What's Going On Out There?

Chime in and let us know what's going on at your polling place. It's gonna be busy.

A 3A voter early on said he was number 135. Mrs. Save Fitchburg went around 8:15 in 3A, and was number 279. Wow. A 4B voter reported being 148 at about 9 a.m.

I think I'll be standing in a line tonight when a go. What was going on when you voted today?

Election Day Roundup

It's primary election day, although there's not much else on the ballot but the state Senate race. That should be enough to motivate people to get out and vote, but I'd be surprised if 5,000 voted. Heck, 4,000 might be a good number. Seems like people are snoozing through this one.

Anyway, I won't be in Fitchburg all day, and will be voting tonight. When you hit your local polling place, note what number your machine is at, and give any other details from what you see at the polls.

How to Be a Candidate

Hoping to tap into the momentum of last fall's elections, a handful of folks led by new School Committee member Sally Cragin and City Council candidate Shaun Cormier are holding a candidate development workshop this Saturday.

The details are all below in the press release from Cragin. This is a fairly interesting development on two fronts -- it would be intriguing to see how many people are not only intersted in running for office but are thinking two years ahead, and it would be a little bizarre if someone Cragin or Cormier helped along ended up booting them out of office in the end.

Anyway, here are the details. If you're interested in running, or know someone who is, this is probably a good place to start.



Candidate Development Workshop With Keynote speaker Fitchburg Mayor Lisa Wong

FITCHBURG - A free Candidate Development Workshop will be held at
Fitchburg Public Library on Saturday, January 19 at 2 p.m. with
keynote speaker Fitchburg Mayor Lisa Wong, and refreshments provided
by Hannaford's Supermarkets and Wass-Arthur Sign. Coordinator and
current School Committee member Sally Cragin explains, "This workshop
is for residents who are interested in learning more about serving
the public as an elected or appointed
official." Co-Coordinator and Former Councilor At-Large Candidate
Shaun Cormier tells "This is a"How to Run For Public Office 101, a
great learning experience for anyone thinking of getting involved in
local government."
Topics will include, how to "take out papers" to get your name on the
ballot, campaign tips and strategies; managing campaign finances
should you decide to have a "committee-to-elect," and creating
campaign literature, including brochures, informational flyers and
even websites. "We'll also talk about the "why" of running for office
and our panel of current and past elected and appointed officials can
answer questions and share their experience," says Cragin.
Mayor-elect Lisa Wong comments, "This past election brought out a
wide variety of voters who wanted to be involved in Fitchburg in many
different ways. I look forward to sharing my experiences to anyone
interested in local politics."
Candidate Development Workshop, Fitchburg Public Library, 610 Main
Street, Saturday, January 19, 2 p.m. FREE. For more information,
contact Sally Cragin at 978 407 6482 or Shaun Cormier at 978-340-7660.

About Last Night

Now that we've all had a chance to sleep on it (sort of), a few things from yesterday's fun and games:

First, let's not let the inevitability of it all take away from what Lisa Wong has done. She entered the race for mayor going up against an incumbent city councilor in Ted DeSalvatore who riled up an energized base, a long-time city councilor in Thomas Donnelly who had one of the best citywide organizations in Fitchburg politics, and three-term incumbent Dan Mylott, whose machine was probably even stronger than Donnelly's at the start. Mylott, of course, read the tea leaves and bowed out gracefully in August.

But Wong, who had never run for office in Fitchburg and has lived here for a relatively short time (especially compared to Donnelly), not only won, but won by a historic margin. On paper, this should have been much closer. Donnelly had run citywide five times in the past. He's been running citywide for 10 years. Wong did it for the first time. She won by a 3-1 margin. She found the formula in time for a preliminary election win that was surprising in her big numbers, and then she blew away all expectations in the general election yesterday.

For Wong, it was a perfect situation. The city was looking for aggressive change. She was THE change candidate in the crowd. She also proved herself to be a shrewd, smart and hard-working campaigner. She didn't make many mistakes -- and no big mistakes. She figured out a winning message and rode it home. Part of being successful in an election is knowing when it is your time. This was a great time for Wong to run, and she took full advantage of the opportunity.

This election was also the dawning of the New Fitchburg, make no mistake. For an establishment candidate to lose by 40-something points, it's clear a new era is at hand. The changes in Fitchburg -- both demographically and physically -- have been subtle in recent years, but subtlety went out the window yesterday, as New Fitchburg grabbed the city for itself.

Last night wasn't the culmination to just the Wong campaign's work, it was either the end game to the city's change and progress over the last few years, or the start of even more rapid change. The regional housing market has forced changes in Fitchburg in the last years, as new homeowners have staked the city as their home -- whether it was Ted DeSalvatore, a couple moving into Bridle Cross Estate or planning on moving into the Falls at Arden Mills or the Johnsonia, or me. At the same time, infrastructure changes have primed downtown for development, and some successes -- most notably recently Destare -- have started to find their way on Main Street.

This was a sea change that didn't register down the ballot, however, but part of that may have been in the fact that there were few Wong-like candidates on the rest of the ballot. Where else were there young, hard-working, dynamic candidates? Dean Tran may qualify, but he was running for re-election. Marcus DiNatale may qualify, but he's already a School Committee member, and a legacy of what is right now the city's most powerful political family. Shaun Cormier was young and energized, but maybe too young. He got his seasoning this year, and hopefully returns despite his low numbers. The only other "new Fitchburg" possibility came in the form of Kevin Starr, at 35 and with a young family, he qualifies.

Wong was given a powerful mandate by the voters last night, one that the rest of city government will have to acknowledge and respect as it moves forward. Whether she can use that mandate as a club on the City Council remains to be seen -- an unlikely way to do business, to be honest. But it gives her an initial clearance to do things her way.

With a big win comes big expectations. One of Wong's top political jobs in the early going may be to limit expectations. You can make the comparison to Deval Patrick, himself a mandated change candidate, who set high expectations, and has failed completely to meet them. Unfair? Perhaps, but it was a situation he created for himself.

Wong will have an easier time dealing with the City Council and government than Patrick does with the Legislature and state government, but voters didn't just vote for Lisa Wong yesterday. They voted for their dreams, visions and hopes for Fitchburg. If there are larger expectations for a new mayor to handle, I don't know what they are.

Twelve Hours to Glory

Fitchburg is at an interesting crossroads. While there is a lot of good things going on -- downtown development is moving forward (Kang Yu excluded), new housing is going up all around Route 2, a major tourist attraction is on the way (CoCo Key), and events like this past summer's Civic Days that packed the streets -- there's that silly little budget problem that just keeps getting bigger.

Today, voters get the chance to decide which path Fitchburg will follow. In just a few minutes, the polls will open (and stay open until 8 p.m.) as the city chooses its leadership for the next two years. But the decisions those people make might last a generation, even more, as a city beginning to rebound tries to consolidate its momentum.

So, obviously, go vote today.

And, follow the proceedings here and at the Fitchburg Pride website. We're going to brave the elements shortly and have a story and photos online this morning from the polls. Probably weather-related, as it's likely the story of the morning. (If you're the type who likes it dry, the rain should be over mid-afternoon, according to weather.com). We'll obviously have game-night coverage this evening. The Pride website was first with the winners in the preliminary, and we have every intention of trying to be first again tonight.

Here at Save Fitchburg, we'll be following the day the best we can, based on phone calls, e-mails and comments. Stop by and tell us what you see at the polls. Big crowd? Little crowd? Buzz around any candidates? Sneak a peek at the counter on your ballot box. Remember, the news of the big turnout during the preliminary was established pretty early on here last time. Let's do it again today. This post will be updated throughout the day, and this is the perfect spot to put in your comments. If you're on the ballot and want to schmooze for a few more votes, here's the time. And when it's all said and done, there will some anaylsis here late in the evening -- call it an election night nightcap, if you will.

And, finally, check out FATV from 7 to 9 p.m. I'll be on with a cast of thousands -- including some candidates -- as the results come in.

That's it for the promotion and the scene-setting. The game starts in about 10 minutes. Go get 'em.

Update, 9:05 a.m. -- You can read about today's election, with color and information from the early-morning activity, at the Fitchburg Pride website. Go right to the story through this link.

Predictions, Get Your Off-Base Predictions

Just in time for tomorrow's election, a set of predictions that will be totally meaningless at about 8:01 tomorrow night, if not sooner. Enjoy.

First, a few notes:

I'm not even gonna try to guess the School Committee races (like I should be tackling any of these, but whatever). It's not that I don't know the candidates, but I have no idea who's winning these things. Hard to get a sense of what the public is thinking on those.

Second, these aren't my favorites or even people who I'm voting for in a bunch of cases. They're just my predictions on who's going to win.

Here goes.

Turnout

Number: 6,000

Why: Actually, I think there's a chance it could be even lower.

I hear you saying, "Moron, 5,500 came out for the preliminary. You're an idiot." Yes, I am, but I'm an idiot who thinks the mayoral candidates in the preliminary pretty much maximized turnout. I don't think there too many more voters who are going to come out for down-ballot races, and I don't think the mayor's race is capturing a lot of new attention. So, there you go. I hope I'm surprised. And really, I probably should have learned my turnout lesson from the preliminary, but sometimes I need to be taught things twice.

Mayor

Winner: Lisa Wong

Why: Simply, the math tells us so. After blowing out opponent Tom Donnelly by 2,200 votes, Wong started the general election in the driver's seat, and she's done nothing to let go of the wheel.

Here's Donnelly's perfect storm: Wong voters are complacent after the big win, and don't show up. Homeowners revolt on the tax issue. The weather is absolutely terrible, and only real die-hard voters show up tomorrow (assuming, still, that he still owns the old-school crowd). You'd think Wong would be aware of the first, the tax issue doesn't seem to be polarizing (more on that in a minute), and the first part of the day should be rainy and cold, although getting better after noon, according to weather.com.

Donnelly has tried to bring it on home with the tax issue, but it's tough for him to get clear ground on this issue. Mostly, it's the fact that he voted consistently for the full 2.5 percent increases, and says now 2.5 percent is vital for the city. He's right, but it's tough to be the tax hard-liner when you support the full increase. Also, Wong says she'll make up any losses in rolling increases to 2.25 percent by bringing in new business. She says it so matter-of-factly, you just assume this is going to happen. Bringing in business to cover a $70,000 in property taxes (or $83,000 or $100,000), however, is no small thing. This is a fundamental part of the Wong candidacy: Bringing in new business. She's going to find some early success on that if she's mayor. Everything hinges on that, and it's easier said than done.

Second, I started coming around this morning on Wong's defensive/angry counter last Thursday. And here's why: She's 28 years old. Did any part of that performance come off as young, not ready for the situation, or intimidated? No. Never once in this campaign has Wong acted her age. It's really kind of amazing. And Thursday was part of that. She could have dismissed it or shrunk from the charges, but she responded forcefully. It took me four days to get here, but here I am.

Give Donnelly credit, despite the big task in front of him, he didn't quit, either through effort or dollars (that Weekend Mailer isn't cheap, y'all). He has driven hard to the end, but he came around the last turn with just too much ground to make up. His campaign has been talking up a late charge for the last few weeks now, but it needs the late charge to end all late charges. So, Wong's the prediction.

At-Large Council

Winners (in order, yes, I'm that bold): Dean Tran, Thomas Conry, Stephan Hay, Marcus DiNatale, Jay Cruz.

Why: Well, everyone likes Tran. He might not be everyone's top choice, but he seems like he's on everyone's top two or three or four. That's how you finish first in these things. Conry should be very strong. He might get caught by Hay and finish third to Hay's second, but for now, this seems about right.

I think DiNatale finds a way in. First, his name recognition will help. To say it doesn't is just silly. He's run a pretty good campaign, most notably an impressive performance in last week's debate. He might finish fifth instead of fourth -- maybe even third -- I think he's in the mix somewhere.

Cruz is a bit of a gamble in that fifth spot. He made a lot of waves with the dispatcher-police officer business, and turned off a lot of insiders. It wasn't his best moment. But it was a proactive moment, for better or worse. Also, based on the preliminary results, the electorate is looking for some change, and Cruz offers more change than some others on the ballot.

If Cruz is out, Annie DeMartino takes that spot. It's going to be close for DeMartino either way, like it was in 2005. But at the end of the day, I think voters are itching for change, and DeMartino gets lost in that wash a little bit. It's tough keeping her out of the top five, but there you go (Rachel, you may proceed with your launch sequence).

Rosemary Reynolds is in a similar position as DeMartino, but she's a non-incumbent former councilor looking for a way on. Considering, really, only spots four and five are probably in play, it's a tough nut to crack.

I really like Shaun Cormier a lot. He's a good guy who has worked hard and paid attention and probably deserves a better fate. But it's a tough, deep field, and he's going to probably have to take the loss. Hopefully he returns in two years. He and Patricia Carbone are two newcomers up against seven people who either are in office or have been in the past. Tough, tough nut to crack. If one of them end up top 5, it's the upset of the night.

Ward 1

Winner: Dave Clark

Why: Simply, Clark has put on a clinic in the last two years on how to be a ward councilor. Kevin Maynard wants his seat back, but Clark has given Ward 1 voters little reason -- perhaps no reason -- to vote against him.

Ward 4

Winner: Kevin Starr

Why: Starr and Steve Seney are locked in a pretty good battle in Ward 4 to take over for Ted DeSalvatore. This is a pretty tight race, but Starr gets the nod, if only because of the late news of Seney's business dealings and court dates, which have probably given voters pause right at the end.

Ward 5

Winner: Heads (or, Peter Allaire)

Why: Another tough one to figure, but I'm going with Allaire, and it might as well have been a coin toss. Honestly, no rhyme or reason for that one.

School Committee

Aw, hell with it. Here's two uninformed guesses. Why not at this point? Glenn Capone, Sally Cragin and John Chittick for the four-year seats. Although Bruce Marien might finish in front of Chittick. Why? Capone is a solid incumbent, Cragin is closely tied to Wong and her tidal wave, and Chittick has been running hard. I'll say James Reynolds for the two-year seat, but if you said Peter Stephens, I wouldn't argue.

There you go. Let's see how bad these are come tomorrow night. I'm guessing pretty bad.

About Last Night

Let's get right down to it: Last night's mayoral debate was the chippiest of the bunch, as Lisa Wong spent much of the night either angrily claiming Tom Donnelly didn't have his fact straight, or defending her positions.

The story of last night was Wong's aggressive defense/angry response to Donnelly -- particularly on taxes and her work at the Fitchburg Redevelopment Authority. Until last night, Wong seemed to float above the fray and the occassional jab thrown her way. She never, for example, go too fired up in the past when Donnelly all but scoffed at her and Ted DeSalvatore as being unworthy to run for mayor.

But last night, Wong fired back, and she did it with fire and anger. She said he was flat wrong on most points regarding the FRA and her tax stance. Oddly, somehow, Donnelly managed to stay out of the muck last night. Sure, the Weekend Mailer (now officially capitalized in all references) and his tax charges started all this, but last night he wasn't the aggressor, really. Which was kind of odd.

An interesting moment last night came when Wong asked Donnelly if the tax issue -- and the Weekend Mailer -- were his ideas or his campaigns (although she called them something not-so-nice that had "hired" in it). Donnelly candidly admitted that his campaign advisors pushed him to open up on the tax issue.

(A brief break to note: Donnelly has been very honest -- even perhaps to his detriment -- during this campaign. It wasn't the best answer in his interest to say his advisors pushed him on taxes. He said last week, and again last night, that Wong did a very good giving info to the council when she was at the FRA. Give the guy credit for doing the right thing.)

Wong noted last night that a slip of the tax levy to a 2.25 increase and a change in the tax shift would have saved homeowners money (remember, Donnelly advocates no change in the shift and the full 2.5 percent increase to keep money coming in). After the debate, one of Donnelly's paid staffers cruised over to note Wong had never proposed such a thing before and said she was backpedalling.

Maybe. Consider this from Thursday's Sentinel. "Wong said she believes more discussion is needed on changing the shift from 137 percent to 136 percent and lowering the yearly 2.5 percent increase." Maybe that was the first time she threw it out there, but she did kind of, sort of, mention it before Thursday's debate.

Outside of Wong's demeanor last night (and I'm not sure it hurt her. It was just very noticeable), the other big thing last night was the clear differences between these two. The taxes are one. Wong's desire for fast-track permitting and Donnelly's anti stance are stark. Donnelly's assurance that job cuts or union renegotiations must ASAP, and Wong's long-term financial view are very different. And then their fundamental campaign message.

Think back to the summer, when the campaigning was easy and people weren't paying much attention. Donnelly talked about his knowledge of city government and the city in general. Now, he's the guardian at the fiscal gate, the one person who can truly do what it's going to take to get the city back on the fiscal rails.

More striking is Wong. Back in the summer, she was about as wonky as you could get. In an interview with the Pride before the preliminary, she was discussing her desire to figure out how much it costs to fill a pothole and then create a system that maximizes efficiencies to fill potholes, instead of using the current less organized system. Makes sense, no doubt, but you didn't hear any of that last night.

Assuming a Wong victory, this race was locked down for her somewhere between Sept. 13 and Sept. 20.

At the Sept. 13 debate, Wong was in her full "goals-oriented" glory. She muddled through that debate -- as did the other three candidates. A week later, at the Sept. 20 debate, she had shifted into the vision and hope candidate, and blew the doors off the joint. That shift didn't earn her the blowout preliminary win by itself, but it went a long way toward cementing the deal for her -- particularly with the core activists and observers who attended and watched carefully.

Last night, when she wasn't fending off questions about her work and her plans, she stuck to the vision and hope message. While Team Donnelly continues to murmur about a late charge, the sheer size of the deficit makes it a tough road back. Lisa Wong is likely four days away from being mayor-elect, and that vision and hope will have start becoming plans and changes to move the city forward.

Once More, with Feeling

Lisa Wong and Thomas Donnelly will meet in their fifth formal debate tonight -- on top of a handful of neighborhood forums, a number of speaking of engagement, and thousands of home visits -- in their last head-to-head showdown before Tuesday's election.

Say what you want about about the candidates, but there's no doubt these two have been very well vetted over the last six months. The issues have been poked and picked over endlessly, and the messages and bullet points of Donnelly and Wong are just about memorized.

That's a good thing. Make no doubt, the next mayor is going to have not only tough decisions to make, but tough decisions that are going to extremely important to the future of the city. Neither candidate will be able to say they eased into office.

So tonight it will be the last roundup. Wong fans will want her to look in control, confident, and visionary. Donnelly fans will want him to look experienced, prepared, and ready to get to work. Wong critics will want to pick at her inexperience and the general feeling that her talk doesn't match her intentions. Donnelly critics will want to define him as part of the problem and over his head. Really, at this point, doesn't that about cover it?

The debate kicks off at 6:30 at Fitchburg State College, and will be live on FATV. We're going to try to cover it live at the Fitchburg Pride website. We had problems at FSC last time, but have been told we should be clear for takeoff tonight. We'll update here when we're up and ready this evening.

So, join us, won't you, for the last big stage for the candidates before this thing goes to the voters. You've come this far, why stop now?

Why So Quiet?

There's an election in six days, and the buzz on all things political is way, way down. Why?

Here's some reasons:

The Red Sox won the World Series. The last two weeks of baseball have most certainly taken away attention from just about everything else. Not only is it the only thing everyone is talking about, but after a bunch of late, late nights, people aren't really ambitious with other things right now. That is over, obviously, but don't underestimate the distraction the Sox caused.

The mayor's race is over. While that might not necessarily be the case, most people think that way. And considering how much has been said about both candidates up to this point, people might be moving on, on this one. Here's a question: Will the preliminary turnout be higher than the general election? Probably not, but consider: There are probably some fringish Wong and Donnelly voters who won't show, because of the general feeling the race is over. How many DeSalvatore voters are inspired enough to vote for somebody else? Similarly, could this be closer than people expect (the general concensus is Wong in the mid- to high-60s)? Let's say the Wong voters get a little lazy -- not a ridiculous idea considering the preliminary blowout. Let's say Donnelly's team generates some more votes. Will be it be close? I don't know, but the point is Wong needs to keep her base motivated over the last six days and not let the big numbers slow things down.

There' s zero excitement in the City Council races. The ward races are interesting: Allaire and Solomito are two solid options in Ward 5. Kevin Starr and Steve Seney are evenly-matched in Ward 4. Dave Clark is fending off the former Ward 1 councilor Kevin Maynard. The at-large race offers a deep field with four incumbents, a ward councilor looking to make the leap to at-large, a former city councilor looking to return, and a School Committee member on the ballot.

Why does no one care?

For starters, few of the candidates have generated much emotion or excitement. I think most people like Dean Tran very much, and I think he cruises into the top two or so next week. But beyond Tran, there are few councilors that most people naturally gravitate toward. I think, from what I hear, that Conry and Hay are in. A lot of folks are still livid at Jay Cruz, mostly on the dispatcher issue, and wonder if he has the goods. Annie DeMartino is considered -- as seemingly always -- on the bubble.

The field is deep, but lacks energy and drama. Getting a handle on nine candidates is a bit difficult, leading to more voter disinterest -- sometimes the big chores get neglected. This is an important race, and one that will go as far in shaping the future the city as the mayor's race, but it has created zero interest.

So, if you're up for it, discuss here. Why is interest so thin? Hell, who's going to win? I'm guessing it's going to be fairly quiet. It's going to be a weird year where the preliminary is the star and the general election plays backup. Just weird.

Campaign Finance Reports in

The candidates for local office filed their campaign finance report today, eight days before the general election.

Tom Donnelly spent nearly $20,000 since mid-September, much of it on printing and advertising. Lisa Wong spent about $7,000, and has a whopping $12,000 on hand if she needs it down the homestretch (by contrast, Donnelly has about $1,800).

City council candidates also filed reports today. To read up on it all, check out the Fitchburg Pride website. Notably, even though he was supposed to, Ted DeSalvatore did not file a report.

Hot Down-Ballot Action

As most of you may know, there are some races beyond the mayor on this November's ballot. And the Fitchburg Pride is here to point you down the path to enlightenment.

Of course it is.

In tomorrow's paper, there's a front-pager on the School Committee candidates, as they check on what's important to them as they campaign for election.

There's a sprawling op-ed page(s), which include short pieces from the six candidates in the three contested ward council races (Wards 1, 4 and 5). The at-larges get their chance next week.

Expect to hear about teamwork, stabilizing finances, and neighborhood issues from the ward candidates in tomorrow's paper.

Oh, hey, now is a great time to remind you all that next Thursday, Oct. 25, is the big Pride, FATV, AM 1280 "The Blend" mayoral forum. It'll be live on FATV and "The Blend," and we expect live coverage and analysis over the Pride website. See you then.

The Dual Tax Rate

Suddenly, it's all the rage again -- or the focus of the rage -- after the City Council decided to keep things right where they are last week.

Fitchburg Follies (see link over on the right side, don't be so lazy to expect it here) got into it over the weekend, and the Sentinel argues for a flat tax rate today on the editorial page.

Personally, I'm starting to come around on one tax rate. I used to think the city should encourage residential development and built a core, vibrant residential mass to lure business. But from all accounts, businesses are getting slaughtered, and something needs to be done.

So, why doesn't something happen? Just look at the calendar, and the voter registration list.

Shifting the tax rates to closer to even means higher property taxes for homeowners, and a bit less for business owners. But, of course, homeowners are voters. Why on God's green Earth would a politician, exactly four weeks away from an election, approve a tax hike on his or her voters? It makes zero political sense.

I don't know how many of the eight councilors who voted against moving the rates closer to even actually think it's a good idea, but you have to figure one or two would if they didn't have to worry about being re-elected next month. And considering the mood for change, why give someone one more reason to vote you out, right?

There's an underlying problem here, and it's the lack of a long-term plan when it comes to getting the tax rates back to even. There's no "let's do in this five/seven/10 years." It's "let's start now, and try to do more later." And there's minimal -- at least from what I've seen -- long-term discussion. It comes up a few weeks before the rates are set, a short-sighted discussion ensues, and nothing happens. If you think that's wrong, go back and look at how the last few weeks went down, and show where that's off base. I'll wait... I thought so.

I'll give Ted DeSalvatore credit: This was something he actually had a plan about, even though he didn't really talk very much about it. After the Sept. 20 debate, we discussed it for a good 15 minutes. He wanted to create a long-term plan as mayor and get the tax rates level after five years or so. For some reason, he didn't talk about this much on the campaign trail, but he recognized the need for something to happen.

The next mayor and council can't make this a seasonal issue. As it tries (hopefully) to create some long-term financial planning, it should make -- outside of the annual setting of the tax rate -- a policy decision on whether or not balancing the tax rate (or at least closing the gap) is the thing to do or not, and then it should start doing what it needs to do over the long term to make it happen. It would help if there was some kind of relief for residential owners through a meals tax or some other kind of other revenue (not advocating for a meals tax, exactly, just mentioning it) to offset some of the increased burden, but that's what a long-term plan is for.

Shifting the tax rates to level at this point essentially means a tax increase for homeowners. City councilors are going to be instinctively pretty opposed to that every year. But based on its spot on the calendar, it's going to be a vote taken close to the election every other year. The city needs, away from the pressure of the ballot box, to make a decision on a dual tax rate, stick with it, and do the right thing in the long term.

Politicians at all levels around here like to talk about "profiles in courage" on votes. It might be the second most annoying political cliche in Massachusetts behind "all politics are local." This is a case, however, where it would actually take some courage for a councilor to do what might in fact be the right thing. Some planning and some big onions are going to be needed if the tax rates are ever balance.

How Far Does It Go?

That's the question that won't be answered until Nov. 6. We can start guessing, though.

Voters delivered a pretty serious call for change in the preliminary election. The question, though, is how far does it go? Will the call effect the City Council races? Only one ward councilor is being challenged -- and by the former seat-holder -- but the at-large race is another story.

The depth of the voters' need for change is important, because when you look at the at-large field, it's an interesting field. You have four incumbents (including Jay Cruz, who was appointed to the seat earlier this year). You have a ward councilor in Stephan Hay looking to step up. You have an older former councilor in Rosemary Reynolds looking to return. You have an elected official on the School Committee in Marcus DiNatale looking to step up. Then you have Shaun Cormier and Patricia Carbone, the only two on the ballot not in office or in office in the past.

So, what are the voters looking for? Are they looking to change one or two particular incumbents, or are they looking to vote in a particular newcomer? A they looking for real, deep change, far away from the establishment, like a Cormier, or would DiNatale satisfy the need for change. Would Hay be considered change at all?

The mayor's race preliminary and the shocking results have dominated the political discussion, but the unknowns of the at-large race is particularly interesting right now.

So, who's in trouble, and who's not? Should there even be change on the City Council at this point? Is it a question of voting in someone better, or getting rid of people considered ineffective? That might be the entire best summarized. Discuss.

What Donnelly's Doing Right

(First, I knew I had forgotten something in yesterday's wrapup post: The Globe's story on Jane Swift on Sunday. Why do we care? A lot of people think Swift will run for Congress when John Olver finally hangs 'em up. Swift has been notoriously media-shy since she left office in 2003, and now she agrees to a front-pager in El Globo? You have to wonder what her motivation is, and what's up with Olver. He's on the Appropriations Committee, so you'd think he'd want to stay. But the "Why now?" question on this story shouldn't be forgotten.)

A few caveats, which will likely take away from the rest of this post:

The Globe story yesterday on the mayor's race (well, Lisa Wong), is getting excellent traction for Wong. Boston Magazine's Boston Daily Blog checks in on the race through El Globo, and focuses on wine bars for some reason. Huh. Also, and perhaps more amazingly, the Wong story is run in the International Herald Tribune (it's a reprint of the Globe article, but if you need to see it, it's here). Um, the International Herald Tribune? Holy cow. I wish Donnelly had been a little more positive about the city for a world-wide audience. But who knew?

In short, Wong's candidacy has broadened the city's scope. Suddenly, the Boston Globe cares -- at least a little bit. The story is interesting enough to grab those self-proclaimed smarties at Boston Maggie, and the IHT picks up the story. Can she do the same as mayor if elected?

OK, on with the show:

I'm not sure Tom Donnelly's moves over the last week will gain him a ton of votes, and they certainly aren't overwhelmingly damning evidence that Lisa Wong is in over her head if elected, but maybe it was the right thing to do -- particularly in the long term.

Consider:

• Donnelly has owned the tenor and message of the campaign over the last week. He has gotten two hits out of the dailies and reframed the campaign into a debate about experience. Is it a winning play? I don't know, but you'd have to think this is the ground where the Donnelly campaign -- for better or worse -- thinks it has an advantage.
• They threw at least a small curveball into the otherwise batting-practice fastball that was the Globe story. While Camp Wong should be head-over-heels with that one, if Donnelly had taken a higher or less-combative road, it would have been even more glowing of Wong.
• Wong's distracted. At least when she's dealing with the media, Wong isn't talking vision, the future and better days ahead. She's explaining her work and defending her past. She says she's happy to do it because she's proud of her record, but she's off message. Remember, the Telegram story came out last Friday, so Wong was interviewed no later than Thursday. It's been almost a week. She's done a good job talking about this, but it's a distraction.

None of the last week will win Donnelly the election. Let's say, generously, this whole thing gains Donnelly 200 votes. Hell, let's be very generous and give him 500 votes -- and that's a Christmas and birthday present combined. That means he still needs to find 1,700 votes. It's still an uphill effort for him.

So, short-term, the benefits might be marginal. But perhaps this has created opportunity for Donnelly. Considering Wong's relatively short work history and zero political history, there isn't fertile ground for digging more dirt like this. So it's Donnelly to step into the sliver of daylight he's created and find a way to build on this. A very tall task.

Donnelly has moved the campaign to his preferred area, he has Wong distracted and maybe a bit off-balance. But he needs to build off this, and do it soon. He needs to come up with Act II right now, in order to take advantage of whatever opportunity this has created.

This issue is a lot more jab than knockout punch, but it has been a decent jab. Now, Donnelly needs to find a combination that works to get Wong on the ropes. Can he do it is the question, and it's the question of now, not next week. He can't let whatever momentum he's generated peter out.

What's next? Who knows. He needs to find another good media hit. His Sentinel feature on Sunday kind of got lost in the noise. The "majority of councilors support Donnelly" on Monday doesn't exactly bolster his image as a change candidate, considering the councilors supporting him. Can he go more negative? It hasn't worked too well for him so far, partly because he usually comes off as condescending and arrogant when he does, and partly because voters don't appear to want to hear it.

Donnelly has spent the two weeks since the preliminary painting a picture of the city on the verge of final financial doom and positioning himself as the person to handle the daunting problems. Maybe he's thinking Wong's support isn't very strong, and voters will have second thoughts between now and Nov. 6. If so, he's at least given them something to think about in the next four weeks, but it wasn't a silver bullet, and if he's going to turn those second thoughts his way, he'll need to come back with something to advance whatever ground he's gained in the last week.

A Few Things

Busy as hell, but I thinks worth pointing out:

If you're a Wong fan, you can't help but love the cover of today's Globe. Donnelly gets a chance to quickly run through his criticisms and throw out the surgeon analogy again, but this is a pretty pro-Wong story. Her campaign should be pleased with that one.

On the other hand, Donnelly's City Council support gets an airing in the Sentinel today. It's a source of strength for him, but doesn't help portray him as a change candidate, particularly when you look at the list of old-school councilors supporting him. However, if those organizations get behind Donnelly hard, it can help make up some of the ground he needs to cover. But the results of the preliminary make you wonder if a lineup of councilors will woo newer voters.

Also, the Sentinel came in with its story on the FRA/Women's Institute stuff on Sunday, if you missed it. It's pretty similar to the Telegram story from Friday (linked in Friday's post). It' s not a momentum-turner, in my view. Donnelly isn't suggesting misuse, abuse, or illegal activity, just questioning some of her decisions and how she promotes her work. He's getting some good ink out of it, though. Maybe if he wears away at it over the next four weeks, he can turn some these vague perceptions into a sudden reality. Or maybe not. But he's got to throw deep, so why not?

The News of the Day

If you haven't seen it yet, you'll probably want to read this (link fixed). It certainly creates a new dynamic in the campaign.

This story is being shopped around, and it creates a tougher tone to this campaign. Donnelly's quotes are certainly pointed. Will it work?

The question is, is this damning evidence of abuse or poor management by Wong? Based on early comments here, reaction is along party (or candidate) lines. Wong supporters think it's another example of Donnelly being an old-school bully. Donnelly supporters think it's about time Wong got hers for not exactly being honest about her work experience.

Another question: Is this is a one-time hit from Donnelly, or does it become part of his campaign. Will he be hammering her on this for the next four-plus weeks? If so, it could get ugly the rest of the way.

Read the story, and figure out how you feel about it. I think this one leaves space to see how you feel about it. Try not to be super-partisan.

On Tonight

Zip on over to the Fitchburg Pride website to see a story on tonight's fun and games.

Quickie analysis: A lot of old ground was rewalked tonight. Maybe I've heard this too many times now, but it seemed kind of stale at times.

There were some highlights -- and lowlights -- but that's for tomorrow. For now, read the Pride web story, get a good night's sleep and have a hearty breakfast in the morning. We'll chat then.

Back in the Saddle Again

It's been only six days since the preliminary election, but the two remaining mayoral candidates face off again tonight.

The debate is sponsored by the Fitchburg Exchange Club, and is at Fitchburg High School. Game time is 7 p.m., and it's live on FATV. Panelists include Chuck Morse from AM 1280 "The Blend," Bill Gates from FATV, and your's truly from the Fitchburg Pride.

While there's only five weeks left before the election, it's still kind of a long time for tonight to have any real impact in the long term. However, it will likely set the tone for the rest of the way, so let's try to figure this out.

Does Wong try to keep the pressure on and put in a performance like a few weeks ago, or does she play it a bit more conservative and try to maintain her status? She set a high bar in the debate a few weeks ago, so anything short of that will be a letdown in some ways. But she doesn't need that kind of performance again.

She has the advantage in votes and the advantage in past debate performances. She can sort of dictate her style and goals and not really worry, unless she throws in a clunker. But you have to think that won't happen.

For Donnelly, the stakes are much higher. He needs to prove tonight that he's still viable. He needs to move off the 45-35-25-1 message. He said last Tuesday night he knows the city wants change, and that he wants change. Tonight, he needs to start doing that. He won't be able to make all of that change ground up tonight, but he needs to start now if he has any chance of getting the job done by Nov. 6.

The question is, how does he do it? He's been fairly even-keeled (to put it somewhat generously) in previous debates. He needs to show some fire tonight. He's been pretty critical of Wong in past debates, but it's been wrapped in a pretty condescending, how-dare-you veneer so far. He needs to be on her case, but not in the dismissive way he has been. He needs to come up with some specifics on how he wants to do things, and for the love of God, he needs to make it seem like he's done something, anything, as a council that's fostered change.

It's certainly not the high stakes of the last two debates, but it's the first time these two get the stage for themselves. I'd expect Wong to keep on as she has been in recent weeks. The biggest thing will be seeing how Donnelly comes out and begins his resurrection effort.

About Last Night

A few more thoughts on yesterday:

I'm pretty sure no one saw this coming. Anyone out there honestly believe Lisa Wong was going to roll up 3,000 votes? Hell, most people thought that would be the total turnout. I'll admit my prediction (see Monday's post) was total garbage. In my weak defense, I didn't talk to one person who said, "Hey, Wong is going to kill these guys." Some folks thought she might have been first, and probably just as many thought she'd be third. No one saw this coming.

If I'm an at-large councilor, I'm a little more nervous this morning. Traditionally, when the electorate chooses to make a big change in one office (like, oh, the Mayor's Office), it tends to leave the rest alone. But considering the giant mandate for change tomorrow, at-large councilors might want to be looking over their shoulders a little bit.

And if I'm an at-large councilor, I'm trying to figure out how to answer questions about the city's finances. Tom Donnelly's "It's not our fault" answer isn't flying.

Give Wong all the credit in the world, she has run a smart and effective campaign. She has the makings of a very good mayor. But she's not a great candidate. She's not an electric speaker, she can get caught up in the minutae of an issue, and she isn't overly engaging. She's not Deval Patrick, who used his sheer force of charisma to get into the Governor's Office. My point? She didn't win all those votes last night because people are in starry-eyed wonder. She won all those votes because the electorate is fed up with the city's financial situation. They were looking for someone they think can bring not just change, but effective change. She gave the best answer to the biggest question in the campaign.

And that was one of Ted DeSalvatore's biggest campaign problems. He was stumping on the wrong issue. Crime is one of the city's top issues, no question. But it's not Number One. Not this year. In some neighborhoods, in some corners, it is. But universally, finances are the key this year. Throw in some questions about his background and previous statements, and his turned out to be an uphill climb. He turned into cannon fodder for the city's bloggers (you know what I mean), that hammered away at his weak spots and dug up information that when read was very damaging. For some reason, Ted and the campaign didn't fight the bloggers' charges. Maybe they were true. Maybe they didn't want to bring additional attention and perhaps some credibility to blogs that are read by dozens, maybe just a few hundred, people. But that stuff sat out there, unchallenged. In the closing days of the campaign, a mass e-mail made the rounds (including to a large number of teachers) that detailed all of that stuff. The attacks were there, but how many votes did that change? 500? That's how many more he needed. What he needed even more was a better focus on finances.

Now Donnelly stands alone against Wong. I figured that sentence would be the other way around before yesterday. He said last night he really is for change, big change. It sounded very close to the Italian Stallion's speech at the end of "Rocky IV." It's going to be a tall, tall order for Donnelly to make himself the change candidate. He spent the last month hammering away at his long-time creditials in the city. At times he came across as borderline insulted that DeSalvatore and Wong -- two people who didn't live in the city less than a decade ago -- had the sheer gall to run against him. He hasn't sounded like a change candidate.

More importantly in yesterday's aftermath, he didn't answer the financial question very well. He's not alone. Other councilors bristle when they hear they hold responsibility for the city's financial situation. But they do. It is a 50-50 split with the mayor? Probably not. But what is it? 60-40? 66-33? 75-25? I'd say that 2-1 area is about right. But Donnelly wanted none of it. In fact, he said outright he accepts none of it. Other councilors feel the same way, and if you watch their comments at meetings, they are pushing as much as possible on the mayor. But voters don't want to hear that. Dan Mylott might not be forthcoming with timely information, but voters don't want to hear that. They want to hear from Donnelly why, after eight years on the council, he hasn't done more. It didn't help when he would take no blame, and then DeSalvatore would follow right behind at debates and acknowledge that more should have been done. The financial issue is fully Wong's property right now. How Donnelly gets some of that real estate back might be an unanswerable question.

So, what next? Honestly, who knows. Conventional wisdom says Wong has a huge advantage. Or more accurately, Donnelly is at a huge disadvantage. He was 2,200 votes back last night. Where does he pick those up? Turnout was way high yesterday at about 25 percent. That would be good for a November municipal election. So, will turnout be higher in November, or did everyone who's coming out come out yesterday? If there's more, how many? Certainly, Wong's performance yesterday only won her more votes. People love a winner, and she's a clear winner. Even if she doesn't pick up one more vote, Donnelly needs to find 2,200 more people to vote for him. Yikes. Wong will get a second inspection now, Donnelly needs to put the heat on early and often, and try to raise questions. And then hope for a mini-miracle.

But the thing is, after yesterday, it might be time to rip up the traditional assumptions. A neophyte not only won, but she destroyed a guy who has run five citywide elections in the last 10 years. In the type of election where long-time base and organization is usually the path to victory, a newcomer managed to pull together a campaign in five months and obliterate the competition. One thing is for sure: The next 41 days won't be a cakewalk for Wong. She'll be under the campaign microscope, and she'll be getting it from all sides -- including, likely, DeSalvatore backers, who are convinced Wong was targeting their guy throughout. She certainly has a big advantage going into Nov. 6, but as the voters showed yesterday, nothing should be taken for granted now.

About Tonight

The drumbeat started when snow was still on the ground. Throughout the city, you heard it over and over again.

"It's time for change."

Sometimes it was coming from then-fledgling candidate Ted DeSalvatore, sometimes it was coming from a frustrated resident, sometimes it was coming from city councilors, frustrated with incumbent Mayor Dan Mylott.

Today, it came from the voters, who overwhelmingly voted for changed when they gave Lisa Wong over 60 percent of the vote in the preliminary election.

The result -- and the turnout -- are nothing short of a surprise. A political neophyte, Wong was putting her name on the ballot for the first time. She was going up against an old-school, long-time resident and insider in Councilor Thomas Donnelly, and an energetic, oxygen-sucking force of nature in DeSalvatore, who always managed to stay in the spotlight.

But for many voters, worn out by the constant financial problems and hoping for a glimmer of change, went with the 27-year-old self-described economist. She struggled to find a mix of wonkish capability and enthusiastic visionary, but found the perfect combination last Thursday. Her debate performance was energizing and embracing, but it also gave a glimpse into Wong and her campaign.

She was the only candidate to pack the room, a sign of organization and understanding how having a crowd cheering you on can help momentum. She asked Donnelly a question that she so knew the answer, she read a prepared rebuttal -- pitch-perfect because Donnelly had given the answer she knew was coming. It showed preparation and smarts. When asked about job loss detailed in a Mass Inc. report, she not only said she's work to bring jobs back, but quoted numbers out of the report. Any other candidates able to do that?

In the glow of victory, Wong is now a great candidate. After that debate performance she was a good one. Before that she was an OK one.

Now, the surprise of the primary must show she can run from the lead. She was able to sneak up on people, who assumed the Donnelly machine and his base would get him pretty far. It got him to the general election, but he has a large challenge ahead.

Now, it will be time for the thorough inspection of Wong. Donnelly, already hard-charging against her, will likely increase the noise. Let's compare her to Matt Leinart: A stud college football player who drops in the draft after the little potential issues get nit-picked at. She will be nit-picked considerably over the next 42 days.

But today wasn't so much about Wong as it was the voters. As the spring went on and summer dragged on, the financial problems mounted. Throughout, the buzz for change turned into a shout, finally heard today. Wong ran a good campaign, but this was a result fueled by a desire for a new face in City Hall.

For DeSalvatore, today was the end to a run that was one of the more dramatic you're going to see. His heated rhetoric grabbed a solid base, but he also turned off a number of voters. He may have tried to be an everyman candidate, but his aggressive stand wasn't for every voter. He brought passion to the campaign, but his focus on crime wasn't an issue for many voters, who were focused on finances. If he ran that campaign in Ward 4, he wins going away. Citywide, however, voters needed something different. DeSalvatore experienced a number of beautiful ups, but was vexed by his self-made downs. In the last few months, he was an electronic media punching bag, as blogs popped up around the city working against him. In the end, he offered change, but not the right kind of change.

So, can Donnelly make up the gap in the next six months? He needs to pick up over 2,000 votes -- certainly the largest political challenge he has ever faced. While he advocated change tonight, he ran his preliminary campaign as the steady old guard. It will be difficult for him to change course now. After months of neglecting responsibility for the city's financial issues, he must find a way to embrace some of it while trying to offer changes for the future.

Wong must now maintain the discussion she started with voters this summer. They most certainly are listening. She'll have to adjust to a hotter spotlight, and find a way to stay a step ahead of the sligns and arrows coming her way.

She has the ultimate advantage. The drumbeat of change claimed Mylott over the summer, when he bowed out of the election. The orchestra of change today seriously wounded Donnelly. Lisa Wong holds that orchestra's baton, and her challenge now is to keep the music playing until Nov. 6.