One-party rule in Burlington will have to wait.
One year after Mayor Miro Weinberger won a landslide election, ending Democrats’ 30-year exile from Burlington City Hall, his party failed to win enough seats to claim a majority on the 14-member city council. Democrats picked up an open seat in the New North End, long a Republican stronghold, but Progressives recaptured a seat in the Old North End and an independent in Ward 1 hung onto her seat.
In the end, voters went for the better known candidates — and the result will be more divided government in the Queen City.
But the big story of the night was the drubbing of incumbent South Burlington city councilors Sandy Dooley and Paul Engels, who lost by two-to-one margins to challengers Chris Shaw and Patricia Nowak. The incumbents found themselves on the defensive about their vote against basing F-35 fighter jets at Burlington International Airport, and about the firing and $140,000 severance paid out to city manager Sandy Miller.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Right. This decisive 26 vote victory shouldn’t be embarrassing at all for the Knodell camp.
a victory is never embarrassing…on the other hand what IS embarrassing is the ultra nasty campaign the Democrats ran against Jane….most people expected it to be close and the Dem’s thought that by throwing every bit of nastiness at Jane they would defeat her. At the end of the day Jane ran a positive campaign that any candidate could be proud of, win or lose. The same could not be said for the Democrats and Emily Lee’s scorched earth campaign. Message to Dem’s…try running positive campaigns based on issues and whats best for Burlington, and forget the Washington playbook.
As an ONE resident, I feel that Emily ran a positive campaign based on neighborhood and livability issues and it was necessary to draw a contrast between herself and Jane Knodell. As a middle class parent in the ONE with young children I was happy to be the focus of Emily’s campaign. It is hard to get past some of the management issues of the recent administration and firmly believe we need practical problem solving on the Council.
you are entitled to your opinion “guest” but the fact is the Democratic state and local party attacked Jane in a very nasty and frankly hypocritical way…Emily’s reaction was that she had nothing to do with it despite the party being very closely involved in her campaign. It may have been close but the negative Washington style campaign was turned back, thankfully. Welcome back to the City Council Jane…you will be a temendous asset!
Eh. It being a low-turnout election (just over 500 votes), 26 votes is 5%. That’s a margin any politician would be fine with. Nice try at stirring the pot though.
I respectfully disagree. I think the Free Press article on Jane’s history as it were was as damaging as anything and any Dem attacks went over my head. And I don’t disagree that Jane will be an asset to the Council. I think she’s bright and experienced. But this is not the Burlington of the 90s. There are a lot of neighborhood issues to contend with. And we do want more on campus housing for UVM. Jane’s statement that students will still be walking through the neighborhoods creating problems if they are on campus is nonsense. It’s their sheer concentration that is the problem. We should promote practices that will distribute students throughout the city. We should encourage neighborhood business and create a thriving North Street Corridor to compete with Pine Street. To put it in economics terms, I ask that she take a more micro approach than the macro approach she has in the past.
also respectfully, it doesn’t matter that the Democratic attacks went over YOUR head…it was a coordinated attack, it was nasty and it was disgusting quite frankly for the Democratic party (again people from the party that were working on emily’s campaign) to suggest that perhaps Jane should give back her salary or turn the Ward two race into a referendum on UVM compensation packages. Emily had the opportunity to condemn this type of nonsense. She chose not to and that spoke volumes.
Kurt, as a guy who leads a party that doesn’t believe in evolution or global warming, YOU shouldn’t be trying to explain things to the rest of us.
I don’t “LEAD” the party Bill…but it is typical by some to paint everyone with the same brush as you do here. And Bill, you were part of the nastiness with the letter you wrote trashing Jane. underscoring the point
This was a particularly ridiculous statement. Is any and every Democratic state rep. in Vt. likewise a “leader” in the national Democratic Party? Is any and every Democratic state rep in Vt. responsible for the policies of the national party? Is any and every Democratic state rep in Vt. responsible for drone strikes on American citizens abroad because the Democratic President of the U.S. engages in them? Your remark is an example of the win-at-all-costs partisan political atmosphere that’s exactly what’s wrong with American politics today.
Seems like the person being the most “nasty” here is you, Kurt. It’s politics for cry eye. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Are you talking about the press release? A press release on an existing news story is a “nasty, digusting coordinated” attack?