One Person’s Trash

Coming soon on the Discovery Channel, the brand new reality show, “Trash Collectors” will debut.  The show, similar to “Hoarders”, will chronicle the real stories of people who are literally buried in garbage – within their own homes.  Arlington can boast that it will be featured in the very first episode as the producers pay a visit to one gentleman living in the Heights.  The following is a transcript taken from the official trailer:
(Arlington, MA)

NARRATOR:  Meet John.  John has lived in Arlington, Massachusetts for many years.  John has owned his medium-sized home for many years.  He used to be happily married with children, but that all changed recently.  Indeed, a lot has changed for John.  Ever since the Town of Arlington approved a new trash and recycling contract, it has been all downhill for John as he has struggled to keep up with the trash in his house.  It has gotten to the point where he has almost given up just trying to keep up.

JOHN (to the camera):  I just don’t know how it got this bad so quickly.  I used to be very neat and clean.  But lately, it’s been tough.  I mean…my wife and my kids left me because of all this (he points to the mountains of trash and bags of trash all over the house).

HOST: Can you admit that you have a serious problem?

JOHN: Sure.  I have a problem.  My problem is with the Town of Arlington.

HOST:  Why is that?

JOHN:  It has to do with that new trash and recyling contract they approved.

HOST:  Some say you are just lazy.  That you just don’t throw out the trash when you should.  That you have an illness.

JOHN:  Well those people don’t know.  They don’t know how tough it is now.  We are now limited to tossing out no more than three trash bags a week.  And if we want to throw out more, we have to pay.  It’s what they call Pay as You Throw, though now, they don’t refer to it as that…but it’s the same thing really.

HOST: Do you actually produce more than three bags worth of trash per week?

JOHN:  Well, when my wife and kids were still here, we did.  What happened is we got so backlogged that the trash just started to pile up in the house.  Now, while I might only produce one bag of garbage per week, I can only dispose of that new bag of garbage and two of the older bags of garbage each week.  Essentially, I end up taking two steps forward and one step back each week, so at this rate, I’ll never get rid of all of it…at least not for a while.

HOST:  So, it’s not that you want to keep all this garbage?

JOHN:  Of course not.  Believe me, I want to throw it all out right now.  There’s nothing worth keeping.  Plus, it stinks.

HOST:  (sniffs and then holds his nose) Yeah…um, I know.

(Doorbell rings)

HOST: Who’s that?

JOHN:  That’s probably my wife and kids.  They agreed to come over and check up on me.

HOST: Ah.

JOHN: I’m just going to get the door.  Excuse me…

(JOHN climbs through a mountain of trash in his living room and is just barely able to reach the front door before slipping off the trash mountain.  JOHN’s wife, AMY peeks in, as well as his kids, JACK and ALICE).

AMY: Are you okay?

JOHN:  Yeah…yeah, I’m fine.  Just lost my balance there (he chuckles awkwardly).

JOE:  Daddy, what happened?

JOHN: It’s a long story, Joey.

JOE:  Where is the living room?

JOHN:  (waving his arm and pointing to the twenty some odd bags of trash filling the room) Oh, it’s right here.  You’re in the living room.

JOE: (equally horrified and puzzled) Really?  Oh.

ALICE: Can I get something to drink, Daddy?

JOHN: Sure, Alice.  Help yourself.  I’ve got lots of stuff in the fridge.

ALICE: (climbing over the mountains of trash) Okay.  Ouch.  I just stepped on something sharp.

JOHN: Oh, don’t worry about that.  That’s probably the beer bottle caps.  I put all the bottle caps in their own separate trash bags.  I try to be organized, you see.

AMY:  John, I don’t think this is very safe…or sanitary.

JOHN:  What choice do I have, Amy?

HOST:  Your husband says that the new trash contract in Arlington accounts for all this.  What do you say to that?

AMY:  That’s a bunch of nonsense.  Even when we were still living here, we never produced more than two bags of garbage per week.  John just never takes out the trash.

JOHN:  That’s not true!

AMY:  It is true!  Very rarely did we have three or more bags to toss.  Even then, I told John, I don’t mind paying the little bit extra.  I even offered to pay the difference!

JOHN:  It’s not about the money.

AMY:  What’s it about?

JOHN:  It’s the principle of the thing, don’t you see?  During the last override, the town promised not to introduce Pay as You Throw.  They lied.

AMY:  That’s ridiculous.  They never promised such a thing.  You’re delusional, you know that?

JOHN:  Oh, I’m delusional?!

JOE: (starts to cry) Stop fighting…

JOHN:  Oh, you see what you did now…?  You upset Joey!

AMY:  He’s crying because his Dad hoards garbage.

JOHN:  No.  He’s crying because the Town of Arlington has let him down!

AMY:  Oh, please!  Look, the Town of Arlington didn’t make you hoard trash.  That was something you chose!

JOHN:  Oh, it was a lot easier when we lived in Wellesley.

AMY:  Really?  A lot easier, huh?  It cost a hell of a lot more to live in Wellesley and…in case you forgot…the town of Wellesley doesn’t even have a trash contract like we do here.  It’s a lot cheaper in Arlington – and we have a reasonable trash contract.

JOHN:  Oh here we go…just another mouthpiece for the Selectman.

AMY:  Another mouthpiece?  I think the Selectmen are a bunch of bozos, too. But on this trash thing, that’s one thing they got right.

JOHN:  Yada yada yada…

AMY:  You know what.  I’m done trying to help you.  Come on kids, we’re leaving.

JOHN:  What…you’re leaving already?

AMY:  Yeah, and we won’t be back until you finally decide to clean house…literally!

JOHN:  But…

(AMY and the kids leave)

HOST:  John, I can see your wife’s point.  Can you appreciate where she’s coming from?

JOHN:  Not really.

HOST:  (Indicating the trash again) But is all this worth it?  Is it worth being estranged from your wife…from your kids?

JOHN:  Again, that’s not the point here.

HOST:  What is the point?

JOHN:  We need more input on these town affairs!  We should not be left out of the process.

HOST:  That’s fair.  I would agree with that assessment, but let’s say you had input on this issue.  What would you suggest the town do differently?

JOHN:  Um…well, I don’t know…but it wouldn’t be this.

HOST:  So, you can’t tell me how this could have been done differently…all you know is you don’t like it?

JOHN:  Yeah.  They should have just left well enough alone.

HOST:  How do you explain the fact that well before this contract was approved, you still hoarded trash?

JOHN:  That’s not true.

HOST:  We went back through town records.  You were actually cited nine times by the Board of Health for many such violations.

JOHN:  They don’t know what they’re talking about…

HOST:  So there you have it, folks.  Just another example of a growing epidemic.  Be sure to tune in next week for another episode of “Trash Collectors”.

Don’t Say We Didn’t Tell You So…

This is a follow-up to the previous story: “School Committee to Pick Political Ally for One Year Seat”

This past week, the School Committee indeed selected political ally Mr. Paul Schlictman.  Mr. Hayner voted for Jim Flanagan.  Mr. Pierce voted for Len Kardon.  Mr. Thielman, Ms. Starks, Ms. Heigham, and Ms. Ampe all predictably voted for Mr. Schlictman.  The two other candidates, Mr. O’Brien and Ms. Bjorkman received no votes.  How funny it is that Mr. Schlictman at first swore off applying for the seat…but then magically changed his mind.   Remember what we said about the eventual appointee being someone that didn’t necessarily want the job?  Things that make you go, “hmmmm…”

Below is an email sent to Mr. Schlictman following his appointment.

Mr. Schlictman,

First of all, the Avocado would like to congratulate you on your appointment to the one-year seat on the Arlington School Committee.  Of course, as you may be aware, the Avocado knew the result of last night’s vote a few weeks ago.

You should now of course be aware that the Avocado now considers you “fair game”.  We have been easy on you up until this point, but now that you are a public official again, we will question you at every turn.  We know how much you love the Avocado, but now you will have to earn the Avocado’s love.  Will your tenure on the Committee bear fruit?  Or will it simply be a bunch of guacamole?

The Avocado will scrutinize you often, and that starts right now.  You may not have taken the oath yet, but the Avocado will not delay in asking you the hard-hitting questions.

Our first question is, “do you know how to answer a yes/no question?”

Last night, Dr. Mrs. Chairwoman Kirsi C. Allison-Ampe M.D, Ph.D, B.A., XYZ, ABCD asked you a critical question.  She asked all the candidates to answer (“yes” or “no”) if they would run again for the seat next year.  Every other candidate answered with either a “yes” or a “no”.

You however, were the only one to answer, “I don’t know”.  What’s more, you went on to add several more words to an answer that required just one.  In fact, when Dr. Ampe pressed you again for just one word, once more, you gave about 11.  Your verbosity almost cost you the appointment.  There is no room for waffling on such an issue.  Fortunately for you, Mr. Schlictman, Dr. Ampe contradicted herself and voted for you regardless - despite having stated that she would vote for someone who clearly did not wish to seek re-election.  She admitted that her choice could be construed as a conflict-of-interest.  While she clearly stated she did not want to be a kingmaker, if you choose to run again, she may become the very thing she claims she didn’t want to be.

Gee, I hope you will be able to answer “yes” when you take the oath.

How will you handle other “yes” or “no” questions if they should arise while you are on the Committee?

Let’s practice some “yes/no” questions:

1. Is the Avocado the greatest blog ever? (we’ll start easy)

2. If it’s sunny outside (which is not the case today), is it always warm? (this is a bit more difficult)

3. Are avocados your favorite vegetable?  (Haha…trick question…avocados are fruit)

4. If John, Mary, Bill, and Rita are in a line and Rita is second in line, John is before Bill, and Mary is after John but before Rita, is John first?

And here’s the hardest one:

5. Kirsi wasn’t successful this week, so let us try one more time.  Now that you have been appointed, will you run again for the seat next year?  (yes or no only please).

In his reply, Mr. Schlictman still couldn’t answer “yes” or “no” to any of those questions.  He couldn’t even answer our question, “are you capable of answering a yes/no question?”  His response to that was “perhaps”.  We’re sorry, but “perhaps” is not a “yes” or a “no”.

In all seriousness, we like Mr. Schlictman and we believe that despite his inability to answer simple questions, he will make a fine SC member over the next eleven months.  He’s an extremely smart, funny, and downright nice guy.  But we think it should be only 11 months.  That said, we will be watching him closely to make sure that he can demonstrate independence and flexibility in thought, like Mr. Hayner and Mr. Pierce.  We feel Mr. Schlictman, given his experience, has an opportunity to teach some of the other SC members how to be less political and agenda driven and more diplomatic – again like Mr. Pierce.

Hey…look at it this way: it might actually be a good thing that Mr. Schlictman doesn’t know the words “yes” or “no”…because the last thing we need on the School Committee is just another “yes” man.  Are we right?  Yes or no?

 

 

Sources: School Committee to Appoint Political Ally to One Year Seat

April 23, 2012
Arlington, MA

Over the weekend, the Avocado learned that the School Committee is getting set to appoint an important political ally to the one-year seat made vacant upon Joe Curro’s resignation.  Curro resigned his seat after winning a seat on the Board of Selectmen.  There had been some talk that they might logically consider a well-qualified individual like Mr. James Flanagan, a strong challenger who claimed the third most votes in the election, but ultimately lost out to the incumbents.  As one Committee member put it though, “come on, this should not be about what is sensible or logical.”

This stunning development is completely outside the Committee’s typical modus operandi, as the Committee has of course always acted above board, conducting itself with the utmost integrity and with a decidedly apolitical decorum.

In another shocking development, which could not be confirmed, the Avocado was told that Mr. Curro held onto his seat until after the election so that the School Committee could in effect block Mr. Flanagan or Mr. Pallett from winning what would have otherwise been a third open seat.  Allegedly, this is why two other minor challengers were recruited to run – in order to steal votes from the top two challengers, thus ensuring the incumbents’ re-election.

According to sources, this political gamesmanship was all part of an elaborate plan to not only retain control of the status quo agenda, but to indeed double down upon it.  Though the public “process”, as they call it, makes it sound like anybody and everybody may apply and will be considered, in effect, the Avocado was told, the School Committee has already chosen Mr. Curro’s replacement.  Some on the Committee talked about selecting an independent thinker at their last meeting, but it appears as though those calls have been ignored.

The Avocado was told by another source, on the condition of anonymity, that the new member might be a former School Committee member.  Regardless, the source did say that the new member has been a consistent political backer of Mr. Curro, Mr. Thielman, and Ms. Starks.  While it is said that the new member will promise not to seek election in their own right, they may change their tune next year when the School Committee implores that person to run in order to keep any political foes off the Committee.

Sources say that the new member probably did not even bother applying or that he or she removed themselves from consideration.  The School Committee is going to ignore all of the other eligible and active applicants and choose the person that backed out.  This too would be remarkable, as the School Committee NEVER did anything like this before.

Some say that once this new member is announced and officially takes his or her seat on the Committee, this will then spur tremendous controversy over whether this is just another example of political patronage in Arlington.

Controversy – in Arlington?  Who would have ever thought?

 
But the Avocado should be quick to remind readers that Arlington is NOT that kind of town.  No such antics occur in our town.  Every decision made by our leaders here is strictly by the book after all.  Oh, sure…there will be naysayers.  There will be protests.  Just tune them all out.  They don’t know what they’re talking about, anyway.  There has never been any sort of political gamesmanship displayed by our elected officials and their supporters since the…well, the last election.

Arlington needs to relax and stop thinking the worst about our political leaders.  Even when they mess up royally again and again, as long as we diligently keep going back to the polls and do as we’re told by re-electing them, everything will continue to be just great.

In a related story, some wondered whether Kurt Fusaris, a former School Committee candidate, would apply for the position.  The Avocado caught up with Mr. Fusaris and asked him about his intentions.

“If I wanted the job, I would have run again,” Fusaris said.  “The School Committee position is not worth a bucket of warm grits,” he added.  “It’s more like a punishment, not a reward.  First prize is one year on the Committee.  Second prize is three years on the Committee.  If nominated, I will not accept.  If appointed, I will not serve.  I’m only going to say this once – I…did NOT have several applications submitted with respect to that position – this vacancy.  I never asked anyone else to apply – not once, not a single time.  These suppositions are false and are a silly distraction – and now if you don’t mind, I’d like to get on with the business of keeping the Arlington people duly informed with news that actually matters.”

Avocado’s Post-Election Analysis

Well, we got it mostly right.

By mostly, we are talking 75% accurate.  Of the four seats up for grabs in the races for School Committee and the Board of Selectmen, the Avocado correctly predicted 3 out of the 4 winners.   Last year, we were 100% accurate, having picked all the winners and the correct order of finish.  In addition, we predicted the outcome of the override vote.   This year, 64% of our picks this year finished in the order in which we called them.  Throwing us off the most were the crazy results of the Selectman’s contest.  We still called the first and last place winners correctly in that race.  On the School Committee side, Mr. Thielman surprised us with a first-place finish over Ms. Starks, but from Flanagan on down, we called all the rest in the correct order.  Multiple simulations produced widely different results in the Selectman’s race and we went with the results that were based on a much higher than predicted turnout and total number of votes cast than what we actually observed on Tuesday.  This overestimate of turnout also caused us to overshoot the vote totals for each of the candidates.  Below, we will provide more post-election analysis, but first a few more numbers…

Over the past three elections (including the override vote last year), the Avocado can still boast an 88% accuracy in its predictions.  When it comes to the correct order of finish, after aggregating all of the races, the Avocado’s record is 75% accuracy.  Still, when you examine the data more closely, despite the craziness in the Selectman’s race, there are many other things that we actually got right – or otherwise very close to right.

What’s more, last year, we came very close to predicting the actual vote totals for many of the candidates.  This year, though our data were thrown off by overshooting the estimated voter turnout, we still came very close to predicting the actual vote totals for two of the candidates in the School Committee race (Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Jackson).  Though we had picked Jeff Thielman to finish 2nd, we were actually within 228 votes of his actual total.  We were within 2% of calling the correct percentage of the vote for Ms. Starks, even though we had picked her to be first and she actually came in 2nd.  We were within 2% of calling the correct percentage of the vote for Mr. Flanagan.

In the Selectman’s contest, we correctly predicted that the 2nd place finisher would eke out a win.  Though we got the candidates wrong, our margin was very close.  Byrne, the 2nd place winner, finished just 99 votes ahead of 3rd place finisher Joe Curran.  We predicted that the margin would be 74 votes between 2nd and 3rd place.  That’s an error of just 25 votes. For the middle of the pack (2nd, 3rd, and 4th) our predictions were off by just 1%-2% of the actual percentages garnered by those candidates.
Last year, we were very close to predicting the actual turnout, which helped us get as accurate as we did then.  The actual turnout this year was around 7,441.  This was similar to last year’s turnout (7,466) and actually a hair smalller, but we had banked on a turnout of at least 7,700.  Though we were off by just 4% in our estimate,  that was more than enough to skew the data.  Factoring in just 100 extra voters, let alone 300, would have been enough to throw everything off kilter.

Below, we take a closer look at the predicted versus actual results.  In bold, we have highlighted the candidates we correctly picked to win.  The candidates we picked in the right order of finish are in italics.  We also bolded any numbers or percentages on which our predictions were close to the actual results for that candidate.
——————————————————————————————————————-
SELECTMEN
PREDICTED                                                                ACTUAL

Joseph Curro               3,943          23%               Joseph Curro      3,417       27%
Bob Tosi                         3,496           21%              Steve Byrne             2,805       22% *
Steve Byrne                  3,422           20%             Joseph Curran       2,706       21%
Joseph Curran             3,351           20%             Bob Tosi                   2,447       19%
Maria Romano             2,773          16%             Maria Romano      1,431       11%

* The predicted margin between the 2nd and 3rd place finisher was also very close to the actual vote (even though we picked the wrong candidates in those spots).
———————————————————————————————————————————————————-
SCHOOL COMMITTEE
PREDICTED                                                           ACTUAL

Cindy Starks:              4,496             29%             Jeff Thielman          3,426      28%
Jeff Thielman:            3,654             23%             Cindy Starks            3,284       27%
Jim Flanagan:             3,360             22%            Jim Flanagan             2,433       20%
A. Matthew Pallett:   2,804             18%            Matthew Pallett         1,402        12%
Andrew O’Brien:             901               6%             Andrew O’Brien         1,049         9%
Ian Jackson:                    356               2%             Ian Jackson                    446         6%
—————————————————————————————————————————————————
IMPRESSIONS:

So what do all these results mean?

The short answer is, we have absolutely no idea.  We have followed with great interest some excellent discussions on the Arlington List about the election results.  Many interesting hypotheses were formulated.  We will break down our own impressions according to different aspects of this election that have piqued the most curiosity.

How Much Did Bullet Voting Impact the Race?

There has been much discussion over how much “bullet” voting may have influenced this election.  Bullet voting refers to the practice employed by some voters whereupon they choose just one candidate in a race for which they have two or more votes to give.  For example, in both the Selectman’s and School Committee races, voters could choose to vote for any two candidates among the five and six that were seeking seats on those boards, respectively.  Voters who bullet vote would choose to vote for just one candidate instead of two.  Speculating as to why a given voter would choose to cast a bullet vote is just that – speculation.  Even if we could examine each bulleted ballot individually, that still would not tell us anything, other than how many people bullet voted.  Some voters may only like or know one of the candidates.  For others, they may simply be undecided on their other choice.  Still others may think one of the candidates is a shoo-in and therefore does not need their vote.  The truth is, we may never really know.

If bullet voting was rampant, our conjecture is that Mr. Tosi may not have received enough 2nd votes from both Mr. Curro and Mr. Curran voters.  If that is the case, this may have helped both Mr. Byrne and Mr. Curran surpass Tosi.  Mr. Byrne may have received just enough of Mr. Curro’s second votes along with enough of his own supporters to edge out Mr. Curran – but this is only a theory.

How Much Impact Did Precincts 8, 10, and 12 Have On The Election?

Often, much is made about the impact of Precincts 8, 10, and 12.  This is thought by some to represent the center of gravity for the movers and shakers in town.  In recent elections, the numbers that turn out in those precincts have been impressive,  to say the least.  The elevated numbers in these precincts, some argue, help maintain the “status quo” as they call it, and they assume that voters in these precincts tend to vote overwhelmingly for the incumbents or those who are otherwise favored by the kingmakers.  When we look at this year’s numbers, we see that between 25%-26% of the votes for Joe Curro, Jeff Thielman, and Cindy Starks came from just those three precincts.

Some have argued in the past that those three precincts alone skew the results in favor of incumbents.  However, we feel that argument lacks supporting evidence.  While it is clear that a good 25% of the votes for the incumbents and Joe Curro came from those precincts, there is no evidence that those three precincts alone made the difference in the outcome.  Consider two scenarios.  If you were to completely eliminate those three precints, Thielman and Starks still end up winning the election handily, topping Flanagan by some 500-600 votes.  If you played this game a different way, kept 8, 10, and 12 in the picture, but pared down Thielman and Starks’ votes such that they were equal to those of Flanagan in those precincts, once again Thielman and Starks still win the general election with ease (though by a slightly smaller margin of about 400-500 votes).  We are not going to go back and compare this to other elections, as that is largely an apples to oranges proposition.  Suffice to say, that precincts 8, 10, and 12 alone cannot elect or defeat anyone.  The elevated numbers could just as easily be attributed to the fact that there are more registered voters or more voters who actually turn out in those precincts.  Not to be outdone, though he came in third in the race and in those precincts, Flanagan managed to make some inroads, having spent a lot of time campaigning there.  Flanagan’s highest vote total came in Precinct 12, suggesting again that the trends we see in 8, 10, and 12 may simply have more to do with turnout there than with any particular slant by the electorate towards one candidate or another.

The number of candidates in the School Committee race may have also contributed to Flanagan’s loss.  It was relayed to the Avocado that Mr. O’Brien’s only purpose in running was to take votes away from Flanagan and Pallett.  If true, Mr. O’Briens’ 1,000-plus votes may have served to dilute the maximum number of votes Flanagan could have obtained.  Mr. Jackson’s votes may have had a small impact, but he registered less than half of Mr. O’Brien’s total, which leads us to believe that Mr. Jackson may not have been as much of a factor in the race at all.  Interestingly, Mr. Pallett did not appear to benefit from too many of Mr. Flanagan’s second votes.  This may be because Flanagan received some 2nd votes from Ms. Starks or Mr. Thielman or because some may have simply bullet-voted for Flanagan.  Again, there is truly no way to know for certain what happened.

Another piece of evidence that works against the 8, 10, and 12 conspiracy theory is that Steve Byrne did not exactly impress in those precincts.  Byrne, a darling of the Curro crowd, just barely edged out the other Joe (Curran) in 10 and 12.  He was only a little better than Tosi in those precincts, too.  Curro was due to score big no matter what.  However, those three precincts really did Byrne no special favors.  We did not think Byrne would benefit from Curro’s coattails all that much.  The data suggest this could be true, but it is not conclusive.  Our hypothesis is that Byrne had to get a fair amount of support from Curro voters, otherwise it is doubtful he would have won.   Still, Curro trumped Byrne by well over 600 votes and for his part, Byrne just scraped by Curran with a 99 vote margin.  If you simply eliminated the margin of victory Byrne claimed over Curran in Precinct 8 (let alone 10 and 12), then we would have had a Selectman Curran (by just 12 votes).  Again, this is just further data that would refute the claim that 8, 10, and 12 are significantly slanted towards incumbents or quasi-incumbents.

Name Recognition

How much did name recognition benefit or hurt candidates?  Again, much of this is purely speculative.  Though, it is interesting to observe that of the top 2 finishers in both the School Committee race and the Selectman’s race, those names are fairly well known in town.  Jeff Thielman has been on the School Committee for nine years and was running for a fourth term.  Cindy Starks has served for three years and ran for a second term.  As an aside, why is it that nobody ever gets Ms. Starks’ name right?  It seems that in both print and broadcast media, everyone calls her Cindy Stark.  Do they not know that her surname shares its name with a town in Maine?

Joe Curro has been an elected official for four years and he has run in three successful campaigns.  Joe Curran was also an elected official for four years and ran in four races (with a .500 record; though one race was uncontested).  With all that has been made over the two Joes and Joe with the “O” versus Joe without the “O”, and not to mention some of the more memorable moments when both Joes served on the School Committee, it is not difficult to conclude that both men brought serious star power to the race in terms of name recognition.  Mr. Byrne, though he is young and never ran for major office before, has a name that is familiar to many in town.  If his name was Steve Baker, the outcome might have been different, but not necessarily, because even Steve Baker, with no name recognition, may have benefitted from Joe Curro’s support.  What gets difficult is separating the variables.  It is foolhardy to consider the impact of name recognition on the race when you must also factor in the effect of 2nd votes from another candidate, not to mention several other variables that may have influenced the outcome.  Bob Tosi may not have had the same name recogntion that the others did, and he finished fourth.  Again, there are too many other variables that may have accounted for his fourth place finish.  Maria Romano has run in three consecutive races.  She has finished last in all three.  One could argue that her name recognition made no difference in her case, but then again, it may have had a negative impact.  Name recogniton can be a bonus for a candidate…except when it is not.

Money

Another factor to muse over is “money”.  Bob Sprague, on his YourArlington site, posted a piece that disclosed each candidate’s campaign coffers.  Steve Byrne led the pack and reportedly collected over $17,600 in receipts and spent about $5,700.  Joe Curran was next with about $11,300 in receipts and $8,132 in expenses.  Curro was not far behind him with $10,000 collected and $6,000 spent, respectively.  Tosi took in $6,600 and spent nearly all of that amount.  Romano collected over $2,500 but apparently spent nothing.  The game people like to play is how much did each vote cost or cost-per-vote.  So, we’ll bite.

If we play along and do the math, then Curro spent $1.75 per vote.  Byrne spent roughly $2.03 per vote received.  Curran spent about $3.00 per vote.  Byrne raised more than Curran, yet Curran outspent Byrne and lost by almost 100 votes.  Tosi spent $2.67 per vote.  Romano spent $0 per vote.  She may have spent nothing to get 1,400 votes, but she also came in last.  In the Selectman’s race, if and only if we could eliminate all other variables (which we can’t), one might conclude that Mr. Curro got the most bang for his campaign buck.  Spending just over two bucks per vote, Byrne got a decent bang for the buck, too.  Curran spent the most and still didn’t win.  Tosi spent the next highest amount and finished behind Curran.  Curro finished first and yet spent only a tiny bit more than Tosi, who finished fourth.  In sum, as far as the Selectman’s race is concerned, if you focus on money spent, you may be able to figure who got the most bang for their buck, but there is no evidence to suggest that the amount candidates raised or spent greatly altered the outcome of the race (at least among those finishing 1-4).

What about the School Committee race?  Thielman spent $4,000 and received over 3,400 votes.  His cost per vote was $1.16.  Matt Pallett was the next biggest spender, spending $3,800.  His cost per vote was $2.71.  Cindy Stark or Cindy Starks spent $2,407 for a cost per vote of just $0.73.  Flanagan spent almost $2,400 and received over 2,400 votes, making his cost per vote almost a $1.00 even.  Jackson spent just 16 cents on the dollar for each vote he received.  O’Brien received over 1,000 votes though he spent nothing.  It can be argued that Cindy Starks got the most bang for her buck given that a) she won, and b) she spent less than Thielman per vote, who also won.  Of those spending any money at all, Jackson spent the least, but has last place to show for it.  With a pattern of one vote per dollar, one could postulate that if Mr. Flanagan spent $3,500 that this might have helped him compete better against Thielman and Starks.  But again, one can draw no definitive conclusions.

In both races, money may have been a factor.  It may have helped Mr. Byrne and Mr. Curran make the contest for 2nd place competitive.  It may have helped Mr. Curro solidify what was thought by many to be an easy first-place finish.  Money advantages may also have helped Mr. Thielman.  However, as can be seen, spending the most does not guarantee you a win.  What might be an easier conclusion to draw is the fact that those who spent no money or anything less than $2,000 did not win – or even come close.

Ballot Order

How much might ballot order have contributed to the election results?  In the Selectman’s race, the order was as follows: Curran, Tosi, Romano, Curro, and Byrne.  Curro and Byrne were fourth and fifth on the ballot, but managed to finish 1st and 2nd, respectively.  Romano was in the middle of the pack and finished last.  Curran’s first place positioning on the ballot did not help him get first place in the election – nor did it gain him 2nd place.  In the Selectman’s race then, there is no evidence that ballot order made a difference.  We will say that Joe with the “O” gave people the most vocal reminders about where they could find him on the ballot.  We could go back and pore over results in previous elections, but we just simply do not have the time.  Plus, as we stated before, we do not want to mix apples with oranges.
In the School Committee race, ballot order would at first appear to have paid off for Mr. Thielman.  The Avocado may have done well to consider that factor a bit more carefully before issuing its predictions.  Andrew O’Brien and Ian Jackson were second and third on the ballot, but they finished 5th and 6th.  Flanagan was fourth but he finished 3rd.  Starks was in the penultimate position on the ballot but managed a strong 2nd place finish.  Mr. Pallett was last on the ballot but he did not finish last.  As with the Selectman’s race, we can draw no definitive conclusions as to whether ballot order had any major impact.  It may have had a negligible impact on Jeff Thielman’s vote totals (he did win the most votes of all the candidates in either race – even more than the very popular Joe Curro).
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
When considering all the above potential factors, remember to consider this:

In 2010, Kurt Fusaris was a first-time candidate for School Committee.  He was last on the ballot, had no name recognition, had no big name endorsers, and had no big-time running-mates.  He was up against two well-financed candidates with solid support from the powers-that-be in town.  He raised just $125, spending a mere 7 cents per vote, and yet he garnered almost 1,700 votes.  He finished 3rd in a 4 person-race where the top two finishers were elected.
————————————————————————————————————————————————–
CONCLUSIONS:

Some lingering questions are…

1) Did the likes of Joe Curro and Cindy Starks lose support as compared to past races?
2) Does this election prove that once again, the pro-incumbent attitude in town is stronger than ever?
3) Is there a wall or an invisible ceiling with respect to the numbers that will turn out – with the day of the election, the number of candidates running, the issues, and the general interest in the race notwithstanding?

To tackle the first question, again, we do not have the time to meticulously examine all the data from past elections.  That said, at first glance, Joe Curro and Cindy Starks did receive fewer votes than they did in their last elections.  In Joe’s case, it’s made trickier because he was running for a different office this time.  In addition, he was running against some strong opposition in this election.  Though some may have figured him to be a shoo-in and chose not to vote for him, that does not mean that they don’t still support him.  Also, some may have chosen not to vote for him because he didn’t resign from his School Committee seat.  All things considered, Curro received over 3,400 votes.  One could argue that this is fairly representative of his solid base of supporters.  Anything more may just be gravy.  A good chunk of the 1,300 more votes he received in his last School Committee race may have been votes received from people who were not necessarily part of his “base”, but who were instead inclined to throw their support behind him because they did not like the other candidates or by virtue of the fact that he was an incumbent.  We would therefore disagree with the argument that Mr. Curro has “lost” support.  The same goes for Ms. Starks.  Her support this time around is fairly consistent with the amount of support she received last time.  Mr. Thielman received even greater support this time than he did last time around.  One could argue that he’s become even more popular, not less so.

As to the second question, much has been said about Arlington being a pro-incumbent town.   For this, we will look back to past elections.  In the past five Annual Town Elections, incumbents were an impressive 15 for 15 in contested races.  That’s not even counting the uncontested races.  When new faces do join the Board or the School Committee, it’s typically only because there is a truly “open” seat.  See Cindy Starks and Joe Curro in 2009, Jud Pierce and Kirsi Allison-Ampe in 2010, Bill Hayner and Dan Dunn in 2011, Steve Byrne in 2012.   None of those individuals had to knock anyone out of office to gain election.  All this too may not be absolutely conclusive, but it does lend strong support for the pro-incumbent hypothesis.

The third question speaks to whether there is an invisible ceiling to the numbers that will turn out for town elections.  The past two Annual Town Elections averaged about 7,400 voters, even though there was a perceived greater interest in this year’s race and the fact that one election was held on a Saturday and the other on a Tuesday.  Looking back, the numbers have fluctuated over the years and again, it would be difficult to pinpoint an exact ceiling.  Honestly, the bigger question we should all be asking is: if there is a ceiling, how do we break through it and get more people to vote in the town elections?

A LOOK AHEAD:

Looking ahead to 2013, Jud Pierce and Kirsi Allison-Ampe will be facing expiring terms.  Also, due to Joe Curro’s election to the Board of Selectman, there will be one additional seat up on the School Committee.  Cindy Starks has gone on record as saying that she would rather not have Mr. Curro’s replacement on the Committee seek re-election to that seat next year.  She does not want that individual to have the advantage of incumbency?  As per our discussion about incumbency, this strikes us as just a bit ironic because Ms. Starks didn’t seem to mind the advantages incumbency brought her this year.  We didn’t quite hear, “Shucks, I really wish I wasn’t the incumbent”.   The other funny thing is that one can only wonder how quickly she would change her tune if the person they end up selecting to fill Joe Curro’s seat is someone she happens to really like a lot!  We love Ms. Starks personally, even though we did not endorse her.  However, it’s little things like that which at the very least, are just a bit curious.  If the person they select is someone we really like too, we think they should have every right to seek the seat in their own right.  If the person selected chooses not to run again, that should be their decision alone. In full disclosure, the Avocado will endorse Jud Pierce for re-election next year.  Yeah, it’s a bit early we know, but we have to put it out there.

On the Board of Selectman, it will be Kevin Greeley’s seat that is up.  It will be interesting to see if he decides to go for one more term.  Now that Steve Byrne has been elected, this means that Mr. Greeley is no longer the “youngest” on the Board

Selectman’s Election Predictions

If you thought that the School Committee race was difficult to call, don’t even get us started on the Board of Selectmen.

We will go out on a limb and say that Annie LaCourt and Clarissa Rowe will no longer be on the Board of Selectmen after April 10th.

That’s a given.  That’s as close to a guarantee as we can make.

After that, we must plainly admit…we have no idea what’s going to happen.

That said, perhaps the easiest call to make is to pick Joe Curro to finish first.  His name recognition, popularity, financial advantages, and track record in previous elections all point to him coasting onto the Board with plenty of room to spare.  Curro may lose some votes from those who disapprove of his decision to seek the Selectman’s seat while remaining on the School Committee, but he will still leave his closest rival in the dust.  By the way, the Avocado feels that Mr. Curro is completely within his rights to seek one seat while holding another.  We had no qualms about that.

 
The major question in this election is simply this: how big are Curro’s coattails?  If Mr. Curro’s coattails are exceedingly long, that may be just enough to pull Steve Byrne onto the Board with him.  It is no secret that Mr. Curro and Mr. Byrne are running in tandem and many of Curro’s supporters also support Mr. Byrne.

If only it were that easy, though.

We admit, this one is tough.  We ran many simulations on both a PC and a Mac, and the simulation crashed several times on both platforms.  The Selectman’s race is so crazy that even the computers don’t want to touch this one…and who can blame them?

If Curro coasts to victory, isn’t it a given that he’ll carry his de facto “running-mate” with him?  There is just one problem with that above assumption.  Many who are supporting Mr. Curro are not necessarily falling in lockstep behind Mr. Byrne.  In fact, many appear to be splitting the difference, opting for Mr. Tosi instead of Mr. Byrne.

We can envision a scenario where many of Mr. Curro’s second votes go to Mr. Byrne, but many of course will also go to Mr. Tosi.  There is also a very narrow chance that Mr. Joseph Curran wins election to the Board if Joe Curro’s second votes are split so much between Tosi and Byrne that Tosi and Byrne fall to third and fourth place.  For this to occur though, this would need to be coupled by a stronger than anticipated surge of support for Curran.  That is not out of the realm of possibility.  Mr. Curran won two School Committee elections hands-down, though he spent almost nothing (and one of them was uncontested).  Last year, Curran easily topped 3,000 votes in the race for Selectman following a campaign that was not nearly as visible as others.  This time around, Mr. Curran has a stronger organization and the campaign finances necessary to compete in the big leagues.  To count Mr. Curran out completely would be foolhardy.

That said, we believe that the race for second-place will come down to Mr. Byrne and Mr. Tosi.  As we stated with respect to the School Committee race, turnout will play a role.  It is possible that Mr. Curran can eke out a third-place finish, relegating either Mr. Byrne or Mr. Tosi to fourth, but as strong as he is this time around, we do not see Curran winning one of the two seats.
Mr. Byrne is 24.  We applaud his candidacy because it is so critical that more young people get involved in politics.  Even though we did not endorse him this time around, we are glad he is running and think that he has a lot of potential.

Because Mr. Byrne is young, we think that he may get a few more younger voters to the polls. Without Mr. Byrne in the race, many of those younger voters would otherwise stay home in a local election.  The great thing about his candidacy is that it will get more younger voters out to the polls in a town election.  This could serve as an advantage for Byrne.  Still, sadly, there are no doubt, many other young registered voters in town who have no idea there is an election.

Not to be outdone, Mr. Tosi may get a very large share of the senior citizen vote, given his work on the Council on Aging and his professional experience assisting the elderly.  Seniors often tend to have a much better voting record than younger people.   If Mr. Tosi can garner a significantly larger percentage of the senior vote as compared to the youth vote that comes out for Byrne, this could be enough to swing the election for Tosi.

Mr. Tosi will also benefit from support from a larger cross-section of voters.  In addition to the fact that he has the support from many who support Curro, Mr. Tosi can also boast support from many residents who may not necessarily see eye-to-eye with the likes of Mr. Curro and his followers.  He has support from old and young, townies and non-townies, as well as those who may be on different sides on some of the town’s biggest issues.

Given the multiple factions that appear to be lining up behind Mr. Tosi, Mr. Curro’s coattails may not be enough to pull Byrne onto the Board with him.  As omnipotent as Mr. Curro seems at times, he may have his limitations.  Recall that last year, Mr. Curro did very well for himself, but his “running-mate” Leba Heigham’s vote totals lagged well behind his.  Mr. Heigham was lucky enough to be running when there were three seats up.

Mr. Byrne is not an incumbent, and when you are not an incumbent in this town, this is a serious disadvantage.  The only reason he may be competitive is due to the fact that there are two open seats and he has the most money.  If he were running as a challenger to two incumbents, Mr. Byrne might have had a far tougher time.    What’s more, if he didn’t have the name recognition due to his family pedigree or the financial advantages, he might not have factored at all.  One cannot discount the advantages Byrne’s name recognition affords him.  Having a popular and well-known name can count for a lot.  Case in point, if your name is Kennedy and you are running in Massachusetts, nobody else need apply.

Though neither Mr. Tosi nor Mr. Curro are incumbents, Mr. Curro might as well be and Mr. Tosi’s many years of tremendous experience on various boards and commissions give him many of the same advantages that an incumbent might bring.  That said, because there are no incumbents running, Mr. Tosi does not face the very difficult challenge of having to “knock” someone out.  There are two wide-open seats (well, one when you consider that Mr. Curro is a lock for one of them).

We must consider ballot order, too.  Joe Curran is first on the ballot.  Steve Byrne is last.  Last on the ballot is not ideal, though perhaps the primacy and recency effect could still boost candidates in last position, too.  Bob Tosi is second on the ballot.   Joe Curro is 4th, but we do not see that as impacting him too greatly.  It may reduce his total number of votes, but it will not prevent him from being elected with ease.

Ultimately, what may boost Tosi is the fact that he may not only get many of Joe Curro’s second votes, but also those of Joe Curran.  Curran’s second votes will likely be split between Tosi and Romano.  Since there is very little love lost between supporters of Curro and Curran, we do not see too many people voting for both Joes.  Some might vote for both Joes just for the fun of it – because they want to see fireworks between them on the Board.  We do not share Mr. Curro’s worry that many may confuse the two Joes.  One should give Arlington voters more credit than that.

It is interesting to note that even though Mr. Curro and Mr. Byrne are running together, many of Joe Curro’s supporters are split on their second choice.
We also do not believe there are too many Curran voters who are inclined to vote for Byrne.  By drawing second votes from the two Joes, combined with the many strengths that will garner him first votes in his own right, Bob Tosi could pull it out.

Therefore, we predict that Bob Tosi will narrowly eke out a 2nd place finish.  At the end of the day, we believe that voters will see Mr. Curro and Mr. Tosi as the best for the Board of Selectmen at this particular time.  We think more voters will value the experiene Joe Curro and Bob Tosi bring to the table.

Voters may also consider the fact that we already have a new and relatively young Town Manager.

Hence, they may be a little bit more comfortable going with candidates who are well, actually older than the Town Manager.

 
We think that Steve Byrne will secure the third-place spot, and that should position him well for a future run.  Joe Curran will have his strengths, though.  He has run a far more visible campaign than ever before.  He also has the support of Diane Mahon, who has proven that she has quite a lot of clout in her own right.   However, we feel that Joe Curro’s legion of supporters will be enough to at least pull Byrne ahead of Curran.

This is Ms. Maria Romano’s third run for the Board of Selectmen.  We can’t say that the third time will be the charm.   Like Mr. Curran, we feel that she has a ceiling of support, too.  Unlike Mr. Curran, we predict that she may actually lose vote-share as compared to her previous runs.   It appears as though Ms. Romano did not even try this time around, spending very little money.  Because many of Curran’s second votes may also go to Mr. Tosi, Ms. Romano will lose out on a lot of potential extra votes.   As a result, it is not difficult to predict a last-place finish for Ms. Romano.

One final word.  There has been some talk about those who might cast a single vote in this election.  In other words, even though candidates have asked for one of our “two votes” in both the School Committee and Selectman’s races, there have been some indications that several voters will opt to vote for just one candidate.  We are considering this to be one of a couple major “intangible” factors in this year’s elections.  If enough voters choose to vote for just one candidate, this could throw off all of the data.  Of course, another “intangible” is the turnout.

Below are our predictions in the Selectman’s race…buckle up for this one.

———————————————————————————————–

Board of Selectmen Race

Popular Vote:                            Percentage:

Curro:           3,943                            23%
Tosi               3,496                            21%
Byrne           3,422                            20%
Curran         3,351                            20%
Romano      2,773                           16%

————————————————————————————————

Note:  Our computer models and simulations for the Selectman’s race did not overlap neatly with the predicted turnout and vote totals computed for the School Committee race.  We ended up with a higher total vote total than we expected (16,995).  This does not necessarily indicate a much higher turnout.   We factored in the possibility that some people may vote for just one candidate and split the difference between a higher than expected turnout and a lower than expected turnout.   We agree with the algorithm that suggests the race will be as close as it is for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place.  It is also difficult to envision a scenario where any of the five candidates establishes a basal level of votes that is below the 2,500 mark.  There are years when candidates for the Board of Selectmen fail to break 1,000 votes, let alone 2,500.  In this election cycle, our calculations suggest a relatively even and close race in the middle of the pack.  Joe Curro will be taking a seat on the Board at the next Selectman’s meeting.  Right now, we see Tosi on there with him, but anything can happen between now and 8 pm on Tuesday night.

School Committee Election Predictions

The Arlington Avocado is at it again.  Can it make it 3 for 3?  Last year, we successfully predicted the outcomes of both the Annual Town Election and the Special Override election.  We were the first website to predict the election results in not one, but two town elections.  We could have just sat this one out and rested on our laurels.  Instead, we will go out on a limb again and try to call this year’s races using many of the same metrics tools and resources as we did last year.

Here it is: Two candidates will triumph in the School Committee race and two others will claim victory in the race for the Board of Selectmen.  In both races, a total of seven candidates will have to wait until next year to try again.  We know it’s a very bold call, but we are standing by that.

In all seriousness, we will offer our official predictions.  First, we will analyze the School Committee race, then follow it up with the numbers.  In our next post, we will do the same for the Selectman’s race.

————————————————————————————————
Like last year, our goals are as follows.  Primarily, we strive to call the correct winners.  With our endorsements, we aimed to influence your vote.  Here, we are simply trying to tell you how you will vote.  Secondly, we hope to call the correct order of finish.  Third, we are hoping to provide percentages that are fairly accurate.  Fourth and finally, the icing on the cake will be the actual vote totals and vote margins separating the candidates.  We hope to call the correct winners.  Everything else is just gravy…though last year we came frighteningly close on all four of those goals!

We are predicting a solid, clear-cut victory for Ms. Starks.  She should finish in first place.  Starks may have made a few enemies over the course of her first term, but not enough to pose a serious threat to her re-election.  She has a loyal base that will mobilize get-out-the-vote efforts on her behalf.  Her organization and her money advantages are just too strong. There is a very real possibility that she will break the 4,000-vote barrier, provided enough voters turn out.  She will also benefit from getting many second votes from those that publicly support Mr. Thielman, as they are running as a team.

The race for the second seat is a bit tougher to call.  In many ways, Mr. Thielman has been a tremendous voice on the School Committee and many have a great deal of respect for him.  However, we also believe, as is the case for most long-serving politicians, that the longer one is in office, the more dissenters one attracts.  Mr. Thielman is savvy enough to appreciate this.  At Menotomy Beer and Wine, during a Meet the Candidates event, the Avocado told him that his interview scored many hits on this site and that it may perhaps point to his popularity.  To this, Mr. Thielman chuckeld and modestly acknowledged, “well I doubt that I my interview got that many hits because I’m popular…I’m sure a lot of that is people thinking…uh oh…what did that guy do now?”  Incidentally, in that interview, Mr. Thielman declared that Ms. Starks will receive many more votes than he will.

Typically, we would say that without question, a vote for Ms. Starks would necessarily translate automatically for a vote for Mr. Thielman.  However, we believe that Ms. Starks is much more popular than Mr. Thielman when considering the broader electorate.  In addition, for those on the fence, they may be more likely to opt for Ms. Starks, despite any reservations about her, given that she has only served a single term thus far.

Last year, Bill Hayner was swept into office with a very strong second-place showing.  He was second only to Joe Curro, whom we all know is perhaps the most popular politico in town.  Had there been only two seats up last year, Mr. Hayner would have easily knocked Leba Heigham out of office.  For those who do not already know, Hayner is strongly backing both Mr. Flanagan and Mr. Pallett in this year’s School Committee race.  To run as a challenger in a race against two very strong incumbents is an uphill battle because the challenger has to overcome the kingmakers and popular elected officials that are backing the incumbents.  Mr. Flanagan has proven to be a fairly strong challenger in his own right, but with Mr. Hayner’s support, he may have established a bit more parity with the incumbents.  It may not be enough to top Ms. Starks, but a surge of support for Mr. Flanagan coupled with enough of a drop in support for Mr. Thielman relative to Ms. Starks could (and we emphasize could) translate into a narrow upset.

Mr. Pallett could also benefit from Mr. Hayner’s support.  What is more, his campaign is closely affiliated with that of Mr. Flanagan.  This is another aspect that serves to make this duo competitive with the incumbents.  When incumbents run as a pair or as a trio, they serve to make each of them even tougher to beat.  In many cases, at least in Massachusetts, when challengers run against incumbents in local elections, they run campaigns independent of anyone else.  This results in challengers taking enough votes away from one another, which in turn allows the unified incumbents to walk away with the win.  This year though, because Flanagan and Pallett are a de facto “team” in their own right, this may give them a bit more leverage as challengers than if they were running as “every man for himself”.

Let’s not forget that last year, when Mr. Hayner won his seat, there were three seats open.  Though Hayner won, both incumbents were also re-elected.   If there were three seats open this time around, we think Flanagan would win one of them.  However, as there are only two seats up for grabs and given that two of the six candidates are incumbents, we do not see either of the incumbents losing.  Arlington is still a largely pro-incumbent town and most will continue to vote for the status quo due to rigid loyalties.  Like last year, we do not see any evidence for that to be any different this time.  It is not enough that they have their fair share of detractors.  There would also need to be significant erosion within their base, where many who previously supported them lose faith and instead jump ship to support the challengers.  We do not envision that to be the case.

That said, if Flanagan and Pallett can’t muster at least 3,400 votes, neither of them win and both incumbents get re-elected.   If either Flanagan or Pallett were to get a significantly larger share of the vote as compared to the other, then there may be an outside chance for one of them to  finish second.  Though we predict that Flanagan will out-poll Mr. Pallett, it won’t be enough to overtake Mr. Thielman.

We believe that Mr. Flanagan will receive more second votes than Mr. Pallett (from those choosing to vote for just one of the incumbents).  This might explain the edge we expect Flanagan to have over Pallett. We feel that Flanagan may have a bit more broader support than Pallett across several voting blocs. It will still not be enough to beat Mr. Thielman, as he will have the benefit of both many of Starks’ second votes in addition to his other advantages.

If there were only four candidates running for two seats, we would expect this would have benefited Flanagan and Pallett.  Instead, there are six candidates and rather than take away votes from the incumbents, those who vote for Mr. O’Brien and/or Mr. Jackson will simply dilute the total votes that could have been garnered by Flanagan and Pallett.   We also feel that ballot order could hurt Mr. Pallett, as well.  When you are last on the ballot, as much as you may want to deny it, it can work against you.  Mr. Thielman is first on the ballot, which we strongly believe will play to his advantage, too.  Conversely, Mr. Pallett’s last place position could very well be his undoing, as unfair as that might be.  Even though Flanagan occupies a slightly higher position on the ballot than Pallett, we do not see that as being enough to give Flanagan an edge over Mr. Thielman.  The difference between Flanagan and Thielman could come down to just a couple hundred votes.  Again, as to which one prevails could be a matter of the turnout.   We believe that the race for 2nd will be a tough one and could go either way, but at the end of the day, our money is on Mr. Thielman for the win, especially if Thielman manages to carry precincts 8 and 10 by wide margins.

Though Mr. Flanagan and Mr. Pallett will miss a chance to join the Committee this time around, they will finish strong enough to provide them with the name recognition and street cred needed to mount a successful campaign next time around.  In addition, they have run such a positive and respectful campaign that voters will remember that next time, too.

As for Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Jackson, we do not see them as being serious factors.  Their campaigns were nearly invisible and despite our interviews with them and their two debates, we do not feel we have truly gotten to know them.  Though both collected and spent relatively little, we would give the edge to Mr. O’Brien to finish in the penultimate position.  We feel he can garner enough Ottoson parents to push him up beyond last place.  Also, unlike Mr. Jackson, O’Brien has run before, albeit in the Democratic primary for State Representative back in 2008.

One final word before we provide the numbers.  As we alluded to before, the turnout could make all the difference.  Because this is a Tuesday election and not a Saturday vote, the final turnout could completely throw all of this off.  As the election is on a Tuesday, we feel the School Committee race may have a higher number of votes cast than in other races.  This is because many schools will serve as polling stations.  This is a great excuse for parents to pop in to vote after picking up or dropping off their children – so turnout may be slightly boosted above normal levels, at least in the School Committee race.

With all that said, below is our forecast of the vote on April 10th.  You might not agree with whom we have picked to win, and we respect those who may disagree.   We are simply calling it as we see it.  This is the future as it is now.  But if it bothers you that much, make sure you go out there on Tuesday and try to prove us wrong!  A lot can happen in the next few days.  Following the election we will compare the actual votes with our predictions and review what we got right as well as what we missed.

Voter Turnout:  7,786
Times Counted 15,571

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Popular Vote               Percentage (out of total votes counted)

Cindy Starks:                4,496                                      29%
Jeff Thielman:              3,654                                      23%
Jim Flanagan:              3,360                                      22%
A. Matthew Pallett:   2,804                                      18%
Andrew O’Brien:             901                                         6%
Ian Jackson:                    356                                          2%
==================================================================================

For Selectman: Curro and Tosi

Now we turn our attention to our endorsements for the Board of Selectmen.  We regret that we were not granted an interview from all candidates.  This did not play a role in our final choices.  While it would have been helpful to hear from the candidates directly, we feel that all the candidates have done a very good job of telling us about themselves and why they are running through other forums and also, obviously, via the plethora of mailings we have all received.  Their websites also provided some good content, with many going into detail about their stands on various issues.

Our first choice for Selectman is none other than Mr. Joseph A. Curro.  Here at the Avocado, we rib Mr. Curro a great deal, but we tend to give the hardest time to those we love most.  There are many reasons we supported Joe when he ran for School Committee and many of those are the same reasons we are supporting him this time for the Board of Selectman.  Not the least among these is the fact that he provides such great material.  An Arlington without Joe Curro at their service would be a sadder, worse off place.  Similarly, an Avocado without Joe Curro would not be as fun or funny.  Though one may argue, “why start then?”

In all seriousness, of all the candidates currently serving in or running for town-wide office, nobody holds a candle to the kind of commitment and dedication Joe brings to Arlington’s residents.  In his “stump” speech, Joe speaks of the experiences and talents that each of the other candidates brings to the table.  He then goes on to point out that he is a little bit of all of them.  Indeed, we have gotten to know Joe very well over the past few years and we can speak with confidence about his strong devotion to this town.  On the School Committee, which is a completely voluntary position without pay, Joe treated that position like it was another full-time job.  He worked at least twenty or more hours a week on Committee business, and even more than that when he was chairman.   On the Committee, he respected the limits of his roles and responsibilities, but that did not prevent him from going above and beyond in other capacities.  Whether it was his work on the override campaign or his service on special town committees to address long-range planning, finances, and other critical issues, Joe met all of those challenges head on.

 

————————————————————————————————
Joe was also instrumental in going to the state and to our state representatives to make appeals on behalf of Arlington’s schools.  He truly takes the time to understand the issues as they play out at all levels of government.  He put in many long and extra hours during the 2010 budget crunch, attending all of the school budget forums, coolly and calmly explaining the ins and outs of the budget and the budgeting process in a way that people could understand.  After those forums, he stayed even later to meet individually with concerned parents.  One of Joe’s greatest strengths is with understanding budgets and finances, and how the whole system is inter-connected at all levels within town, in the state, and at the federal level.  This is why we feel that he can make a very nice and seamless transition to the Board of Selectmen.

Before Joe was on the School Committee, he was very involved in town.  He was very much involved in local issues, specifically those concerning his neighborhood.  Joe also served on the Human Rights Commission here in town.  It is clear that Joe’s commitment to Arlington goes way back.  Though the hair in his goatee is a bit grayer than it was just four years ago, Mr. Curro has no plans to slow down anytime soon, and this is great news for Arlington.
We are disappointed to see him leave the School Committee, but when we are reminded of what we will gain on the Board of Selectmen, we feel much better.  Joe is running because he is concerned about an experience vacuum on the Board with the retirements of both Annie Lacourt and Clarissa Rowe.  Though Joe will be new to the Board of Selectmen, he will be no stranger to our local government.  By himself, he could almost single-handedly replace both Annie and Clarissa.  Joe makes no  pretenses that he knows all the answers.  When he doesn’t know, he does his homework and researches it.  He respects people with many different perspectives and takes the time to listen, rather than simply asserting his opinion.  Joe also acknowledges mistakes and he even shows an independent streak now and again.  In the past year on the School Committee, Joe has been a profile in courage, respectfully breaking more often with his colleagues.  Over the years, he has just gotten better.  We joke about how much of a big shot he has become and that perhaps he has become too big to fail…but honestly, Arlington needs Joe Curro to be as visible and as big a voice as he is.  In the coming years, we need a leader with the stature, gravitas, and power to affect real change in Arlington.  We need someone who can put Arlington on the map by emphasizing our rich historical heritage, someone who will ensure the state truly pays attention to us by fighting on our behalf, and someone who can help us realize the vision of Vision 2020.

Joe Curro’s smarts, his energy, and his strong track record of experience make him well-prepared for the job on Day One.  In fact, he could be the chairman of the Board tomorrow and he wouldn’t miss a beat.  He’s that ready.  So please join us in enthusiastically supporting Joe with the “O” Curro on April 10th.

Our second vote in the Selectman’s race would have to go to Mr. Robert Tosi.  We do not know Bob nearly as well as Mr. Curro.  However, from what we have learned about him, we are duly impressed.  Bob is a life-long Arlington resident.  He has served on countless boards and commissions here in town.  He has been a member of Town Meeting for a quarter century.  In addition, he served on the Finance Committee, which provides critical experience and understanding of the town’s budgeting process and finances.  Bob’s experience as an accountant will also prepare him well when reviewing the town’s budget.  Bob has also worked on behalf of seniors, both in his professional career and as a member of the Council on Aging.  We know he will be a true friend for Arlington’s senior citizens.   He has given of himself selflessly to the Arlington Food Pantry, showing that he both understands and cares about those who are less fortunate than others.  He has volunteered for those with special needs and he has been a mentor at the Boys and Girls Club.  He served as a member of the Housing Corporation in Arlington, showing his dedication to affordable housing for all.

If you added up the experience he has had serving on various boards and commissions or in voluntary capacities here in town, Bob would have logged about 240 years worth of experience serving the people of Arlington.  I agree with Joe Curro that we need tremendous amounts of experience in order to replace those who are stepping down.  Joe Curro is certainly experienced enough to have earned one of those seats.  However, we believe that without question, Bob Tosi brings even more experience to the table, with the major difference being that Joe has held major elective office.  Therefore, if it is truly experience that drives Joe Curro and his supporters, and we agree that experience is of greater importance where the Board of Selectmen is concerned, then we feel the most logical second choice would be Bob Tosi.  Bob Tosi has been called “Mr. Arlington”.  You get the sense that Mr. Tosi is not in this for himself.  He is in this for us.  He is not looking beyond the Board of Selectmen.  He looks no further than what he can do for the good people right here in town.  He does it asking nothing in return.  He does it because he wants an Arlington that is as good as the people he serves.  He is deeply proud of his town and those that call it home and he will work tirelessly to understand and respond to the needs of all residents.   He is honest, humble, and extremely helpful to all he serves.

So next week, on April 10th, for leadership upon which we can trust and always depend, we strongly recommend supporting both Joe Curro and Bob Tosi for the Board of Selectmen.

For School Committee – Vote for Jim Flanagan

There are so many well-qualified candidates for School Committee this year.  However, in this election cycle, as voters, we can only choose two out of the six candidates on the ballot.
These endorsements have proven to be particularly difficult.  This is because there are two really good incumbents, both of whom we have known for a while and have impressed us at times.  Also, there are two challengers this time around whom we have come to know quite well in just a short time.  Both of them impress us, too.  Needless to say, the choices were not easy.  We wish we there were four seats up this year.

 

We have already thrown our enthusiastic support behind Matt Pallett.  We believe his will be a fresh new voice on the Committee.  His energy, his knowledge, and his passion for the critical issues on the horizon will help to bring even greater balance to the Committee.

 

For all of those reasons, we also very much like Jim Flanagan.  We have come to know Mr. Flanagan during this campaign and he has continued to impress us.  Like Matt, we feel that Jim would bring a high degree of energy, a strong work ethic, and a rich professional background in management and organizational development that would serve the School Committee and the administration very well.  He is a life-long Arlington resident and a loving parent of three great children.  There is no doubt about his commitment and dedication to Arlington’s schools.

 

When endorsing Mr. Pallett, we mentioned how important it was that he would bring a fresh perspective and balance to the Committee.  If we are to remain true to our ideals of a balanced Committee, then we feel we must be consistent.  For this reason, we choose to endorse Jim Flanagan for School Committee.
With his background in IT management, Jim will bring valuable skill sets with respect to managing people and processes.  He will focus on a results-oriented approach to maximizing the services delivered to Arlington’s children based on careful examination of quantitative and qualitative measures.  He will not base his decisions on polls, personal agendas, or politics.  Through his work, he has been a team player, which is critical in order to successfully move projects forward.  However, he is also not shy about respectfully asking questions and offering constructive feedback on various operations.  Like Mr. Pallett, he would add another independent voice to the Committee.

 

The election of Mr. Pallett and Mr. Flanagan would indeed usher in a new beginning for Arlington’s schools.  The school system has endured many challenges and controversies in recent years and finally, we appear to be entering a period of some stability.  We thank both Ms. Starks and Mr. Thielman for the roles they have played in helping to right the ship over the last couple of years.  However, we also need to give a lot of credit to people like Jud Pierce, Joe Curro, and even Bill Hayner, all of whom were instrumental in solving many of the issues that confronted the Committee.

 

We have very glowing and positive things to say about all of the candidates running.   All of the candidates offer great potential.  With respect to the incumbents, we have already seen what they can do.  However, this is not about the past and what has been done.  This is about the future.  Therefore, our final decision was premised on one simple question: “who is best for the School Committee right now…this year…and in helping us move forward from here?”

 

In both Mr. Flanagan and Mr. Pallett, we see concerned parents who still have children in our schools.  We see two parents who have already worked passionately on behalf of educational issues in Arlington.  Of the four candidates, in this particular election, we feel that Mr. Flanagan and Mr. Pallett therefore demonstrate the most “buy-in”.  Because they have young children in the system, their commitment to the future of Arlington’s schools is genuine and tangible, and it will be for many years ahead.

 

As Jim Flanagan has pointed out, the School Committee is often viewed as being in “damage control”.  Finally, after a few difficult years, the clouds appear to be parting and it looks like the sun is shining again.  Now that things are generally back on course, while some would argue that it would be best to stick with the two incumbents, we honestly feel that the converse may be true.  There are some individuals who are very skilled at fixing problems.  We believe the incumbents helped to do just that.  We also believe that there are other individuals who are strong visionaries, who are skilled at building out from a strong foundation, and who can proactively solve issues before they arise.  Mr. Flanagan is one of those individuals, in our view.

 

Consistency can be good, but consistency may not always be the best policy.  In Jim Flanagan, we have someone forward-looking.  When the Editor of the Avocado ran for School Committee, his motto was, “Straight A’s for Arlington”.  One of those A’s stood for “Advance”.  We need leaders on the Committee who can divorce themselves from that which kept us back, and who know how to lead us on from this point.

 

Jim is both a visionary and a problem solver.  His profession requires this of him.  It also requires him to be a strong communicator and manager.  Jim is experienced at mediation and in bringing different people, even from different departments to consensus.  This is a trait that will no doubt prove very useful when balancing the concerns of teachers, parents, and students.   Given his background, we know he will take the time to study the issues carefully.  He does his homework.  In the LWV debate, he showed he had clearly read the DOR report that spoke to the possible consolidation of the town and school finances.  He even advised members of the audience to read it and directed them as to which pages they should specifically refer.  He is always eager to understand issues from every angle before making a decision.  He does not simply have his mind made up before anyone gets to speak.  He listens and remains open to adjusting his views should others present compelling and reasoned arguments.  While Jim will always rise to challenges and may at times challenge conventional wisdom, he will always keep the discourse civil and respectful with colleagues and stakeholders.  We may not always agree with Jim on every issue, and the same goes for Mr. Pallett.  However, we know that he will actually allow residents’ voices to be heard.  The School Committee needs a lot more of that.

 

Like Mr. Pallett, as we saw in our interview, Mr. Flanagan also shows potential for providing some levity at times on the School Committee.  Not only will he keep the debates positive, but also, he may at times be inspired by the Avocado and poke a little fun at himself and/or the Committee’s processes and procedures.  A modest fellow, Jim is not afraid to laugh at himself.

 

Jim is big on accountability.  That starts with himself.  He knows if he is elected he is accountable to all the stakeholders.   If he falls short of this, rather than make excuses, he will acknowledge his shortcomings, apologize, and make up for it.  This is part of what will make him successful in a role that requires him to provide strong oversight of the administration.

 

Finally, Jim has already led on educational issues here in town.  He has worked with neighbors, concerned parents, and town officials in trying to work out logical solutions to the daunting, but very important re-districting effort.  As this is sure to be one of the most important issues facing the School Committee in the next year or so, Jim is ready to hit the ground running, given his leadership and experience on this issue thus far.

 

As a lifelong Arlington resident, Jim wants to give back to the town.  Now that he has kids in the schools, he has a clear personal stake in our schools’ future, and that is good news for all of the stakeholders in Arlington’s school system.  Jim is an all-around good guy who is ready to work hard on behalf of all of Arlington’s kids.

 

For all these reasons and more, we are delighted to endorse Mr. Flanagan for School Committee.

The First Official Avocado Selectmen’s Debate

Hello and welcome to the very first Arlington Avocado debate!  We are very excited to bring you our first official debate sponsored by the Avocado!
We’ve seen the ACMI/Advocate Debate.  This past week, the League of Women Voters brought us Candidate’s Night.

 

————————————————————————————————–
But today, we are very fortunate to bring you a third debate in this election cycle.  This debate is brought to you in partnership with Hindsight 2020.
As is well-known from our interviews, the Avocado asks questions that are both serious and not so serious.  In this debate, our trademark style will be no different.  We will try to ask some of the most important questions on the minds of many voters, including many that both the Advocate and the League of Women Voters overlooked.  In addition, we will throw in a few fun questions for the candidates to ponder.

Because we do not yet have access to television broadcasting equipment, this debate will be recorded and the transcript will then be posted on the Arlington Avocado.  The candidates have joined us here at Jam n’ Java in Arlington Center.  We want to thank Jam n’ Java for providing us with the time and the space (as well as delicious coffee).  Remember, when you want great coffee and unique pastries, come on down to Jam n’ Java.  You’ll be glad you did.   It is now Friday, March 30th, 2012, just after 6 pm.  It is our hope to have the transcript of this debate posted later this weekend.

With us today, we are very proud to have Joseph Curro, Jr., Steve Byrne, Maria Romano, Joe Curran, and Bob Tosi.  All five candidates are seeking one of two open seats on the Board of Selectmen.  Joseph Curro is a current School Committee member who has served for the past four years.  He has a distinguished track record, having worked on behalf of Arlington residents in various capacities.  Steve Byrne is a life-long Arlington resident who currently works on Beacon Hill as a legislative aide.  He has also worked on several high profile political campaigns both here in Massachusetts and in Connecticut.  Maria Romano is no stranger to running for office.  She is a New Yorker by birth, but she has called Arlington home for many years.  She owns her own company and she has been a vocal advocate on behalf of her friends and neighbors in East Arlington.  She was elected to Town Meeting last year.  Joe Curran, not to be confused with Joe Curro, also served on the School Committee with Mr. Curro.  Mr. Curran ran for Selectman last year and therefore cycled off of the School Committee, where he had served for four years, having been elected twice.  Mr. Curran, a life-long resident of Arlington, is a coach and a teacher.  Welcome, Joe.

And finally, we have Mr. Bob Tosi.  Like Mr. Curran, he is also a lifelong Arlington resident.  He is a Town Meeting member who has served on a variety of different boards and commissions here in town, including the Council on Aging, among others.

The format this evening is fairly simple.  Though our time is very limited, we plan to give each candidate at least a one minute opening statement.  If time permits, we will try to ask up to three questions for each candidate to answer.  Depending on the remaining time, we hope to get to a brief closing statement from all of the candidates.
By random drawing, we picked names out of a hat.  As such, it looks like Mr. Curro will be first to provide us with his opening remarks.  Without further ado, the floor is yours, Mr. Curro.

CURRO:  Thank you very much, Kurt.  I want to thank the Arlington Avocado and Jam n’ Java for hosting this very unique candidates forum.  If you do not already know me by now, my name is Joe Curro – people who know me call me Joe with the “O” and I am running for a seat on the Board of Selectmen.  We are very privileged this year to have five great candidates for the Board.  One candidate has served his town on a number of boards and commissions.  Another has been very passionate about issues impacting her neighborhood.  We also have someone who served with me on the School Committee, who is a lifelong resident and cares very much about his hometown.  Finally, we have another lifelong resident, who though he is just 24, has already gained immeasurable experience as a legislative aide.  As for me, I bring a little bit of all of that.

AVOCADO:  Uh…I’m sorry, but we are out of time.  I’m afraid we’re going to have to cut you off there, Mr. Curro.  As you know, our time was a bit limited tonight.   Once again, I want to thank all the candidates for coming out tonight and sharing with all of us a little bit more about why they are running.  This has truly, I think, given us a lot more insight into your way of thinking and it will help voters make an informed decision.

Remember, the Annual Town Election is Tuesday, April 10.  It’s not Saturday.  I know traditionally it’s been on Saturday, but mark your calendars…it’s Tuesday, April 10.

Regardless of for whom you vote, please make sure you get out there and vote.  Also, next week, look out for the Avocado’s very first School Committee debate.

Until then, for the Arlington Avocado, I’m Kurt Fusaris.
Have a wonderful April Fool’s Day!

Avocado Interviews: Steve Byrne (Board of Selectman Candidate)

We now turn our attention to the second of five candidates seeking a seat on the Board of Selectmen: Steve Byrne.  We want to point out that we have extended interview invitations to the other three candidates.  As of yet, we have not heard back from Bob Tosi or Joseph Curran.  To be fair, we did hear back from Maria Romano, but she respectfully declined an interview.

 
Steve Byrne is a life-long Arlington resident.  He is a 24-year old legislative aide on Beacon Hill.  He is also a member of Town Meeting.  He has worked on several political campaigns, both here and in the state of Connecticut.  Go Huskies!   Sorry, we still have NCAA basketball on our minds, even though UConn was one and done this year.
So on with the interview…

1. Why are you running for Selectman? Why now?  

BYRNE:  I wasn’t telling anyone, but the actual reason I’ve decided to run, is that I heard Marie Krepelka has the best candy in town and I’m told that Selectmen always get first dibs.    How could I resist?

2. Having worked in the legislature, how will you use that experience on the Board? If Sean, Ken, and Will don’t cooperate with the Board, are you prepared to beat them with an avocado and/or throw guacamole at them?

BYRNE:  Avocado.  Guacamole.  Pie plates with shaving cream.  Whatever it takes.  Actually, I’m fortunate to have great relationships with our Legislators and I hope my knowledge of the legislative system will be a way of assisting them.

3. You have spent a lot of time campaigning for candidates from my home state of Connecticut. What have you learned from that experience that you can use on the Board?

BYRNE:  I don’t know if I can use it on the Board, but I did learn to appreciate the need for a good night’s sleep.  Staying at rural independent motels on remote highways while jumping from area to area on campaign stops is not conducive to a restful night.  But in truth, the experience I did gain while listening to a wide variety of constituent concerns and working out solutions for our candidates and residents is an immeasurable experience for the job as a Selectman in the Town of Arlington.  I look forward to assisting Arlington residents with their wide variety of concerns.

4. Are you happy that Joe Lieberman will finally be gone after this year?

BYRNE:  It will be interesting to see who throws their hat in the ring to try to replace him…

5. Are you the Ned Lamont of Arlington politics? How are you similar? How are you different from Ned?

BYRNE:  Ned Lamont is one of the nicest people I’ve had the privilege to work for.  He’d always make sure to hear what the field organizers and campaign volunteers had to say.  He was a hands-on, frontline, very positive styled candidate, something I hope I’ve been as well.  I am hopeful that I will be different from Mr. Lamont by winning a seat on the Board of Selectmen on April 10th.

6. What are your plans for addressing the proposed MBTA fare hikes and/or service cuts? What would you recommend if such cuts or fare hikes were to occur?

BYRNE:  The MBTA announced their rate hikes this week.  Although, I’m not particularly happy with the 23% increase the plan does preserve Arlington’s present services.  Going forward pressure needs to be maintained on MBTA’s management team to better control their costs.  As an alternative I may subscribe to the Hubway Bicycle program.

7. What’s with the boring green and white sign? Why green? You do realize Arlington’s colors are maroon and white, right?

BYRNE:  Boring?  Our signs stick out like sore thumbs on crowded corners!  Being of Irish descent it seemed a natural, not to mention avocado’s are green.  In honesty, this campaign is based on our future of sustainability and enhancement of green initiatives.  The color seemed a natural!

8. You talk about wanting to increase our commercial tax base. How do you propose to increase the tax base in Arlington? Annie LaCourt argued with me a couple of years ago that it could not be done. Can you prove her incorrect?

BYRNE:  I think anyone would have a hard time proving Annie wrong with any of her passions.  She’s been a truly dedicated public servant whose intelligence and work ethic I admire.
Increasing our commercial tax base is a long-term goal but in the very near future Arlington will have the opportunity to update our zoning bylaws with a carefully laid out well overdue Master Plan that will adapt our zoning districts, adjust density and dimensional regulations, parking requirements and make other recommendations to help present Arlington as the perfect location for our areas high-tech, sustainable companies that employ so many of our residents.  Coupled with our new Economic Development Coordinator position we will be in a great position to attract appropriate new businesses, while increasing our commercial tax base without affecting our residential community.

9. Who will get more votes…you or Joe Curro?

BYRNE:  If I’m fortunate to earn enough votes to gain one of the two seats available, that’s good enough for me.

10. What are your favorite things about Arlington? Where do you like to hang out?

BYRNE:  My favorite things about Arlington are our parks; restaurants and our biggest asset, the people of Arlington.  During the campaign I’ve had opportunity to walk many of the neighborhoods, going door to door; seeking residents concerns and opinions, the response has been awesome.  My favorite place to hang out is on a nice day sitting in centerfield at Summer St. Playground with my dad watching my younger brother play baseball.  It doesn’t get much better than that.

11. For all the eligible single ladies out there, do you have a girlfriend? And how will you have time for a girlfriend when you’re on the Board of Selectmen?

BYRNE:  I do have a girlfriend and so far she’s been 100% supportive of this campaign, and if I’m elected, I hope she doesn’t change her support.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Talk about Byrne baby Byrne!

One thing’s for sure…he’s not nearly as long-winded as Joe Curro.

We want to know exactly what kind of candy Marie Krepelka has on offer.  Jim Flanagan said he’s running for School Committee in part because he looks forward to the donuts that Jud Pierce brings to some meetings.  That’s a hard call.  Candy or donuts.  So if you prefer candy, you run for Selectman and if you like donuts, you seek out a position on the School Committee?

In dealing with our legislators, if Mr. Byrne requires any avocados or guacamole, he knows where to turn.  Incidentally, perhaps his signs are green because that is the color of pears.  Indeed, the German word for pear is “birne”.  That’s very similar to Byrne.

If he really wanted to run a “green” campaign, he shouldn’t have any signs at all.  He could also save a lot of money on all those mailings.

I’m sure all the single ladies are disappointed to hear that Mr. Byrne is spoken for.  Mr. Byrne often talks about wanting to live in Arlington indefinitely.  He wants to one day raise a family here.  This is noble.  One question we neglected to ask was: what would he do to encourage more transients (defined as single professionals who have lived in Arlington between 4 and 6 years) to consider staying in Arlington long-term?  In other words, how do you encourage them to stay in Arlington, and not to settle down in Lexington, Wellesley, or other surrounding communities? – where the grass may appear to be a bit greener right now.

We also neglected to ask whether the Board of Selectmen will be something that he hopes to serve on for the long-haul or if instead, he views it as a stepping stone to higher office.   We already know he works on Beacon Hill and that he’s worked on some higher profile campaigns.  Does Mr. Byrne hope to follow in Sean Garballey’s footsteps and be Arlington’s next boy wonder?  Or will he prefer to be more like Batman…and stay committed and dedicated to helping the good people of Arlington right here in town, where he would be closest to them…ready to answer the Byrne signal whenever residents have concerns or issues.

Only time will tell.