GilfordGrok

Last week, Alec ruminated on if the voters issued a “clear message” last week. While the question of “what has Gilford decided to be” were answered in some areas, he was “baffled” with what he thought was the defining race. I am perplexed that his belief that a tie for the third open seat defines his consternation.

How to categorize the voting? With a checklist total of around 6,000 registered voters, only about 2,000 actually cast their votes. Should a 33% turnout be considered “bad”? Or given that it was only a local election, could it be considered reasonable? Regardless, the Town can only benefit when more people come out to fulfill their civic duty and vote.

Let's review the major “race”. Much of the campaign rhetoric did not center around the proposed Town and SAU budgets (what was deleted, what was added) but the “tone and civility” (or lack thereof) claims wrapping around those budgets. With a more conservative bent of the BudComm, many cheered and many wailed over the decisions made.

And Mr. Lambert put himself square in the middle of it. Unabashedly conservative, given to spouting political theory from the likes of Machiavelli to the Founding Fathers (among others) and not one to remain silent on pretty much any topic, he earned the ire of those opposing his views. All one would have to do to verify this is to review how often Mr. Lambert was mentioned in the local papers over the last budget season. Thus, a number stepped into the fray, smelling either political opportunity or altruistically seeing a chance “to make things better”.

This is where I disagree with Alec's assessment of the race and who were the main competitors in the race. Into the fray came Mr. Dormody who made “tone and civility” the issue of the campaign and the basis of the election and essentially against Mr. Lambert.

As Alec correctly points out name recognition would play a major role. Supporters on both sides wrote Letters to the Editor to all of the local papers, partisans on both sides talked to persuade the undecided, and calls were made to get out their vote. Also, for the first time in Gilford's history, much campaigning was conducted on the 'Net with GilfordBudget going head to head with GilfordGrok. A good thing, as it can readily make the opposing political views an active event for all – educating the electorate and quickening the pace of ideas than what is possible with the traditional media. While Alec correctly points out that the 'Grok and the Taxpayers Coalition endorsed for Lambert and Stewart, I discount the 'Grok a bit in this as the 'Grok is only two schlubs (albeit, outspoken) and only one possessing a history in local politics. Match that up, for instance, against the Firefighters who are always involved in local elections) and the ads for Mr. Dormody.

Agree: the surprise of the race was the tie between Sirs Dormody and Stewart. Disagree: this was not the defining event. For much of the campaign, it was not Stewart / Dormody; rather, it was Lambert / Dormody. The answer could, however, be seen as something else entirely than the personalities.

Take the results in toto – would it be wrong to say that voters have turned conservative in fiscal issues and those that do not listen will pay a price? Putting aside Mr. Phillips (as ALL sides approved his candidacy), the second highest vote getter was a conservative. The third highest vote getter was a conservative no matter which person wins Thursday's recount as both Sirs Stewart and Dormody announced that stance.

After all, did anyone successfully run by stressing that the Town or SAU should be spending more?

The voters also rejected the SAU's budget for the second time in three years,. While the controversial issue of Gilford Football certainly had an impact, money cannot be disregarded. Now couple this the defeat of their generalized Building and Grounds Warrant.

Now add Saltmarsh. While I believe that this issue became “collateral damage”, it's failure to pass also adds up to one thing being said by the voters in Town – it didn't matter the “value” if it would also amount to higher taxes. At about $4,300 per person, the combined Town and SAU budgets have folks finally saying “enough, do not cross this line”, that the balance between private, public, and retired sectors needs to be brought back into balance.

Oh, back to the tie. When it was announced, there was a collective “huh?” from those waiting on the election results. A fluke? Certainly, but should be taken more as in the realm of oddity than a message on the state of the voters mind.