Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Election Day Coverage
What a difference a year makes... Last year I had to wait in line at 7:15 AM, this time I was alone in the polling place with the polling volunteers/officials. You might want to remind like minded friends and neighbors to vote. (ie every vote may count...)
After Christine's compelling endorsement, I ended up voting for Sue Stavenau instead of Jim Oathout. I liked Sue's energy in the candidate forum and if she could pass Christine's District knowledge filter/test, she'll make a great board member.
Finally, I drove by Pilgrim Lane Elementary to confirm a rumor I had heard. Cruel irony is playing out there as PLE is the polling place for the PLE community !!! I am guessing that will definitely affect their vote as they are physically reminded that the incumbents closed their school. I wonder if it is the same for Sunny Hollow???
Any news during the day or last minute endorsements are welcome !!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
I'm glad to see people interested in Sue Stavenau. I was thinking of voting for her but was doubting myself since no one else had mentioned her.
I'm glad to see others are interested in Sue as well. My neighbor also sent an email indicating her support of Sue and Tom Walsh.
I don't think Sunny Hollow was ever a voting site, but yes, Pilgrim Lane was and still is. It was harder than I expected to go in there to vote, and very ironic, of course.
It's early but it appears as though there isn't a mandate and people are not looking for a change in leadership. That is what I see so far. Also, numbers seem low which is good for incumbents.
DJ
Wow !!! Maybe the voters are ready for a capital levy then...
I figured the vote no'ers and the don't close my school contingent would have shown up... Given all the comments that were made.
Where are you seeing these early results?
District web site has the 5 minute updates from SOS website.
Incumbents are all at about 16% right now. Mark is just under 10, Andrew and I are next at 7.5 or so.
DJ
Found it. Thanks !!!
9:26 PM - expect Andrew and Jim to jump some more as north crystal results come in.
Nothing from PLE yet? Golden Valley trending huge for incumbents. They are in unless something massive changes I think.
DJ
9:33 PM - So much for PLE being angry about the school being closed!!! We have a union sweep tonight folks.
DJ
According to my simple math:
- 15,771 votes cast
- therefore ~3,950 voted
- meaning <6% of citizens even showed up..
Unfortunately this was worse than I predicted... I am not sure how to get citizens engaged in our community...
As for the winners, they should make a solid and cohesive board. And overall they have done a good job given the challenges RAS has faced. The only thing I fear is "group think" and "blind spots".
As for the contenders, thank you for caring enough and taking the time to run for the board !!! This is the kind of involvement that will help our community thrive !!!!
Low turnout always favors the incumbents. I thought this year might be different. Maybe close to 10% if we were lucky. Maybe there were too many people on the ballot and that splintered votes of any anti-incumbent movement? If a movement even existed.
Personally, time to put this disappointment behind me and move on. Thanks everyone.
DJ
Well, DJ, while I'm happy that Mark was elected, I'm very disappointed that you didn't win.
It appears that the union endorsement means a lot. Mark campaigned hard-- I know he did a lot of door knocking and passed out fliers at a lot of functions, but I'm sure there are people who also figured the teachers would know best and vote for that slate.
I think not having a primary was key for the incumbents. That's unfortunate. I wish I had paid more attention to that decision.
Voter turnout was extremely high at Pilgrim Lane-- far higher than the other precincts. But unfortunately the incumbents won even there. (Though Mark had more votes than Patsy.) DJ, it looks like you had your highest numbers there outside of your base of Crystal.
Linda and Patsy also had the backing of a lot of DFL loyal who went out there to vote, even though they don't follow school issues. (That's what Mark found from doorknocking at homes with their signs.)
In two years, we should push for a primary, and any candidates are going to have to campaign very hard throughout the district if they want to overtake the incumbents. I can't see any of those three not running again.
Of course, by then, these facility issues will already be decided. (At least, you would think that they would be, but given this district...)
How about if the 4 that won agree to a 3 year term. That would save 281 about 15k in fees.
[quote]How about if the 4 that won agree to a 3 year term. That would save 281 about 15k in fees.[/quote]
Fees as in their yearly pay of the four board members? You would still have that cost - salary will be static ever year at 7 members?
Plus they don't get to agree to that unless you all step down at the start of year 4...which would be funny because I have no clue what the board would do as by-laws say less than a year = appoitment.
DJ
Mark meant that if the newly elected members agree to a 3 year term, the next election would fall on an even year, when there would already be an election taking place. The school district incurs an extra $15000 in election costs by holding the school board elections in odd numbered years, because it is the only election taking place and can't share costs.
I think a better idea would be for the three incumbents up for re-election in 2011 to agree to shorten their terms and have an election in 2010!
Ah, but I guess the newly elected would also have to agree to three year terms, in order to get all of the future elections to even years.
I'm going to be the contrarian here. I like odd year elections, reserved for local offices only, up to the County level, including all referendums, charter amendments, etc.
$15,000 vs $150 million budgets doesn't excite me, worth the money if it gives us extra, calmer time to consider the candidates and issues.
Finally, in Minnesota's case, the Legislature's odd year sessions set the school funding, so odd year elections with candidates campaigning in response seems like good timing.
I wonder what "Instant Runoff Voting" might have wrought. Just wondering. Personally, I think it's unconstitutional.
Oh, that makes more sense. I think I'm with Speed on this one. Problem with even year elections is typically you get tons of people just there to vote for the "big" stuff and then just guess on the "small" stuff.
DJ
Post a Comment