patching...
Update: Minor coastal flooding expected in Narragansett Bay this evening, says NWS.
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Republicans Seize Council Majority With Five Seats

Downcast Democrats call new council a 'nightmare,' and say 'God help Portsmouth.'

 

Portsmouth voters picked five Republicans, two Democrats and plenty of newcomers to lead the town for the next two years. Only three incumbents ran for re-election to the Portsmouth Town Council, and only two of those won back their seats. Incumbent Democrat Dennis Canario was bounced from office.

Incumbents Keith Hamilton and James Seveney won back their seats. It appears they will be joined by Liz Pedro, Paul Kesson, Joe Robicheau, Michael Buddemeyer and Judi Staven. Another 400 mail ballots still needed to be counted.

The results were not received well in Democratic headquarters at the Portuguese-American Club.

"This is a nightmare," said Seveney. "This is a lousy council," said Canario seconds after the preliminary results were shown.

"The results are not what we had hoped for," said Leonard Katzman, candidate for Town Council. "I will caution everyone that there are still 400 mail ballots yet to be counted. Last time in the presidential election, there were only 100 mail ballots.

"There could be changes. These are not final. We have other candidates within stricking distance of winning. A lot of college kids vote." 

Katzman was among the Democrats who lost in Tuesday's race.

"We ran an honest campaign," he continued. "I look forward to working with everyone going forward."

"God help Portsmouth," said Glenn Allen.

According to preliminary results, incumbent Canario came in eighth place in Tuesday's race, losing by 44 votes to Judi Staven. This would have been Canario's fourth term on the Town Council. Officials were still waiting for results from Prudence Island, which carries 95 votes.

The following is the preliminary tally of votes from Tuesday's General Election:

CANDIDATE VOTES
Michael A. BUDDEMEYER (D) 3,430
Keith E. HAMILTON (R)* 3,632
Dennis M. CANARIO (D)* 3,337
Paul Francis KESSON (R) 3,489
Terri-Denise CORTVRIEND (D) 2,934
Stephen E. LARSON (R) 3,304
Albert E. HONNEN JR. (D) 2,836
Elizabeth A. PEDRO (R) 3,571
Leonard Barry KATZMAN (D) 3,144
Joseph W. ROBICHEAU (R) 3,433
Jeffery Charles LEWIS (D) 2,644
Judith J. STAVEN (R) 3,381
James Arthur SEVENEY (D)* 3,694


Related Topics: Ballots, Election, Election 2010, General Election, Incumbents, Town Council, Voters, and Voting
What do you think about the candidates who were elected to the Town Council? Tell us in the comments.

Susan Watts

11:55 am on Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Last Night's Election Results Send Three Clear Messages

Last night's election results send three messages: 1) Voters are fed up with the "same old, same old" and want newer, fairer and more fiscally responsibly leadership. The process of using personal relationships and past prejudices to make critical decisions that can negatively affect growth and quality of life in Portsmouth is OVER; 2) Voters demand their own voices be heard. Having to hire legal representation to protect our neighborhoods and our rights from arbitrary and self-serving actions from our elected officials is OVER; 3) Voters want and deserve a clear vision for the future of Portsmouth. Haphazard, knee-jerk, uninformed decision-making is OVER. Thank you, thank you Portsmouth voters for sending these messages loud and clear. And to newly elected leadership: Congratulations: your constituents are watching!!

Reply

nun

12:06 pm on Wednesday, November 3, 2010

There sure are some sore losers in Portsmouth.

Twice in the last two months, Portsmouth voters have made their feelings loud and clear at the polls. Hopefully the losers in this election can start listening (and hearing).

Reply

Scot West

5:13 pm on Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Let's all recognize the Mayor of Portsmouth: Mr Larry Fitzmorris. For 2 more years, what he says – goes.
And let’s not gripe about this fact. We live in a democracy.
The PCC has won everything it has put its mind to since the tent meeting in 2006.
The votes could not be any clearer. Portsmouth belongs to the PCC.

I hope I am not in the sore loser camp, but I am in the disappointed and worried loser camp. I really hope that Ms Watts enthusiasm above is well founded and at least her 3rd point comes to fruition.

Reply

Benjamin Franklin

8:22 am on Monday, November 8, 2010

Why sore losers? How about concerned losers. Have any of them asked for a recount, NO. In 2004 Judi Staven demanded a re-count, now I think that was a sore loser and then Joe Robicheau did the same thing when defeated by Seveney in 2008, why don’t we say it like it is when the PCC loses they are ten times the sore loser, then any Democrat. Now to the article I agree with all the Democratic sentiments, I have lived in this town all my life and am proud to say it but this council-elect is going to be a catastrophe. We have had Democrat controlled Town Councils and we have had Republican controlled Town Councils but we have never had a Teabagger controlled Town Council and that is why I am worried about OUR community; how many of them are from this town?, how many of them had kids go to Portsmouth Schools?, how closely are they tied to our community?, Do they care about OUR community? I won’t tell you the answers but I’ll tell you this looks bleak for Portsmouth.

Reply

faithful reader

1:52 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

Joe,
Teabagger is what someone who supports the Tea Bag Party. The Tea Bag Party refers to protesters who are conservative demonstrators against taxation and government spending.

this is what's on wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_protests

Reply

Average Joe

1:58 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

Oh, I have heard of the "Tea Party", but not the "Tea Bag Party"

Reply

faithful reader

2:20 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

So sorry, shall I reword for you Teabagger is what someone who supports the Tea Party movement... better?

Reply

Average Joe

2:29 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

I researched it on-line, and found out that the term "Teabagger" is a derogatory reference to someone who is involved in the Tea Pary movement.

Reply

Susan Watts

2:45 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

If folks are so strongly loyal to their political parties, why don't they use their real names instead of fake ones? Just not too proud of your opinion, perhaps?? Or your politics? Very easy to criticize and mock under an assumed name! Come on out!

Reply

faithful reader

2:46 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

Ok then, just trying to be of help, next time do your own research before asking.

Reply

Average Joe

2:53 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

Faithful, why all the anger?
Susan, I am new to the Patch. I plan on giving my opinion on occasions. I forsee discussions regarding the schools and teacher's unions being a hot topic very soon. My opinions my not alway be favorable to the unions. I have a child in the school system, and do not want any retaliation towards my child.

Reply
Comment_arrow

faithful reader

3:08 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

Not angry, surprised to be, what appeared to be "called out", on a simple mistake, since the links I included were for the Tea Bag Party. My mistake again. My quick research to answer your question did not turn up the derogatory aspect of the termonology, just the reference to sending actual tea bags as a protest statement, ie. teabagger...

faithful reader

2:57 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

Or maybe they have other affiliations where it would not be proper or legal to express their opinions in a public forum?

Reply

Susan Watts

3:02 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

WHOA. If you are correct and really expect retaliation toward a child, it is a very bad commentary on the current social and political atmosphere in Portsmouth. Perhaps this new change of political leadership is a very good thing! You may be right; if so, this is a far different town than the one I thought I lived in!! What a shame for all of us if we cannot freely and fully express our opinions without fear of retribution.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Pearl

5:58 pm on Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Susan:

Whether people choose to post here under their real name or not is their own business. Stop trying to make it a political statement. Just because someone fears retaliation, doesn't mean those fears are justified.... so it isn't a commentary on anything.

Maybe some folks prefer not to have the entire internet know that their address is on Wapping Road. Or that their house is appraised for $516,300 by the town. Or that their birthday is November 16th. I could go on, but I only spent 30 seconds using google and facebook.

I'll point out that using an anonymous name has a long and respected history in America. The original Federalist essays were published under the name "Publius", to keep secret the fact that they were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay.

So if someone posts something here that you like, or don't like, feel free to say so. But criticizing folks for their screen name seem kind of pointless to me.

Just my two cents.

Average Joe

3:02 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

No Faithful, I have no affiliations to a group or political party. I'm just keeping anonymous to protect my child.

Reply
Comment_arrow

faithful reader

3:12 pm on Monday, November 8, 2010

Ah see, I have to be careful for other reasons.

Leave a comment