Article

COMMENTARIES AND EXPLANATIONS ON TWO RACES: STATE REP AND MAYOR, AS MARK MILLER AND DAN BIANCHI ANALYZE FOR THE MASSES

By DAN VALENTI

PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, THURSDAY, SEPT. 22, 2011) — And so the cynical but successful electoral scam continues on track. The Larkin-to-Larded-to-Sandwich Lady has worked like a charm. The TFB end of Tinkers-to-Evers-to-Chance around-the-horn twin killing seems poised for victory Oct. 18, the date for the special election. When all is said and done, unless the voters wake up, this $40,000 fiasco Larded stuck Pittsfield voters with will end up with another GOB marionette in the state house, and the back room at Remo’s will continue to be Pittsfield’s equivalent of The Sands. You know, the place where the Rat Pack conjugates.

GOB: KEEP THE TURNOUT LOW, BOYS, AND THE REST IS A GIVEN

The scam predicates itself on low turnout. Special elections practically guarantee few voters, and that’s all the Special Interests need. They can count on their core, mobilize them to vote, and they steal another election. We write this acknowledging that Tricia Farley-Bouvier may have the goods to be an effective representative in Boston, but under these circumstances, THE PLANET doubts we will see her full talents. She won a seat on the council through the low-turnout game and hooking up with WHEN.

You remember WHEN. That was the group of ladies, gals, and soccer moms who were going to “empower Pittsfield’s neighborhoods.” Right. The group actually became WHET: Women Helping Empower Themselves. WHET excluded minorities and kissed up, literally in some cases, to the GOBs — a marriage made in heathen.

TFB used the position to schmooze with the “right” people, and the next thing you know, she’s Mayor Jimmy Ruberto’s Gal Friday. The mayor then grants her peerage, dubs her a princess, grants a fat pay raise, and the next thing you know, old Jed’s a millionaire. She goes from being a secretary to all of a sudden, if you listen to the GOBs tell it, the greatest candidate ever to traipse down the pike since Sarah Palin.

The special election on Oct. 18 will not draw much better than the preliminary unless Pam Malumphy and TFB, who bear little love for each other, hold a mud wrestling contest instead of a debate. Would you pay five bucks to see that? Actually, the best candidate and the man who should be sent to Boston is Mark Miller. Miller has the intelligence, the grasp of issues, the knowledge of Pittsfield, and the earnestness of effort to ride head and shoulders above the others in the race.

THE PLANET also sees that Miller provided the best discussion of what happened on primary day, which he posted in his online journal. THE PLANET reprints it here. We provide this as recommended reading:

—————————————-

BY MARK MILLER

Special to THE PLANET

Wednesday, September 21, 2011 — Well, a four-way contest is on to determine who will represent the Third Berkshire District in the state House of Representatives for the next roughly fourteen and a half months.

Some math: In yesterday’s primary, less than 17 percent of those eligible to vote in the district actually voted for a candidate (4,034 people out of 24,588 registered to vote).

Among the three Democrats in the only primary contest yesterday, Tricia Farley-Bouvier received a plurality of 38.17 percent of the vote, Peter White received 32.94 percent, and Ryan Scago received 28.88 percent.


Mark Jester, who mounted a sticker/write-in campaign to get on the Republican ballot, received 202 votes, or about 25 percent more than the 150 he needed to be on the ballot as a Republican in the October 18 special election.

Mark Miller — that’s me — received 86 votes from people who voted on the Green-Rainbow ballot, where there was no contest, and no urgent need to qualify for this party’s nomination, as I was already guaranteed ballot status for the special election.

At this point, the Green-Rainbow Party is a minuscule party in terms of registration. Yesterday 122 GRP-enrolled voters were eligible to vote in the district.

In terms of voter awareness, the GRP is apparently minuscule as well. And judging from the way the paid clerks at the district’s 12 voting places informed, or failed to inform, many unenrolled (“independent”) voters of the choice of ballots they had yesterday, the party’s relative non-existence in voters’ minds will continue, at least for awhile. That is one of the challenges of my campaign.

I have a call in to City Clerk Linda Tyer to ask her exactly how she instructed polling place wardens and others prior to yesterday’s vote with regard to the three parties’ ballots, and whether the instructions were on printed sheets or were given orally.around 6 to closing time at 8. I quickly observed that the two clerks were mostly less than explicit in the information and instructions they gave unenrolled voters. There was some improvement after I spoke with the polling place warden, but he appeared less than overly concerned.

I conclude that if this was the case in all or most of the polling places, a considerable number of unenrolled voters who appeared at the district’s 12 polling places didn’t realize there was a Green-Rainbow ballot.


————————————————————-

The hard reality of electoral politics, Pittsfield style, suggests that TFB won the general election on Sept. 20 in narrowly winning the primary. White, bowing to GOB wishes, has endorsed TFB, and that’s the name of that tune. There are scenarios where an independent (Malumphy), a Republican (Jester), or a third party candidate (Miller) could win, but they involve turnouts more than 50% and acts of God.

————————————————–

ON THE MAYORAL SIDE


On the mayoral side of the race, this one not a special election, the candidates in their paltry one debate made their cases. Only one candidate, however, thought to send an analysis, and therefore, THE PLANET shall only print one.

The Dan Bianchi campaign issued this statement following the mayoral debate that included Peter Marchetti, Joe Nichols, Donna Walto, and Steve Fillio.


FROM THE BIANCHI CAMPAIGN

September 19, 2011

Pittsfield – Mayoral candidate Dan Bianchi used tonight’s debate to argue forcefully for getting citizens involved in city government. “I want to lead Pittsfield in a new direction by creating an atmosphere where all citizens are encouraged to participate,” said Bianchi in his introductory remarks, adding: “as mayor, I will welcome public opinion – not discourage it.”

Bianchi, a former city councilor and city finance director, also spoke passionately about a range of important issues. He advocated for better management of the state and federal funds that the city receives, and strongly supported the city’s Neighborhood Watch programs.

On the topic of renovating the city’s schools, he declared “we need to make sure that our community is informed and involved as we work to find affordable, effective solutions for our children.” When moderator Larry Kratka asked the candidates about the physical condition of Crosby Elementary School, Bianchi described the neglect of it and other public elementary schools as “unconscionable,” and swore that he would address their upkeep as mayor.

“I’m asking for your support next Tuesday. Join me in moving Pittsfield forward,” Bianchi said at the close of his introductory remarks.

After the debate, Bianchi was confident about his performance, and upbeat about his prospects in next Tuesday’s primary election. “In the debate, I tried to communicate my faith in the strength and ability of our community. I believe I got that message across, and I think voters will respond well to being treated like grown-ups,” he said. “I laid out my honest views on the issues – no equivocating and no dodging. Now this election is really in the hands of the voters, and I look forward to hearing their voice on Tuesday.”

The interesting part of the statement is Bianchi’s sleight of hand reference the what he calls “the exclusionary policies of the Ruberto Administration, which Bianchi says Marchetti will continue.

FOR WHAT IT’S WORTH, HERE’S BIANCHI’S OPENING STATEMENT FROM THE DEBATE:

Prepared introductory remarks from Dan Bianchi:

My name is Dan Bianchi.  I’m not looking for a job – I’m running to do a job for you. I want to be your next Mayor.

Two years ago, I ran a close race. And since that election, I’ve stayed in touch with many of you. Together, we’ve continued our conversations about the direction Pittsfield needs to go in order to expand business, create new jobs, improve our schools and reduce crime.

Those were the most critical issues of the last campaign, and they are the issues again today.

I want to lead Pittsfield in a new direction by creating an atmosphere where all citizens will be encouraged to participate. And as mayor, I will welcome public opinion, not discourage it.

I want to bring solid business practices to City Hall and set well defined, long range goals for our community and for our government.

I want to protect residents from undue governmental burdens by scrutinizing the budget and managing the budget, and working closely with state and federal agencies to make sure that all entitlement funds reach Pittsfield and are spent wisely.

Our schools need infrastructure improvements in order to meet 21st century standards. I will work with school officials, faculty and parents to ensure that all of our schools have the resources they need. We need to make sure that our community is informed and involved as we work to find affordable, effective solutions for our children.

Lastly, and most importantly, our community has been shaken recently by horrific acts of crime. Our DA, Police Department and Sheriff have done a great job in collaborating to bring those responsible to justice. We need to do more in the future to protect our citizens against crimes like this. That’s why, as your mayor, I will promote a zero tolerance policy for serious crime, and give the full support of City Hall to our neighborhood crime watches.

I’m asking for your support next Tuesday. I urge you to choose decisive, experienced leadership – support me in this effort. Join me in moving Pittsfield forward.

Thank you.

—————————————————

THE PLANET SHALL LEAVE IT TO OUR READERS TO PARSE THE STATEMENT. WITH THAT, WE SAY,

“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”

LOVE TO ALL.

35 Responses to “COMMENTARIES AND EXPLANATIONS ON TWO RACES: STATE REP AND MAYOR, AS MARK MILLER AND DAN BIANCHI ANALYZE FOR THE MASSES”

  1. CONCERNED
    September 22, 2011 at 2:52 pm #

    The only thing Miller will do is give the election to TFB. He will take votes away from Pam.

  2. baby baby
    September 22, 2011 at 3:05 pm #

    Pam doesn’t stand a chance.

  3. baby baby
    September 22, 2011 at 3:05 pm #

    Pam doesn’t stand a chance.

  4. Joetaxpayer
    September 22, 2011 at 3:22 pm #

    must agree with concerned miller and pam will split votes leading the way for FB to win.Hope I am wronge,but does it really matter.The state house is full of sheep, bahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

  5. Dusty
    September 22, 2011 at 4:24 pm #

    Farley got over 1000 votes. Really, what kid of person would vote for her? I mean what goes through their minds when they pull the lever for her? This is a serious question…I am flabbergasted if indeed the votes did actually come from people.

    • Joetaxpayer
      September 22, 2011 at 5:21 pm #

      Barney Frank ,John olver Deval Patrick,John Kerry they all got elected thats the way MA. rolls

  6. pjmh
    September 22, 2011 at 5:55 pm #

    Yes, I would pay to see that match… 24+K registered voters. is that correct?… if yes, well there you go…

  7. scott
    September 22, 2011 at 6:50 pm #

    I like Jester he’s a good man and a great cook!

  8. Delicious
    September 22, 2011 at 7:34 pm #

    I too am puzzled at the vote but Tfb got the votes of the Ruberto-Massimaiano-Etc Machine. This special election like the special election before it is a GOB special. Valentis correct, the only way its gonna change is if people vote, high turnout. This 17percent turnout gives GOB candidates every time.

  9. rick
    September 23, 2011 at 3:00 am #

    sooner or later no one is going to come out and vote. so while marchetti skips along with his one pittsfield that he thinks is going to deflect his one roberto stance hes nuts. all these years , all his votes say a one pittsfield didnt include all pittsfield. pay attention to the voting records of marchetti and the twinkie lady and ask your self if they made any kind of difference in your day to day life.. did they stabilize spendinng no…. did they ever vote against roberto…..rarely…. if you want the same old crap, their your people. did either of them ever speak up with any of their own ideas to better the people of pittsfield? if you listen to them now they will chang the world….where were they all those past years.. i think i know..maybe hidding in the shadow of roberto…. twinkie girl made her way into city hall, do you think all those yes votes worked her way.. 50k buys a lot of twinkies, and now wants to live off the tax payers for 15k more, sound familiar( speranzo)

  10. Still wondering
    September 23, 2011 at 5:27 am #

    I’m doing what I can to help Pittsfield lift itself out the mess the GOB’s have gotten us in to. I am voting for Pam Malumphy and those who know me will see me at the standouts.

  11. Shakes His Head
    September 23, 2011 at 7:24 am #

    I vote and speak my mind. The city is failing its people, or better, the people are failing the people. So many here are hopeless. Let’s elect the candidates that show us hard work is the reward.

  12. Richard
    September 23, 2011 at 8:18 am #

    You got this one right Dan Trica counts on the low turnout and she is a female version of Ruberto. If people only know the dirty tricks that Ruberto and some of his supporters did in the last election they would not vote for anyone he supports. The way she sounds about education one would think she should be superintend of schools. I have yet to hear her say she would support what the voters want. She tells you what she wants to but not a word about what the voters want.

  13. Silence Dogood
    September 23, 2011 at 8:25 am #

    Mark Miller is a fringe kook. The only reason he did as well as he did against lar des is people were upset at lar des

  14. Maxwell Edison
    September 23, 2011 at 9:57 am #

    Is that a debate analysis or just a press release reiterating talking points?

  15. ambrose
    September 23, 2011 at 10:06 am #

    Don’t fret suckers. Their’ll be another election in February. She’s gonna pull a Larkin. When she hits the ground running as Jerry put it she’s dropping that monicker. It will be ‘Patricia Bouvier’. A Greek shipping magnet will sail into Cohasset Harbor and off she’ll float. No more Big Macs. It’ll be souvlaki on pita bread, gyros and baklava. No more twinkies for her. Or maybe he’ll need a tugboat…

  16. ambrose
    September 23, 2011 at 10:07 am #

    sorry, its ‘there’ll’

  17. Seth Rogovoy
    September 23, 2011 at 11:38 am #

    Dan Why don’t you like me? We’er both bald and wear stupid hats. remember rogovoyreport.com The best Blog around!

    • danvalenti
      September 23, 2011 at 5:49 pm #

      SETH
      Not like you?
      I love you, man!

    • Silence Dogood
      September 24, 2011 at 3:27 am #

      This blog is free and I used to get free final issues of your magazine. The good news is that your blog won’t take up any room in the recycling bin.

      Do you have a shrine to Bob Dylan in your back yard?

  18. Dusty
    September 23, 2011 at 12:07 pm #

    I too will be voting for Pam Malumphy. What I do know about her is that Ruberto hates her and that must mean she is not part of the GOB. And right now I am happy with that much.

    Guess I will go for Nichols for mayor. I would settle for Dan. If Marchetti gets in I will not stay around to go down with the ship. I have been watching this mess for too long…the newcomers can’t see the whole picture and I hope they don’t vote to keep around those who keep dragging the city down further and further.

    • rick
      September 23, 2011 at 3:17 pm #

      check marchettis voting record , there was nothing that roberto put forth that he didnt vote no to …untill roberto went lame duck then he grew a pair(if he can) and questioned a few of robertos petitions…. this to me means a weak personality and we dont need that in a mayor.

  19. beezer
    September 23, 2011 at 12:19 pm #

    Gee Dusty we thought you might run on a sticker campaign. And until the debates begin I want to see if the girls really dislike one another or this is another example of Ruberto subterfuge

  20. beezer
    September 23, 2011 at 12:25 pm #

    …Malumphy has changed more positions and jobs than any politician in the city.

    • Jim Gleason
      September 23, 2011 at 4:12 pm #

      Pam changed jobd from MA Office of Business Development because ruberto and Eva Braun (deanna ruffer) told her bosses that they couldn’t work with her and that she was ineffective in her job. In other words, because she had the audacity to run against ruberto for mayor, they didn’t want her working there and would not co-operate with any effort she made. That’s the kind of people ruberto and Tricia Farley (sandwich lady)Blah Blah are, if you disagree with them they try to get you professiomally and personally.

  21. rick
    September 23, 2011 at 12:34 pm #

    sometimes when a guy like filio pops up you have to stop and think that a vote for steve is the start of ridding our city of these pesky gob rats that have infested our local goverment, and corrupted the voting. a guy like filio is so far from a politician the gobs would go back into the sewers they slithered out of.

  22. beezer
    September 23, 2011 at 12:46 pm #

    @ rick, do you believe in miracles? I depend on them. Go Steve!

  23. rick
    September 23, 2011 at 3:09 pm #

    breezer its a looooong shot with steve but it would send a message that we need to regain our city from special interest.. i dont think he could do any harm infact i think hed be welcomed change in politics….hes a little rough around the edges but i can think of a couple of past mayors that fit that discription… good luck steve….

  24. beezer
    September 23, 2011 at 4:43 pm #

    …..Planet, you could have an open blog once in a while like an open mike, no? Not complaining.

  25. Nomad
    September 23, 2011 at 5:21 pm #

    Ambrose

    I agree with your “There’ll be another election in February.”

    TFB left the city council after 2 terms so she could spend more time with her family. It seems like she doesn’t realize that the rep’s job requires her to spend considerable time in Boston…a 2-1/2 to 3 hour drive, each way. I see the “ego high” she’s on from being the GOB’s “chosen one” wearing off quickly…the first time she’s confronted with a snowstorm on a trip home.

    Why do you think Nucifero and Speranzo gave up their elected positions for lucrative jobs close to home?

  26. Paul Smith
    September 23, 2011 at 5:48 pm #

    Sandwich Lady will be as much of a disaster as Marchettii will be as mayor. Vote ANYONE BUT Tfb (I’m going with Malumphy or Miller). Vote Nichols or Bianchi.

  27. pjmh
    September 23, 2011 at 7:12 pm #

    Tricia “Blah – Blah”… makes me laugh every time.

  28. Rob Petrie
    September 24, 2011 at 6:12 am #

    @beezer…I’ve known Pam for almost 25 years and in that time she’s been with the Jimmy Fund, Isaacson-Miller, Boston Symphony, and the Commonwealth…working at four different places and putting yourself through grad school, doesn’t sound like a lot of jobs to me. And the only position she changed was from being a Dem to an Independent 2+ years ago like the other 12,000 of us in this city.

  29. Silence Dogood
    September 26, 2011 at 5:49 am #

    Fringe eccentric Miller would like check-in inspectors to do more to educate voters on their choices. This is not their role. Polling places are neutral territory and poll workers must not influence a voter’s choice. Voter education is the responsibility of candidates and party committees.

    • danvalenti
      September 26, 2011 at 7:01 am #

      Agreed. It’s is primarily, though, the responsibility of the voters to understand how government works and to inform THEMSELVES of their choices. That’s not happening today. That’s why inferior candidates backed by special interests get in and rob the people blind.