Tan and Bald, vs. Pale and Curly

Dear Readers,

If you would like to add a Takoma Park election essay of your own to this blog (rather than a comment), send it to me at granolapark@yahoo.com, and I will publish it. You can choose to be anonymous or not.

One of the biggest problems baby boomers have is admitting that they are no longer young. This denial may have an effect on the mayoral vote, since the majority of voters are middle-age homeowners. Will voters have difficulty admitting they are "going bald?" Challenger Seth Grimes would be the least hirsute mayor we've had since Sammie Abbott, and he was safely of the older generation.

Judging by the number of yard signs around town, the answer is "no." Perhaps he negates his “streamlined” hairline by being so lean and fit. He must get some regular exercise, and judging from his tan, he gets it outdoors. Kathy Porter, though she possesses an impressive headfull of curly hair, looks pasty white by comparison. It's one thing to look tan, rested, and ready, but the contrast between the working mayor and the challenger leads one to wonder if this new guy is up for the obligations, responsibilities and worries that make Kathy look like she hasn't seen sunshine for 4 terms.

Lean is one thing, mean is another. I have to say a word or two about how Seth comes across. I emphasize that this is just based on his public appearances, not from knowing him personally.

It's a little worrisome. I'd certainly be worried if I were a city employee, listening to Seth's clipped descriptions of how he's going to whip the city staff into shape and change the managerial style of city hall. When dealing with any person who spends most of his or her time complaining about how other people haven't done their job right, listing all their mistakes and flaws, listeners wonder what happens when the complainer turns his attention to them.

Maybe its the fact that he works with computers, but Seth seems a bit machinelike himself - an efficient machine, I'll grant you, but he comes off as a bit cut-and-dry, possibly imperious and potentially ruthless. Again, I emphasize this is just the impression I got.

I question how patient such a person will be with citizen comments at city council meetings. Seth has vowed to zip through city council meeting agendas more efficiently than the current mayor does. How is he going to react to long-winded critical citizen remarks? Will he install a trap door under the citizen-comment podium? A giant mallet suspended above it?

I can't see him doing what Kathy does. She slips into neutral mode, and even when the citizen is unloading nasty criticisms directed personally at her, she sits as calmly and inexpressively as the folks who take cranky calls on CSPAN. She nods her head, says something like "ok, I hear your concerns." and, much like she does with Seth's criticisms, she walks through the events that led to the decision or situation being criticized and leaves most people thinking, "oh, that makes sense when you consider how it came about."

At the candidate forum Kathy seemed defensive but ready with a patient, calm explanation of how things ended up the way they did, which, without fireworks, takes the sand out of Seth's criticism. For instance, Seth makes much of the city paying "$327,000 more than the $423,000 budgeted for legal services" for a 4 year period as an example of mismanagement and profligate spending. Kathy explains that that due to the nature of legal services, it is impossible to predict an exact budget for them. Spending will vary depending on the legal needs of the city. A city can predict what it's road maintenance costs will be, but not whether it will get sued or not. This is, Kathy says, typical of most municipalities.

Yes, it all looks bad when one lists the problems, as Seth does. But, Seth wasn't there. It's easy to second-guess a bad outcome, and to cast blame and neglect in hindsight. Its another thing to have to deal with the situation face-to-face and make decisions in real time based on the information at hand at the time.

I don't mean to make Kathy look so good, though. I hear over and over from residents that, yeah, she does a competent, sometimes even terrific, job, but . . . she just just doesn't have the fire and vision that people would like to see. I heard one person complain that she is merely reactive - she waits for stuff to happen: whether the catalyst is outside commercial interests or citizen activism. Be it Metro development, hospital expansion, the community center,r or citizen's committee recommendations - as it comes up, she deals with it or facilitates it. She doesn't seem to have a program, except for dealing with it as it is served onto her plate. With a tiny little fork.

Even as I write this I see myself headed for trouble going down this path. After all, she's elected to represent the city's people so what else should she do but what she's asked to by the citizens? This is what the Abbott Revolutionaries discovered. Once in office they discovered the job was mostly about responding to constituent requests like installing stop signs and speed bumps. Some revolution.

Kathy doesn't always come through for citizens, though. I do know that she's made some citizens genuinely angry with her for NOT doing what they asked. And, she sometimes seems to wriggle out of some citizen requests by going through the basic motions on their behalf but not really fighting for them. These are criticisms I've heard, but I don't have any specific examples.

Seth doesn't exactly have a visionary program himself. His website indicates that the issues he speaks to are, essentially, poll-driven. They are based, he says, on the citizen concerns he's heard voiced in conversations he's conducted over the last 6 months.

I hope, reader, that you also read the comments from the last entry. A Grimes supporter put his finger on the crux of the campaign. "Kathy gives the impression ( may be false ) its not "that" broken[,] let[‘]s plug along ahead."

The Pro-Cons see the city as "broken". The Moderates don't see it as broken, and that's the bottom line of this election.

Basically, all the "fixes" proposed by Pro-Cons, Sustainable Takoma, the TASDI committee, and others - such as looking into whether the county would provide as good service for some things the city provides, Kathy says she's working on, or open to working on. It's not like she refuses to listen to this stuff. But, since she won't admit it's broken, she'll continue to raise the ire of the Pro-Cons.

Seems to me that in the natural order of things municipal, issues come up (crime, cost-overruns, development, and so forth), elected officials respond, and the process to officially deal with these issues is fairly slow since it involves studies, citizen input, etc. It's easy to stand on the sidelines and shout "you should have seen this coming, the system is broken!".

This is what bothers me about the Pro-Cons. I hear a whole lot of angry rhetoric that appeals to people's emotions and discontent, but when you look at the complaints they raise, most of them are "gottchas" - incidents that look bad when described in a certain way without the full story.


Readers, some of you are wasting time trying to guess my identity. I'm not going to play the game. The focus here should be on the election. My (and your, if you so choose) anonymity allows us to say what’s on our minds. The purpose of this “blog” grows out of the assumption that many people are in the same place I am - not entirely sure who to vote for (or perhaps leaning slightly one way or the other). By voicing my thoughts I hope to able to assist others in thinking though their vote. I don't seek to influence the way anyone votes, but I hope to get people thinking - and I hope you share your own thoughts and information. Please note that you can leave comments anonymously, yourself. I admit I look forward to making smart-alecky remarks, but I will not be abusive. I hope you won't be, either.

--Gilbert