Northampton Mayor Clare Higgins, take heed–because you could be next!

Was that an omimous enough opening for you? I must admit to having a flair for the dramatic at times, but Ii’m halfway serious this time, because Higgins could learn a lot from what happened this week to her compadre to the north, Greenfield Mayor Christine Forgey.

As you may know by now, Forgey’s bid for a third term was derailed this week with a third place finish in a mayoral primary won by Greenfield Town Councilors Alfie Siano and Bill Martin. Adding insult to injury was Martin’s second-place finish, which came from a write-in effort launched less than two weeks ago–not to mention that Martin was partially responsible for putting Forgey in office, having been a driving force in her first insurgent mayoral campaign back in 2003.

I will break down some of the subtleties of that race in my Recorder column. My purpose here today is to send a warning shot across the bow of Northampton’s current chief executive, who’s facing a re-election challenge of her own from a former ally, City Councilor Mike Bardsley.

At this point, Higgins is taking Bardsley very seriously, which is good–because that was one of Forgey’s major errors. Granted, she never expected to get blindsided by Martin, but she should have been prepared for it. She should have been prepared for anything, and she wasn’t. Forgey, like a lot of people, took a look at the field and just assumed it would be her and Siano in the final. That was the fatal mistake. And even when Martin jumped in the race, Forgey still didn’t seem to take the threat seriously. If she did, she wouldn’t have waited until the Thursday before the campaign to launch her re-election bid. A more adroit politician would have been in the news cycle the very next day after Martin announced, but Forgey didn’t even go that far. Meanwhile, Martin became the flavor of the week, and rode that momentum all the way to a victory that, though surprising, wasn’t exactly a shock.

In fact, Forgey’s lack of performance and response to Martin, actually had me wondering if she even wanted the job anymore. She assured me that she did, but you’d never know it by her response, or, should I say, lack of response.

I should stop for a moment and say that my intent today was not to come here and bash Forgey. But I can’t help but question her re-election strategy, assuming there was one, and submit to anyone reading this that it is an abject lesson in one of the cardinal rules of politics–namely, that incumbent that make assumptions about any re-election bid usually wind up watching someone else take the oath on Inauguration Day.

This is the lesson that Higgins needs to heed. The fall of Forgey may have been the result of a variety of factors directly related to Greenfield’s toxic political climate. But Northampton’s political toxicity levels aren’t getting any lower either, and it won’t surprise me if the Higgins-haters go looking for a primary candidate to do a similar job on her this fall.

If that happens, Her Honor will do well to remember the lessons of the Forgey implosion, and take nothing for granted because it never is–especially in a climate where people are hurting, pissed, and looking for someone to blame it on…

Collins

April 3, 2009

Compare the cities of Greenfield and Northampton to people in either of those towns and you are likely to get a varied response–and most often it’s negative.

A lot of Greenfield people, especially natives, think Northampton is a stuffy, elitist berg of beautiful people, and I’ve met more than a few Paradise City residents who think Greenfield might be a location choice should anyone decide to do a remake of the movie “Deliverance.”

So, there’s not a lot of love there. But I have to exist in both worlds, so, as you might expect, I never miss an opportunity to compare and contrast those two wonderful municipalities–and one area where I’m starting to see a lot of similarities is in their respective mayoral elections.

Northampton Mayor Claire Higgins and Greenfield Mayor Christine Forgey are both up for re-election this year, and both are being challenged by At-Large members of their respective city councils. Greenfield Councilor Alfie Siano has been running for mayor since long before he actually issued a formal challenge to Forgey, and the same can probably be said for Northampton Councilor Mike Bardsley, who last night made it official when he pulled nomination papers to challenge Higgins’ claim to a fifth, two-year term.

Bardsley and Siano share some similarities as well. Both are very liberal councilors who both seem to enjoy wide at-large support in their respective communities. Both seem to be carrying pretty positive messages of change, as well. My sense is that Bardsley is the more overtly political of the two, but Alfie isn’t afraid to mix it up and, if necessary, take both sides of an issue, which has become a bit of a Bardsley hallmark in recent years.

But perhaps the most important similarty between these two guys is that they are both going up against mayors who are somewhat wounded politically. There seems to be a growing anti-Forgey sentiment in Greenfield, although there’s been no specific polling to indicate that it’s become a factor. That will become more apparently in this month’s primary. And Higgins seems to have about 35 percent of the population that won’t vote for her, which won’t be enough to beat her unless Bardsley can find away to convince the other 65 percent that he’s a better choice to move the city forward.

Both mayors are somewhat fortunate in that they both are facing devastating budget years. The reason I say they are fortunate is because (1) everyone else is in the same boat, so the chances of a challenger being able to level a charge of imcompetence is virtually nil and (2) voters are often less likeky to change horses in time of great economic and fiscal stress UNLESS that stress is a direct result of mayoral mismanagement–which I don’t think is a makeable case at this point.

The other similarity I see between Bardsley and Siano–and this is the “biggie”–is the question of whether they are really up to doing this job.

It’s not that they aren’t intellgent, capable, interested guys. They are. But you need more than just those three traits to be a successful leader. There’s an intangible element that’s missing, not to mention the presence of certain shortcomings that don’t exactly foster a lot of confidence with the electorate.

Siano’s main Achilles Heel seems to be his inability to focus, while Bardsley’s is his at times shameless attempts to be on both sides of every issue. And while those are style issues that can be addressed, the fact is that to address them requires the candidate to be aware of them–which I’m not sure is the case with either of these guys.

There are some that will say that I am trying to simply derail these two campaigns on behalf of the incumbents. But, the truth is, I don’t really care who wins these elections. My interest is in seeing effective government leadership, and if Siano and Bardsley can provide that, they should be elected. Certainly, there are strong arguments that can be made to replace both of these women, and I’m guessing we’ll hear a lot of those arguments advanced before too much longer.

The question that remains, however, is whether these respective communities will be better off replacing their current mayors with these two men. To date, I haven’t seen a compelling case made either way, but I hope to hear one sooner rather than later.

 Collins