Campaign Impressions
Also see 2007 Royal Oak Election

The reluctance of some readers to be identified -- not for negative reasons but mostly for reasons like, "I'd rather that Friend A doesn't know that I'm favoring Friend B this time." -- suggested the need to begin this page.

02 Sep 07
Besides budget concerns, Royal Oak's chattering classes at the moment seem focused on Downtown development, or not. Quickly, then, they revert to NIMBY issues like the condition of this or that park or the granting or not of a zoning variance. Awareness of and opinions about candidates is for the most part superficial. The "big picture" is not yet in the public's mind.

16 Sep 07
I encountered the following candidates during the fundraiser for Safety City. U.S.A.: Clyde Esbri, Mitzi Hoffman, Art Makarewicz, and Andrew Androff. Mayor Ellison was there; he's running for re-election, but he probably would have been there anyway, representing City Hall. Makarewicz was accompanied by his 11-year-old daughter who told my wife that she is running for Student Council President. Politics runs in the family, eh?

In my mind, the candidates should have been more aggressive in their table-hopping, but they did get exposure. In separate conversations with me, they touched on everything from the impact of Semchena's entry to the chances of unseating incumbents Andrzejak and Drinkwine. There was puzzlement over the validity of some of the content in Brian James's challenge to Ellison re a proposed candidates rally other than the one with the League of Women Voters.

Conversations with non-candidates ranged more widely. A couple of readers wonder what the impact of Semchena's election would be on department heads, several of whom had previously complained about counterproductive relationships with the City Attorney's office. . . About the James challenge to Ellison, I sensed uncertainly about whether a second or third candidates event would serve any purpose, mixed with speculation about how Ellison plans to react to what they see as James's personalized and adversarial approach to campaigning -- exhibited, so far, mostly on royaloaksoundoff.com. . . . About whether incumbents Andrzejak and Drinkwine will be re-elected, the impression I received is, "Probably, but it ain't going to be a slam-dunk." . . . I even heard the suggestion that voters should vote for three non-incumbents, just to throw a scare into the incumbents even if they win . . . There was praise for and criticism of Commissioner Miller's bulldog persistence about keeping budget matters on every agenda.

. . . About the possibility, after the election, of a millage  increase, there are five identifiable moods: 1) No way in hell. 2) Inevitable. 3) Only with a sunset provision. 4) Only after they've convinced us that they've cut as much as they can. 5) Only after we, the public, make it clear that we will accept no further reduction in services.

Geez, why would anyone want to be elected?

01 Oct 07
§ Voters may be reluctant to write for publication, but not to chat informally.
Inevitably, voter-focus on personalities, both in CITCOM and in the election campaign, has moved over to the proposed Charter Amendments, which are politically neutral in content and intent. Those voters who read power struggles into the intent to streamline local government ignore that both the Administration and the City Commission see the benefit in the proposals. And those who want to blame Hoover or Johnson or Miller or Ginotti or Drinkwine or Capello or Lelito or Ellison or Andrzejak for current budget fights ignore that such major blunders as the Water Department IOU and discontinuing payments to pension funds occurred when the Finance Director reported directly to CITCOM and under people with very different names. Voters also say:

§ "Throw the bums out." . . . "No, keep the incumbents." . . .  "Vote in three newbies." . . . "No, all of them say 'no tax increase, no sale of assets, maintain quality-of life'. Nothing would change except they have no experience." Those slogans summarize what attentive voters -- not very many, so far -- are thinking these days. In discussion, one hears how the current CITCOM has harmed Royal Oak's future for decades by failing to sell Normandy Oaks when the price was $16-18 million . . . Hears statements that voting for Semchena would be like electing an incumbent; no,  an anti-incumbent . . . Hears that if James is elected mayor, several department heads will quit . . . Hears that Ellison has "chickened out" by his silent campaign so far. . . . Hears that Mitzi Hoffman, as the only woman candidate, might get enough women's votes to win.

§ Conflict of interest?
If Terry Drinkwine is re-elected and if Chuck Semchena and Brian James win, 'there will be three retirees on the city commission. Talk about a conflict of interest." That suggestion popped out during an easy-going speculative discussion of "what-ifs" with one knowledgeable city hall insider.

To repeat, the election is a topic of conversation, so far, among only a small number in attendance at civic and social gatherings and club meetings.