Background: Mods, Revs, and Pro-Cons

Takoma Park politics seem bizarre to outsiders. That's because when outsiders compare the political positions of TP politicians with those of politicians in the rest of the country (excepting probably Berkley and other "liberal/progressive enclaves") ours seem pretty extreme. But, no, our politics are just like everyone else's in the sense that here are camps, factions, those in power and those who aren't, and they all act pretty much the same as they do anywhere else.

Here we've had one particular camp that's been in power since Stephen J Del Giudice was elected back in 1985 (can it be twenty years ago?!). I call that camp the Moderates. They unseated the Revolutionaries, the camp one former council-member calls "The Disloyal Opposition". This is the group of radical activists, led by the late mayor Sammie Abbott and a slate of radical city council candidates who swept into power in the early 80s. It really was a revolution, they seized control of the city from the conservative Seventh Day Adventists who had been running it for at least a couple of generations. The SDA promptly moved their world headquarters out of town, a sea-change of a magnitude that Takoma Park is not likely to see again for awhile, certainly not in this election.

The Revolutionaries promptly started factionalizing and in-fighting as soon as they gained office. They managed to lose the mayoral office because Sammie Abbott did things that some say were justified in the cause of his radical agenda, others say were abuses of power. The Revolutionaries have never quite gotten over the fact that they lost the city to the Moderates over this. On occasion they have tried to get it back, but each election shows how, even though this is the group that gave Takoma Park its reputation, their brand of politics is increasingly unpopular. The Moderates have won each mayoral election for the past 10 terms, starting with Stephen Del Giudice, then Ed Sharp, now Kathy.

The majority just doesn't want a Sammie Abbott-type rabble-rouser leading the city, even though Sammie was more responsible than just about anyone else for shaping the city's current image as a progressive, activist enclave (oh, that E-word again).

The Moderates drive the Revolutionaries crazy, as you might expect. The Revolutionaries fought for a decade to shape the city into a radical [e-word], only to see the Moderates horn in and with no more effort than buying homes, moving in, and voting, turn the city into an [e-word] for liberal homeowners with "peace" bumper-stickers on their gas-guzzling SUV's, the sort of people who say they "love Tree City" but get incensed when they discover the tree ordinance applies to them, too. These are people who are pleased to live in a city with a liberal cache, but are ambivalent about the city's past radical postures. They just want a City that provides services and a family-friendly small-town atmosphere - and that's what the Moderate Ed Sharp and Kathy Porter provided. If the services caused taxes to go up a bit, well, that's fine, they wanted those services and that's what taxes are for. If there were no radical programs coming out of the Mayor's office, that's fine too, as long as residents can get new curbs and plenty of speed-bumps on their streets, the Moderate camp doesn't care. The big issues were unifying the city into one county and saving the fire house, and had been since the Abbott days, but the Moderates went about it quietly, building relationships with the politicians who could make those things happen. No big Abbott-style confrontations, mass demonstrations, and public denouncements of other politicians.

How annoying - if you happen to be a Revolutionary.

And even more annoying how Mayor Porter easily swept to victory again and again, gathering endorsements from every organization in town, from other elected officials, and from influential citizens. Many of these endorsements even came from the Revolutionaries - people who admitted that while it would be nice to have a mayor who lived up the Takoma Park's reputation, Kathy knows how to get things accomplished. Her Revolutionary opponents, while sufficiently radical, seemed more than a little weak as administrators.

In the last few years however, we have seen the growth of a new faction. They hold a very odd position, considering local politics. They rail against excess spending and high taxes like traditional conservative Republicans would, yet they support liberal causes as much if not more-so than traditional progressive Democrats. In fact their candidate Seth Grimes says that as mayor he would be more pro-active in pursuing an environmental agenda for the city than Kathy has been. One of this faction's criticism of the Community Center construction, besides the cost overruns and mismanagement, is that the building is not sufficiently "green."

So the opposition to the mayor comes not from the Revolutionary left this time, its from the . . . . well, it's from the right and left - these people are progressive fiscal conservatives. Scratch your head over that one for while, especially when you consider that these Pro-Cons are attacking Kathy for being a tax-and-spend moderate. Kind of bends your mind in donut shapes, doesn't it?

Can the Pro-Cons pull it off, or are they destined to become outsider fist-shakers like the Revolutionaries? There are a lot of Porter loyalists out there. She has supportive quotes on her website from movers and shakers in the community, crowned with an endorsement from Tom Perez, County Council President. Bruce Williams is supporting her - he's the city council representative from Ward 3, traditionally the ward that turns out the most voters. Of course, Williams is unopposed, which may thin out that ward's vote. Look to Ward 2, the only ward in which there is a contested seat, for a big number of votes. And, that just happens to be Kathy's ward. Play the Jaws theme for Seth!

But, Kathy is swimming with the sharks herself these days - and she's bleeding in the water, due to wounds inflicted by the community center cost overruns. She acts wounded, too. Her campaign still doesn't seem to be in full swing, when Seth has been up and running since early October. His signs have been posted for at least a week, her's are just starting to appear and so far they are vastly outnumbered. Seth's very professional-looking website has been up for ages, [www.sethgrimes.com] while Kathy's just came online - a couple of weeks after she provided the url on her literature. Her's [www.kathyporterformayor.com] is pretty minimal compared to Seth', but then you'd expect a disparity, since websites and computers are Seth's business.

OK, enough background and horse-race speculation. Next time I'll write more on the candidate's positions, personalities, and campaigns (as I see them.

Meanwhile all of Seth's signs that he put out so early are getting soaked in tonight's downpour. I hope he got waterproof ones.

--Gilbert