I've never held much stock in political endorsements, but when I read the Concord Monitor this morning I was absolutely stunned. Experience seems to be the key word with the Monitor, but let's take a look at Ward 1, in which the Monitor endorses Brent Todd. They claim he is the better candidate because he is a member of five committees that work with the City Council, and that gives him the "experience" to do a better job. The Monitor endorsed Adam Czarkowski in the last election over the very experienced incumbent councilor Liz Blanchard. Liz Blanchard endorsed Brent Todd in this election. This makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Apparently what the Monitor wants is a rubber stamp on the council willing to keep the status quo and not rock the boat as it were. As a resident of Ward 1, I want a councilor who cares more about the people he represents than his stature in the community. Brent Todd will serve the community well on his five committees, but Adam Czarkowski will serve the people of that community far better as their City Councilor. In Ward 2 the Monitor chose the lesser of two evils apparently, pointing out that Alan Herschlag has run and lost four times, and that Tim Bauman admits to having a lot to learn. I can only assume from this that the Monitor is afraid of change and decided to go with the known commodity despite never having endorsed him in four other tries. I would have no problem working with either of these candidates on the council, and I believe the voters of Ward 2 would have been better served by the Monitor to just say this one should be up to the voters. (As they ALL should be.) Again in Ward 4, the Monitor chooses against its own argument by endorsing Byron Champlin. Personally, I think this a good choice in this ward, but the logic behind the Monitor making this choice is confusing at best. Councilor DelloIacono is an incumbent Councilor at Large who felt he could better serve the constituency of his home ward by becoming their Ward 4 councilor. You can't get much more experienced than that, so if experience is the qualifier, why this choice? Could it be that Mr. Champlin sits on the Greater Concord Chamber of Commerce and its Creative Concord Committee? Are we seeing a pattern here? In Ward 3 the Monitor relies on Jan McClure's five terms of experience over Jenifer Kretovic's one term. The Monitor states that Councilor McClure has given the voters no reason to throw her out, yet I don't believe Councilor DelloIacono has either, but the Monitor will throw him under the bus for Mr. Champlin. The Monitor's logic behind these choices makes no sense whatsoever other than the obvious connection between sitting on committees that the Monitor supports. Finally, Ward 8. Gail Matson over Dennis Soucy? Why, because she works for the state? Let's face it, the Monitor doesn't think Mr. Soucy has the intelligence to be on the council. The Monitor doesn't think a lot of the candidates, including myself, have the smarts to be on the council. It's not like the Monitor doesn't make mistakes, underestimating any candidate is a very big mistake. Also, I could not believe what was printed in the paper about this race. The complete and utter evisceration of Councilor Dick Patten was uncalled for, unnecessary and extremely illogical. The Monitor dares to, in their view, demand he steps down due to his "stunning ignorance of the limits of his authority" in regards to calling a police officer in regards to a ticket issued to a friend, yet endorses Fred Keach, a sitting councilor when he was arrested for drunk driving just two years ago, with two kids in his car, and then hired a lawyer to keep the police record out of the Monitor, as the best choice for Councilor at Large? Are you serious? It's no wonder people in this city are sick of politics and so apathetic. The people of the City of Concord should be glad they do, in fact, have a choice this year other than a slew of uncontested seats held by members of all of the city's special interest groups. The Concord Monitor should be ashamed of itself. The editorial board has shown its true colors, and they are not very pretty. To all my fellow candidates, I wish you good luck - may the best person win. As the Monitor stated, we can now all go to the polls on Tuesday and "happily" vote, hopefully for the candidates of OUR choice, not theirs.
