Several people - both Egremonters and outsiders - have asked me or Laura how she managed to lose. The answer is the skill, organization and diligence of the Flynn team. They outperformed my efforts as Laura's de facto campaign manager by a mile.
The team began preparing promptly after the 2010 election. They thought Bruce Cumsky would run for reelection in 2011, and their dislike for him was so strong that they would do anything to defeat him. Their first task was finding a very strong candidate, because Cumsky was a formidable opponent. The best they could do was Charlie Flynn, who had campaigned vigorously for Bruce Turner in 2010 and had endeared himself to the "defeat Cumsky" team.
Flynn had several election weaknesses, such as his being a staunch conservative in a town filled with liberals and that his election would put a second school employee on the selectboard, a potentially serious conflict. So the team's strategy was to downplay Flynn's positions and instead concentrate on Cumsky.
By the time Cumsky decided not to run for reelection, the team was so dedicated to defeating him that they couldn't help but be adamantly opposed to whoever replaced him. Transferring their dislike to Laura - which at first blush seems to be irrational - was not difficult since they considered her to be "too close to Cumsky" - a mantra they repeated often during the campaign - and they disliked her husband almost as much as they disliked Cumsky. The unfairness of that to Laura - and the patently sexist character of it - was disregarded.
It was not easy to attack Laura as if she were Cumsky. One of the members of the Flynn team (Peter Goldberg) even told Laura shortly before the election that he would have supported her had he known she would be running instead of Cumsky. So not surprisingly there were no attacks on her or her positions throughout the campaign. She was attacked solely through guilt by association.
Two events that could easily have swung the election to Laura were skillfully turned by the team to Flynn's benefit. First, the members of the finance committee publicly supported Laura because of the conflict issues that would inevitably arise from Flynn's being a school employee and member of the Southern Berkshire school committee. Bruce Turner is already disqualified from considering school issues as a result of being an employee of the school district and Flynn may well end up in the same position. The Flynn team quickly cobbled up a claim that the endorsement - which most of us, and the courts, would consider an exercise of First Amendment rights - somehow constituted an ethical violation. That caused voters to focus on the alleged violation and not on the substance of the conflict issue.
The second event was the discovery by someone of Flynn's own Facebook page, which clearly demonstrated his very conservative leanings. The page was widely emailed to voters. That event was cleverly blunted by the Flynn team by a widely distributed email claiming, with no factual support, that Laura was just as conservative as Flynn. Furthermore, the email stressed the theme that Flynn was actually running against Cumsky. While clearly insulting, the email swung at least a handful of voters back to Flynn.
I admire the tactics of the Flynn team if not its standards. As Laura's de facto campaign manager, had I been more aggressive in exposing those tactics, Laura might well have won.
Posts
10 comments:
Richard, it is interesting that you make the excuses rather than Laura. I consider Laura to be a good person truly focused on the best interests of Egremont. She lost not because of Cumsky, but because Flynn had a better message and more experience. Pure and Simple. It truly amazes me that a small rural town of 1200 people is still hearing the devisive tirades and misinformation that you so skillfully perpetrate. I work in the Lee Public Schools and am an experienced School Administrator. I am an elected member of the SBRSD School Committee and it was determined last year, by the state ethics commission, that School committee members from Regional School Districts could also serve on Selectboards. That was determined because Steve Bannon of GB and a member of the MMRHS School Committee ran for Selectboard in GB. Get off your pedestal, get your facts straight, come down to earth with all the other locals, and help build a better Egremont
Richard, the above comment is from me. I checked the wrong box.
With all due respect, Mr. Flynn had no message and his experience is flawed, at best. He was elected by misplaced anger and was told by his "handlers" not to speak at the town meeting regarding the police station, for fear his true colors and ever present anger would be revealed. He was against the police station, but sat silent. More important to be elected than to be honest. He believes his one year as a Selectman many years ago qualifies him better than someone who has handled Egremont's finances extremely well over many years. He speaks of bringing Egremont together while demonstrating divisiveness in his actions and disdain for those who do not agree with him. Even in his remarks here, where he states, "come down to earth with all the other locals..." demonstrates his unwillingness to accept those who have moved here or are second-home owners. Well Mr. Flynn, you are a "Housey," as you often say. You're from out of town. But that's okay... nobody's perfect.
Mr. Ms. Mrs. Anonymous
Your comments might have more credibility if you actually put a name to them. I respect people who at least own what they say for they at least have the courage of their convictions. May not like what they say, but then again this is the USA and a democracy and I took an oath to protect and defend that right. What did you do?
It's difficult to give a name when Mr. Flynn holds the purse strings for our committees and his anger and retribution is well documented.
Mr. Flynn expresses, above, the Ethics Commission's approval of GB having a Selectman who is also a School Committee member. It is important to note that GB has a 5-member board. Egremont only has a 3-member board, so to have two members be employed by the SBRSD is a serious problem (elected officials are considered employees). Worse, is that Bruce Turner's hiring was approved by Mr. Flynn as a School Committee member and that he sits next to Mr. Flynn in School Committee meetings. Mr. Turner is subordinate to Mr. Flynn. That conflict became evident in the second meeting of the Selectboard. During that meeting we heard Mr. Flynn IMPROPERLY accuse Mr. Burdsall of illegally recording the open meeting. This, clearly without Mr. Flynn having read or researched the Open Meeting Laws. Those laws CLEARLY STATE that ANYONE may record or videotape an open meeting, so long as the Chair is informed and it does not interfere with the meeting. MR. TURNER WELL KNOWS THOSE LAWS. Mr. Turner was also aware of Mr. Burdsall's recording of the meeting, and had announced to the audience that the meeting was being recorded. It would have been appropriate, as Chair, to correct Mr. Flynn, rather than allow him to angrily and improperly accuse Mr. Burdsall. He did not correct Mr. Flynn. Instead, he sat silent. Why? Mr. Turner did not do his job at that meeting and it is clear that his relationship with Mr. Flynn at the SBRSD affected his role as Selectman. This, in just the second meeting of the Selectboard. What are we to expect for the rest of the year?
How can Mr. Turner, as Business Administrator for the SBRSD, and Mr. Flynn, as a School Committee member, prepare and approve a school budget for the District (Mr. Flynn has often said he "represents the District as a whole" as a School Committee member) then sit as Selectmen and discuss it without bias. Do they vote yes for the budget in School Committee meetings and then sit as Selectmen, change their hats, and evaluate it as to whether it is best for Egremont? Could they then vote no? Do they recuse themselves (which would be appropriate) and leave only one Selectman, Mr. Bursall, to vote on it? This issue would not come up for the 5-member Selectboard in GB, but is a serious issue in Egremont. It is no surprise that a fellow School Committee member, Mr. Sears, suggested to Mr. Flynn he resign from the School Committee.
Lastly, many remember Mr. Flynn boldly stating that "The Egremont School would never close while I am on the School Committee." Recently he stated that if the school budget did not pass "the school would never be the same." (fear-mongering at its best). Then, in this week's Berkshire Record he is quoted as saying,"...if the District has to make significant cuts, one of the budget items at risk are the costs of maintaining three satellite elementary schools in Egremont, Monterey and New Marlborough."
It is insincere for Mr. Flynn to discuss having "courage of conviction." He sat silent at town meeting during the discussion of the Police Station while his views and opposition to it were well known. He was told not to speak by his "handlers." Were they afraid his well known anger would come out? Was the election more important that honesty? For Mr. Flynn to invoke the word "credible" is incredible.
Remember, people in glass houses...
Trust may be the bigger issue than conflict of interest.
Wow! Interesting blog. I wish I heard about this school stuff before the election. Anonymous or not, facts are facts. thanks for sharing.
This is a response to Anonymous. It is in three parts. I apologize for the length but felt that it was necessary to clarify a number of key points.
Part I
Mr. Anonymous (1)
I will call you anonymous (1) as it appears that there is a 2nd anonymous now commenting. Based on the information that you provided in your above extended dissertation, I have a pretty good idea whom I am responding to. However, we will keep that our little secret. You make a number of statements and I thought that it would be appropriate to respond. I will list your comments numerically with an appropriate response following.
1. Mr. Flynn holds the purse strings for our committees and his anger and retribution is well documented.
A. It is the residents of the community that hold the purse strings not I or any other Selectman. Essentially, the town treasurer may not issue a check unless a majority of the board of selectmen signs a warrant of authorization. The key term is majority.
2. Mr. Flynn expresses, above, the Ethics Commission's approval of GB having a Selectman who is also a School Committee member. It is important to note that GB has a 5-member board. Egremont only has a 3-member board, so to have two members be employed by the SBRSD is a serious problem (elected officials are considered employees).
A. There are two items here. 1. SBRSD is a separate government entity created by the 5 towns to oversee the operation of the Southern Berkshire Regional School District. Our role and responsibilities as elected government officials are clearly defined in MGL, specifically the Education Reform Act of 1993 as Amended. 1. Under MGL, no school committee member may accept employment at the School District while in office or after leaving office for a period of 2 years. I am not an employee of SBRSD, I am an elected School Committee member.
3. Worse, is that Bruce Turner's hiring was approved by Mr. Flynn as a School Committee member and that he sits next to Mr. Flynn in School Committee meetings. Mr. Turner is subordinate to Mr. Flynn.
A. The School Committee, by law, appoints the Business Administrator. I am one vote in that committee of 10 and yes, I did support Mr. Turner’s appointment as he was the best qualified candidate. The appointment vote was unanimous so apparently the other 9 committee members agreed with me. Mr. Turner is not subordinate to me; at least I do not look upon his position that way. Rather I look at him as the Chief Financial Officer of the District working for the Superintendent of Schools. He is evaluated by and answers directly to the Superintendent.
Part II
4. That conflict became evident in the second meeting of the Selectboard. During that meeting we heard Mr. Flynn IMPROPERLY accuse Mr. Burdsall of illegally recording the open meeting. This, clearly without Mr. Flynn having read or researched the Open Meeting Laws. Those laws CLEARLY STATE that ANYONE may record or videotape an open meeting, so long as the Chair is informed and it does not interfere with the meeting. MR. TURNER WELL KNOWS THOSE LAWS. Mr. Turner was also aware of Mr. Burdsall's recording of the meeting, and had announced to the audience that the meeting was being recorded. It would have been appropriate, as Chair, to correct Mr. Flynn, rather than allow him to angrily and improperly accuse Mr. Burdsall. He did not correct Mr. Flynn. Instead, he sat silent. Why? Mr. Turner did not do his job at that meeting and it is clear that his relationship with Mr. Flynn at the SBRSD affected his role as Selectman.
A. Your assessment of Mr. Turner’s actions is incorrect. However I did incorrectly, not improperly, question Mr. Burdsall’s recording of the meeting. No one had a good understanding of the law, and it was I who the next day, read that portion of the OML and it did state that anyone could record a public meeting. However they were required to notify the chair of their intention. It would have been appropriate of Mr. Burdsall to do that at the first meeting with the new member. There was no anger from me. Also, I publicly apologized to Mr. Burdsall at the next meeting of the Selectboard.
5. How can Mr. Turner, as Business Administrator for the SBRSD, and Mr. Flynn, as a School Committee member, prepare and approve a school budget for the District (Mr. Flynn has often said he "represents the District as a whole" as a School Committee member) then sit as Selectmen and discuss it without bias. Do they vote yes for the budget in School Committee meetings and then sit as Selectmen, change their hats, and evaluate it as to whether it is best for Egremont? Could they then vote no? Do they recuse themselves (which would be appropriate) and leave only one Selectman, Mr. Burdsall, to vote on it? This issue would not come up for the 5-member Selectboard in GB, but is a serious issue in Egremont. It is no surprise that a fellow School Committee member, Mr. Sears, suggested to Mr. Flynn he resign from the School Committee.
A. You clearly do not understand the budget process for a regional school. The budget preparation process is a 6 Month process that starts in the fall of each academic year. The administration, working collaboratively with faculty and staff working collaboratively with the School Committee finance subcommittee begin a detailed review of priorities and objectives that lead to a budget that is presented to the entire committee and the community. These are open meetings and town finance committees especially are encouraged to attend as well as member of the community at large. Once the budget is approved and certified by the School Committee it is sent to the individual towns’ for review and placed on the respective warrants for the annual town meeting. Prior to the town meeting the Finance Committee review the budget and assessment and per town bylaws makes a recommendation. It is the town that ultimately approves the budget, not the Selectboard. At the town meeting, the Selectboard can speak to any warrant article, but the town meeting is the people’s meeting not the Selectboard’s meeting. Bruce Turner and I have one vote just like every other resident in the town. PS: Mr. Sears is married to the Chair of the Sheffield Selectboard.
Part III
6. Lastly, many remember Mr. Flynn boldly stating that "The Egremont School would never close while I am on the School Committee." Recently he stated that if the school budget did not pass "the school would never be the same." (fear-mongering at its best). Then, in this week's Berkshire Record he is quoted as saying,"...if the District has to make significant cuts, one of the budget items at risk are the costs of maintaining three satellite elementary schools in Egremont, Monterey and New Marlborough."
A. Last evening, Thursday 6/30, the SBRSD School Committee voted to add $100,000.00 in E&D money to the Operating Budget. E&D is similar to a town’s Free Cash. Bruce Turner has been spending a significant amount of time trying to find ways to lower the assessment to the towns and make it more palatable to the remaining towns without impacting educational programs. Total E&D now funding next year’s budget is now $300,000.00. We are not closing any of the outlying schools. Further, there is a protocol for opening and closing schools and the process takes over a year to complete. Our ability to make improvements to these buildings is seriously impacted by this budget impasse. However, each of these schools will be open in the fall.
7. It is insincere for Mr. Flynn to discuss having "courage of conviction." He sat silent at town meeting during the discussion of the Police Station while his views and opposition to it were well known. He was told not to speak by his "handlers." Were they afraid his well known anger would come out? Was the election more important that honesty? For Mr. Flynn to invoke the word "credible" is incredible.
A. I voted for the Police Station at the Fall Saturday Town Meeting as well as this town Meeting. I had a number of residents talk to me and ultimately sway me. I know that it cost me votes as a number of people asked me about this and I told them that I favored a Police Station.
PS: I don’t have handlers. I am a retired Navy Commander. The only person who handles me is my wife of 40 years.
Should you or anyone else who visits this blog site have questions and want the facts about the school or town issues please feel free to contact me.
Richard, Thank you for the hospitality.
Mr. Flynn's responses pretty clearly illustrate the problem. A conflict of interest isn't resolved by the conflicted person acting responsibly and honestly, nor by saying that others outvote me or have more influence than I do.
Post a Comment