Attending the Chester County GOP endorsement convention last night was a four-hour marathon event. The evening started at 7 PM and was filled with political tradition, excitement, predictions, disappointment and for some of us . . . a night of waiting.
With 391 committee members voting (or holding proxy votes), the convention endorsement process required a candidate to receive 60 percent of the total votes or 235 votes. If after one round of voting, a candidate did not receive a minimum of 60 percent of the votes, there was a second round of voting. On the occasion that the second round did not net a candidate at least 235 votes, a third round of voting was required. If a candidate did not emerge with the required 60 percent on the third round of voting, both candidates received ‘recommended’ status versus ‘endorsed’ and the Republican candidate would be determined by the voters in the May primary.
For those of us in the spectator seats (only the voting committee members of the county GOP were permitted beyond a certain point) there was an opportunity to speak with the candidates. Fortunately for me, Congressman Joe Pitts campaign manager was sitting close by and she provided a wealth of information on the candidates and an explanation of the endorsement process. I liken my attending the convention, much as a spectator at a sporting event, when you have never played the sport and do not know the rules and regulations. It was great to have an expert explaining the ‘plays’ throughout the night!
My interest in attending the GOP convention last night, extended beyond idle fascination. I felt like I had a ‘horse in the race’ so to speak and for me the evening centered on the district attorney race. I have written about the DA candidates, Pat Carmody, Tom Hogan and Steve Kelly. Although I know Hogan and consider him a friend, I have had email and telephone contact with Carmody and Kelly. Having had several phone conversations with Pat Carmody, I was delighted to put a ‘face to the voice’. Friendly and engaging, it is easy to see how Carmody has successfully served in the district attorney office for 27 years! As expected, Kelly withdrew his name from the nomination process and his support (and the suggestion that his supporters do likewise) went to DA candidate Hogan.
The district attorney race was the last race of the night. Remembering that after the straw polls, only two votes separated Carmody and Hogan (Carmody led by the 2 votes) the committee members cast their votes for DA. First round, the vote count was Carmody 165; Hogan 224. Neither candidate had received the necessary 60 percent vote; a second round of voting was required. At this point, it was late in the evening – after 10:30 PM. Two of the committee members had left the building (and apparently did not leave their proxy) so the committee members voting dropped to 389 (versus the original 391). However, the 60 percent number of votes required for endorsement remained the same at 235. After a second round of voting in the DA race, the count shifted — Carmody 127; Hogan 255. Hogan had passed the required 60 percent vote margin and emerged the endorsed Republican District Attorney candidate. Although Hogan is the GOP endorsed DA candidate, there was speculation among the spectators that Carmody may remain in the district attorney race.
In other races, there was no surprise that the two endorsed County Commissioner candidates are Terrence Farrell and Ryan Costello. If you recall, Costello was recently appointed to fill the unexpired term of Carol Aichele. The Common Pleas Judge race was interesting. Candidates Jeff Sommer and Ann Marie Wheatcraft were both recommended after three rounds of very close voting. However, so as not to confuse voters at the primary, Jeff Sommer withdrew his name, and by a special vote, Wheatcraft was named the endorsed candidate; thus avoiding any confusion in May. The other Common Pleas judge candidate endorsed was Mark Tunnell.
Creating a look right out of the Wild West with straw cowboy hats and red t-shirts were supporters of Sheriff Carolyn “Bunny” Welsh. Without party opposition, Welsh was endorsed for re-election as Chester County sheriff.
I want to thank the Chester County GOP for allowing the public the opportunity for an inside look at county politics. Several people asked if I would be attending the county Democratic convention on Saturday. My reply, only if there are any contested races. (I do not think any of the races are contested.)
Although the district attorney’s race was my primary motivation for attending the county GOP endorsement convention last night, the evening provided a glimpse in to political party tradition and a front row seat for the candidate endorsement process. Thank you for the experience Chester County Republican Committee.
17 CommentsAdd a Comment
In the end, I believe the right person won.
Pat Carmody is a good and decent person, and has committed his professional life to the DA’s Office.
Despite this, I believe Hogan brings a more diverse background with more new ideas and proven techniques from other prosecutors’ offices across the state and country.
In the end, the county would have been served well with either candidate, but I think Hogan was the better choice.
I am sure that Tom Hogan will be a great DA but I am a big supporter of Pat Carmody. Pat has on the job experience – 27 years, and he’s commited to the DA office. He’d get my vote if he decides to stay in the race.
My own concerns about Hogan relate to his apparent silence as the BOS solicitor. We know that this group retains his services, but has he really stepped up and acted on behalf of taxpayers when they have stepped a bit over the line?
I agree with John on this and would like to add that as Solicitor he is not an elected official chosen by the people to “represent the taxpayers.” In fact, he isn’t even a resident of the township.
Section 1102. Solicitor to Have Control of Legal Matters-The township solicitor shall direct and control the legal matters of the township, and no official or official body of the township, except as otherwise provided under law, shall employ an additional attorney without the assent or ratification of the board of supervisors.
Why do you find it offensive? (mimi not a resident of the township)
I’m curious about Mimi Gleason’s background? What positions had she held before becoming Tredyffrin’s Township Manager? Just being nosy, not complaining.
Is she related to Robert Gleason?
I don’t recall her job directly prior to hiring here, but before that she worked for the Department of Community Development in Chester County….well regarded by her co-workers, but that department was the most obvious example of “government work” that I ever witnessed — so she knows what public “service” is all about.
Who would want that job AND live here? While it may limit her “investment” in the results, she’s just a puppet of the supervisors, and living here would mean she would never leave work. I think it’s to her mental sanity that she doesn’t live here.
And no — to my knowledge, she is not related to Robert Gleason unless it is a very distant relation. I know his family and some of his relatives and I have never heard her name come up as a local.
Wasn’t Mimi the Director of Public Works here for several years?
Just a thought — I think that Mimi was hired as the Assistant Township Manager under Township Manager Joe Janisak. Upon his retirement, she was selected as Township Manager. I don’t think that she was with the township prior to that point.
Tom Hogan has had exposure to a lot of big world investigations like: Federal and local law enforcement co-operative task force’s. That was a mouthful. What he brings to the job of DA will bring that office into the 21st century. Pat is a great prosecutor and well respected but as John said, he should stick to doing what he does best. They are both great guys. Sometimes the best Mechanic shouldn’t run the garage ;)
John is complaining that the Township is poorly run. I don’t know about his metric of approval times, but I do see a range of issues, from deteriorating infrastructure (eg traffic lights, stormwater systems) to failure to publish meeting Agendas.
I worry that this is due to lack of budgeted resources rather than lack of management ability. There are ways around this – it seems to me that lower cost out-sourcing has been a solution for snow removal. But I’m not sure how far that approach can be extended.
The traditional response to service issues is to show up at meetings and make a fuss, but that seems suited only to the bellicose and anyway now the opportunity to do that has been cut by two thirds. Perhaps both management and the BOS would be served well by a formal customer service survey and metric?
In general I think it would be good to know the trade-offs between service levels and expense in assessing the budget going forward.
Ray, I didn’t understand your comment about “showing up for meetings…the opportunity …has been cut by two thirds”.
Please explain – thanks.
The reference is to the reduced schedule of Township/community meetings. For example, the Stormwater Committee meeting frequency was moved from monthly to quarterly because the township management does not have the time to address resident issues more promptly. I think that this is also true of the Traffic Committee and the EAC, but not the Libraries Board.
For 2011, the Sidewalks, Trails & Paths Committee (STAP) no longer even has a scheduled meeting time — will meet on an ‘ad hoc’ basis. After the upcoming summary report by the ‘special’ sidewalks committee, I wonder how often STAP will meet!
John, “why would she really care…”
Answer.. maybe because she is a professional?