Mar 232019

Two guys are on a safari in eastern Africa, and in the distance they see a tiger; more importantly the tiger sees them. The first guy reaches into his backpack for his running shoes and puts them on. The second guy says, ‘you’re not going to outrun that tiger’. The first guy says, ‘I don’t have to. I just have to outrun you’.

Eleven candidates are running for four open seats on the city council. It’s not important who gets the most votes other than bragging rights. What is important is who gets the 4th and 5th most votes, because 4th most will be a city council member, and 5th most will be history.

During the last three city council elections, the difference between the last candidate voted in, and the first candidate not getting elected was just a few votes. In 2013 the candidate coming in 5th place and not getting elected, lost by just 129 votes from getting elected to city council. Current councilman Kevin Coyne remembers it well, because he is the one who came in 5th place losing by just 129 votes. In 2015 the difference between last in and first out was 161 votes. And in 2017 the last person-in coming in 4th place was current councilman John Krummen with 5,193 votes, while 5th place finisher Julie Berkowicz had 5,103 votes, falling 90 votes short of getting elected to the city council.

The point is, there is little difference between last in and first out. A few more handshakes, or a few more yard signs, or a huge bump from an endorsement can make the difference.

On March 28th, Watchdog will be endorsing a mayoral candidate, followed by the endorsement of four city council candidates on March 31st. For each of the last three elections Watchdog’s readership has skyrocketed during the month of March. Elections have a way of doing that.

  3 Responses to “Last In, First Out”

  1. It’s sad that a website claiming to be a “watchdog” hasn’t touched the news of Chirico’s conflict of interest regarding Central Park place and other developments.

    Your readership may boom, but your credibility is damaged.

    • Credibility is a matter of opinion dependent upon which side of the issue one is on and thus can vary, whereas ‘readership’ is a rock-solid metric. Conflict of interest is open to interpretation thereby making everything a possible conflict of interest.

    • Claimed conflict of interest.

      It is worth noting that CBS which interviewed Chirico twice about this possible conflict of interest, did not make a statement concluding such a conflict exists. CBS has dropped the matter and is not investigating it further.

      In fact the only reason they did a second interview is because Chirico called them to correct is original statement after his family informed him about Great Western Flooring being approached by a Realtor to provide a bid. Otherwise the story would have end with just the first interview.

      The City Attorney has looked in this and publicly stated no conflict of interest exist. And Chirico even recused himself from the discuss and voting on this development during the last council meeting just to make sure there was no appearance of undue influence on the council vote regarding this development.

 Leave a Reply