorsements, we hope they will vote for Connolly." Maybe they couldn't quite make up their mind.

In endorsing Ciommo, they write:

In the hard-fought district race in Allston-Brighton, the Phoenix urges the election of Mark Ciommo, a life-long resident of that neighborhood and the executive director of the Veronica Smith Senior Center. In the years to come, Allston-Brighton will have to cope with the continued growth of Boston College and the unprecedented expansion of Harvard University. During the campaign, Ciommo has made his mark as the candidate best able to fight for the interests of his neighbors while simultaneously engaging the educational powerhouses as potential allies.

In the Councilor-At-Large race, the Phoenix has been the only city newspaper to provide regular, in-depth coverage. The Phoenix's local politics endorsements ought to carry weight from the politically-astute crowd, because their news and op/ed pages have provided information and analysis on which to base editorial board endorsements.

Their endorsements for Councilors Flaherty and Murphy seem to be based on their records and perception that both are continually improving during their time in office. For Councilors Arroyo and Yoon, the Phoenix editorial board appears to be encouraging both to better reach to their potentials as voices for minorities and those who are less fortunate economically. The near-endorsement of Connolly says that he too would be a "welcome addition" to the council.


So there you have it. Between the Boston Globe, Boston Herald, and Boston Phoenix you have endorsements for both candidates (Ciommo and Glennon) in Allston-Brighton, and all five front-runners (all four incumbents plus Connolly) for Councilor-At-Large. Well, actually the Globe said to "throw the bums out" in the Councilor-At-Large race, and the Phoenix says to "keep the bums in, but maybe substitute a new guy if you want to throw one bum out." The Allston-Brighton TAB will be coming out with their recommendations in the next day or so, and I expect they will stay within these seven names.

So go ahead and try to figure out who to vote for based on media endorsements. You won't see any endorsements here, though.


On a related note, within 24 hours of the Herald endorsement of Glennon I saw stickers plastered to Glennon lawn signs reading, "Endorsed by the Herald," as well as a one-page photocopied flyer left about. No such response from Ciommo, at least that I've seen, about his endorsement from the Globe. Schofield had same-day flyers out in A-B after he was endorsed by the Globe in September.