Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone received more than 75 percent of the vote and Suzanne Bremer beat out fellow challenger Richard J. Scirocco to narrow the field of mayoral candidates to two after Tuesday’s primary.
Curtatone easily outdistanced his two grassroots challengers and came away with a commanding victory on primary day. He received 4,652 votes to Bremer’s 822 and Scirocco’s 464, garnering 76.7 percent of the total vote, according to unofficial poll results.
Curtatone said the wide margin of victory is proof voters are satisfied with his performance and the direction he is taking the city in.
“I’m thrilled with 76 percent of the vote. It’s a statement by the voters who have seen me work hard for four years. I have no intention of slowing down. The voters endorsed my performance and have given me a mandate,” he said. “And now I will keep working for the city.”
Curtatone must now defeat Bremer in the Nov. 6 general election to win a third term in City Hall. Bremer said she first entered the race for mayor after the campaign tactics used by Alderman-at-Large John M. Connolly in his special election victory this year against Marty Martinez, who Bremer had volunteered for. She said Connolly’s mailings in the last week of the campaign were negative and played on voters fears.
A librarian at Tufts University and first-time candidate, Bremer promises an open, inclusive city government focused on cultivating affordable housing and open space if elected. Despite being a heavy underdog against Curtatone, at the outset she claimed her chances of unseating him were “phenomenal.” And after a primary day performance that keeps her alive as a mayoral hopeful for another five weeks, Bremer is still optimistic.
“I came in as an underdog and I’m still an underdog. In the end it will be up to the voters to decide what they want,” she said. “All I can do is work harder and harder.”
Tuesday’s big loser was Richard J. Scirocco. With 464 votes, he failed to qualify for the general election. He blamed media coverage of his past brushes with the law for his loss. He said he had “a better knowledge and understanding of the city than Suzanne Bremer” and should have been the one nominated to challenge Curtatone.
However, controversy and accusations marked much of Scirocco’s campaign. The Boston Herald reported his history of violence against women and long list of run-ins with the law --- four women had sought and received restraining orders against him and he was once arrested for allegedly providing alcohol to minors, though the alcohol charges were later dismissed.
And Lenny DiCicco, a close friend of Scirocco’s, added more controversy when he told a Curtatone supporter to switch sides because “we’re going to bury [Curtatone].” The Curtatone backer told police and a police officer on paid detail accompanied the mayor the next day. The one day detail reportedly cost the city $1,034. DiCicco said the remark was not a threat but a verbal jab twisted by people with political motives.
“If the papers had given me a chance and not gone through with a smear campaign against my name, maybe people could have had a different perspective of me and I would have prevailed. I’m not a bad person, at least I don’t think I am. The media is completely the reason I lost,” he said.
On the day of the primary, Scirocco was seen driving around the city in the passenger seat of a limousine with his campaign posters on the windows. A woman speaking through a bullhorn exclaimed from another car covered in “Scirocco for Mayor” signs, “Vote for change, vote for Scirocco.”
In the only other primary Tuesday, Charles Chisholm easily beat out Robert Adams for the right to challenge incumbent Ward 6 Alderman Rebekah L. Gewirtz in November. In the ward’s three precincts, Gewirtz received 727 votes to Chisholm's 389 and Robert Adams' 47.
Gewirtz was facing two challengers after her first term in office since defeating Connolly, a 22-year incumbent, in 2005. Chisholm and Adams both pulled papers to run against her, forcing Tuesday’s primary.
"She must now face Chisholm in the general election before returning to the Board of Aldermen for a second term in 2008."
What is this? An anti-Freudian slip?
Posted by: Tricky | September 25, 2007 at 10:12 PM
Does anyone know who are the candidates running for the Alderman-at Large seats??
Posted by: Alderman-at-Large | September 26, 2007 at 09:37 AM
All four incumbents, plus Fred Berman and Tony Lafuente.
Posted by: Ron Newman | September 26, 2007 at 10:02 AM
I fail to see how receiving a 76% majority of less than 6000 votes cast (blanks/write-ins?)constitutes a 'mandate' from the people!
Posted by: 'mandate'!? | September 26, 2007 at 10:08 AM
What would you call a mandate? 80%? 95%?
I do hope Suzanne Bremer revs up her campaign a bit so we can have a real race where issues are debated and discussed.
Posted by: Ron Newman | September 26, 2007 at 10:13 AM
How does receiving a 76% majority become a mandate was asked by the person above. The answer I would give is....... it doesn't. What I think it says is that the mayor, whoever is in the seat at any particular time, has a machine in place with city hall hires and patronage and favors they've done and so on and he or she is able to get their vote to the pols. That's why they usually say a low turnout favors the incumbent and a high turnout favors the challenger. When its all over though, remember that its money and organization rather than yard signs that wins elections in most cases and right now this mayor seems like he has both of these. I had people walk up to me yesterday and ask if there was an election today after they saw people with signs outside Dilboy and Ciampa. It shows how much the average person pays attention to these things.
Posted by: PersonDavis | September 26, 2007 at 10:16 AM
Ron I think the point being made is out of 35,000+ registered voters in the city no one has a mandate.
The mayor did recive a high percent of the vote because in reality he does not face serious opposition.
I know Joe, Stan and the boys are already putting the spin on that he has a mandate, that's why his team is so good, they are the Whitey Bulger of politics.
Posted by: ccollins | September 26, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Incumbent mayors can and do lose elections, including preliminary ones. Have we forgotten Dorothy Kelly Gay already?
Posted by: Ron Newman | September 26, 2007 at 10:40 AM
Nice headline. Better than "Scirocco GIVES a beating" this time.
Posted by: it *is* funny | September 26, 2007 at 10:57 AM
The spin should be coming from the so-called citizens of Somerville who failed to get out and vote..not on those who did!
Posted by: Paul Colyer | September 26, 2007 at 10:58 AM
No sure what point you are making Ron, of course incumbants can lose, but they need serious competition in order to lose. Having a pie in the sky platform not base in the reality of running a major city doesn't cut it.
Posted by: ccollins | September 26, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Yes Newman, your right they do. In that case of Dot Gay though it was because there was a third candidate with fairly deep pockets, Tony LaFuente, who acted as the spoiler during a time when Dot's ratings were low.
Over in Everett Ragucci who was a multi-term incumbent came in third as well last time behind Bonfanti and Hanlon.
I bet if this Bremer woman spent 35-40% of the money that Curtatone spends, she could make a serious challenge but she would still fall short. No matter what though, I bet you will also see her get 30-35% of the vote if she doesn't do anything at all. Just look at the past election results from Bill Baros and others and you will see that it is a common figure of non-contents.
Posted by: Spoiler | September 26, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Here are a couple of interesting data points to go with Spoiler's post. When he was fist elected mayor in the 2003 general election, Joe Curtatone spent three times what Tony Lafuente spent. Curtatone spent more per vote than any other mayoral candidate in the Commonwealth that year. But he only won by 50.8% of the vote.
Posted by: Truth Fan | September 26, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Please remember in 2003 Joe was the spoiler. Lafuente was already in the race and Joe at the last minute filed papers to run.
Posted by: ccollins | September 26, 2007 at 11:38 AM
how many blank's were there?????
Posted by: blank | September 26, 2007 at 11:49 AM
CANDIDATENAME VOTES
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 6164
MAYOR
SUZANNE W. BREMER 825
RICHARD J. SCIROCCO 467
JOSEPH A. (JOE) CURTATONE 4717
WRITE IN 83
BLANK 72
ALDERMAN - WARD 6
BOB ADAMS 49
REBEKAH L. GEWIRTZ 728
CHARLES J. CHISHOLM 390
WRITE IN 8
BLANK 23
Posted by: Not Many | September 26, 2007 at 11:54 AM
The Mayor ran against "Restraining Order" Rick and a no name Tufts librarian who says "entered the race for mayor after the campaign tactics used by Alderman-at-Large John M. Connolly in his special election victory this year against Marty Martinez, who Bremer had volunteered for." What a great reason to run for Mayor!
There will be no holes in Joe's shoes this year from pounding the pavement. The only pounding that will be dished out this year is by Joe trouncing this bitter Martinez supporter who got mad at how poor Marty got treated in the rough and tumble world of Somerville politics.
Boo Hoo!
Posted by: Get a grip | September 26, 2007 at 12:09 PM
Fred Berman of the Mystic View Task Force Constipators? This city does not need a Mystic View Task Force refugee involved in city government in any capacity, nothing will ever get done. Just look at Ward 6, name one major accomplishment she has achieved.
btw: Why didn't the PDS endorse anyone for Mayor? The librarian in the Mayor's "race" was a Marty supporter. Are the PDS embarrased by her?
Posted by: To Ron | September 26, 2007 at 01:04 PM
Joey Cakes, Confucius Say, “If you want to know what a ma n is, place him in authority” So we saw lets beat up on a woman, I.E. Linda Bohan, she aint going to go away Joey Cakes
Posted by: Read | September 26, 2007 at 02:05 PM
To Ron Newman: I don't know why you don't get it! Receiving 3/4 of 6,000+ votes is not a 'mandate' of the voters of this city. It may indeed be a mandate of those 6,000 people, but a mandate from the people of the city of somerville would require lots more than 4700 people to cast their vote!!
Posted by: To Ron Newman: | September 26, 2007 at 02:07 PM
But if those non-voters were strongly against the Mayor, shouldn't they have voted for one of his opponents?
Posted by: Ron Newman | September 26, 2007 at 02:08 PM
That's a false choice, Ron -- it's not the case that either you're "strongly against the mayor" or you're "giving the mayor a mandate," with no other options. The only mandate delivered here is one of indifference.
Now, you can try to twist "indifference" into "contentment," and then twist THAT into "mandate" but it seems pretty labored, and perhaps a little partisan.
Posted by: dashford | September 26, 2007 at 02:43 PM
Point taken. I wouldn't count myself as a full-throated supporter of the Mayor, as I disagreed with him regarding Assembly Square before the current agreement was reached. I voted for Bremer because I wanted to ensure she finished ahead of Scirocco, to save our city some embarrassment.
Posted by: Ron Newman | September 26, 2007 at 03:02 PM
Its nice to see the skipper back! God Bless Ya, You look great! Hail to the skippa!
Posted by: I love the skipper and naughty girls! | September 26, 2007 at 03:24 PM
Dear "To Ron Newman",
I have to respectfully disagree. If voting is the way we determine who has support fromt the community and who doesn't, it seems to me like the people who actually show up and vote are the ones who get to decide who has a mandate and who doesn't. If you don't care enough to show up and vote, you've kind of lost your moment to make your voice count. Of the people who actually cared and bothered to speak up at the polls, more than 3 out of 4 of them were pro-Curtatone. I'd say the guy is justified in at least claiming to have a mandate.
Posted by: Somerville Reader | September 26, 2007 at 03:56 PM
Dear "To Ron Newman",
I have to respectfully disagree. If voting is the way we determine who has support fromt the community and who doesn't, it seems to me like the people who actually show up and vote are the ones who get to decide who has a mandate and who doesn't. If you don't care enough to show up and vote, you've kind of lost your moment to make your voice count. Of the people who actually cared and bothered to speak up at the polls, more than 3 out of 4 of them were pro-Curtatone. I'd say the guy is justified in at least claiming to have a mandate.
Posted by: Somerville Reader | September 26, 2007 at 03:57 PM
Then again, why did 4000 more voters turn out for the 2003 mayoral primary? Could it have anything to do with the viability of the candidates?
I fell into the same boat Ron did yesterday, voting for Bremer so she could finish ahead of Scirocco, not because I thought she has a snowball's chance in hell in November. What the hell kind of election is that?
Posted by: Tricky | September 26, 2007 at 04:28 PM
The Rick and Joe show was not pleasant to watch. It was a disgrace to the city and in the long run was costly to our city's image.
To those who think the Mayor has done some good for the city, I agree. To those who think he's a saint, think again.
Time will tell. In the end, I think most of these "friends and supporters" will move from the city when the trough runs dry.
In the meantime, drink up and have a ball.
Posted by: Somerspeak | September 26, 2007 at 07:44 PM
Ricky squandered tax payer's dollars by entering the race. Rumor has it that Lafuentez planted the "the tricky dick" in the race to divert attention from the at-large race. I have to give lafuentez credit. Its working!
Posted by: ricky squandered tax payer's dollars | September 26, 2007 at 10:28 PM
Is it true that Lafuente funded Richard Scirocco's bid for mayor? Rumor has it, they were seen having lunch @ Atasca's in Kendall Sq.
Posted by: Lafuente funded Richard's run for mayor | September 26, 2007 at 10:35 PM
If Lafuente and Scirocco did not want to be seen having lunch together they'd be having lunch far from here. Oh wait, that IS far, relatively speaking.
Posted by: Election | September 26, 2007 at 11:08 PM
Here we go. Just out of the gate from the first election, now the attacks are unleashed.
Someone is real nervous and I wonder who it is. This Administration is trying to set up for the final election and will spin any lie it can conjure up. Lafuente backing Scirocco? Come on will ya. You would do anything, anything to just dirty the waters. Even to think Lafuente would back Scirocco to deflect the at large race. Come on.
How desperate are you and the crew thinking these ridiculous things up? Desmond or Sullivan will be looking in from the outside when the final is over.
Posted by: Spin, Spin, Spin | September 27, 2007 at 06:57 AM
to Tricky: "what the hell kind of election is that?" You're right, it's no kind of election. It's just some idiot's way of making a mess and causing the city to have to pay thousands of dollars to hold a primary election, what a waste of money. Anyone who thought this would be a real race is delusional.
to Somerspeak: "Time will tell. In the end, I think most of these "friends and supporters" will move from the city when the trough runs dry." If you think that the majority of the people who call themselves "friends and supporters" of Joe are really in this for Joe, you're delusional too. While some of us can truly count ourselves as Joe's friends, most people support any politician, not just Joe, for what they can get out of it. So don't kid yourself into thinking that those who run for the hills when the "trough rund dry" were really Joe's friends to begin with.
Posted by: nobody important | September 27, 2007 at 10:21 AM
The only disgrace to the city is Restaining Order Rick. This monster LOVES to be in the limelight. He will continue to keep himself there if the good citizens of Somerville do not do anything about it. He may be out of the race but he is still in YOUR city! What a scary thought! Take action and complete the task. Let the truth be told regarding Restraining Order Rick and stop this monster! A good majority of the people in Somerville know what he is all about. Remember, the truth will set you free and put Restraining Order Rick where he belongs. We all know where that is....
Posted by: Hoorah | September 27, 2007 at 12:23 PM
Hey why doose the media keep writing bad things about Rick? He is a good guy trying to make this city better for us lifers in the city.
Posted by: hala | October 02, 2007 at 08:31 PM
i just wanted to coment to whom this may concern! to the media and Who ever. it seems as though you are all visious and UnProfessional with your rude and and crude coments on Rick Scirocco! Do you have any thing better to do than chew people up and spit them out? hope fully this statement ive made can give a little thaught about chamging your cruel and melevelant ways!
Posted by: daniella g | October 02, 2007 at 08:45 PM
hey daniella....get a dictionary...and a clue.
Posted by: rachelfromtheville | October 02, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Once someone becomes a public figure, they lay themselves open to scrutiny and criticism, it goes with the territory.
Posted by: Kate | October 03, 2007 at 10:19 AM
That race was a mockary. Scirocco hang it up. You'll never run the hill, and you'll never run somerville. keep to running from the Law.....
Posted by: B.T.K. | December 27, 2009 at 04:57 PM