By Jim Schutze
By Rachel Watts
By Lauren Drewes Daniels
By Anna Merlan
By Lee Escobedo
The Morning News and its new favorite mayor both had endorsed Roxan Staff, former president of the school board, for the Place 9 council seat representing the Lake Highlands/Lakewood part of East Dallas, a generally affluent and conservative clime. Staff, in fact, was to be the centerpiece of the mayor's "slate" of city council candidates. But, oh, the best-laid plans of mice and mayors: The voters in District 9 elected Gary Griffith by a whopping margin.
That's what I want to philosophize about: Hey, mayor! Where'd ja get that slate idea, anyway?
But first, if you don't mind, please allow me to do the weighing-in thing, too. It seems so distinguished. I wish I smoked a pipe. I don't have a green tweed jacket with leather elbow patches, but I can get sort of the same look by taking off my shirt. It's the best I can do in a pinch (don't you dare!).
On the surface, the two candidates seemed very alike. Griffith, who defeated Staff by 61 percent to 39, is a loyal wired-up Republican. Staff's a loyal wired-up Republican. (The race is nonpartisan.)
He's a former member of the city park board. She's former president of the school board. He's a longtime civic activist and volunteer. Ditto her. He big Bushie. She big Bushie.
The weigher-inners at the News have sort of forgotten their own big miss on this one and have concentrated instead on the mayoral factor. Miller, after all, defeated her own opponent in the May 3 general election by 56 to 40 percent--a solid rout. But Miller endorsed three candidates in the May 3 general election for city council, and all three of them lost.
Not all of them lost by the same mud-hole stomping margin as Staff. Incumbent Mark Housewright lost the race in the new Place 3 in North and Southwest Oak Cliff to fellow incumbent Ed Oakley by 55 to 43 percent, more in the range of your average head-whipping landslide.
The third mayoral endorsee, Miller's friend and ally Sharon Boyd, lost the Place 6 race in far west and Northwest Dallas to former council member Steve Salazar by 60 percent to 33. There is a vernacular term for that kind of defeat, but we can't print it here, even though we are not even close to being a family newspaper.
In its focus on the Staff-Griffith May 31 runoff, the News has floated a couple of pipe-smoke theories. One, stated in a formal editorial, was that voters love Laura but believe they need a system of checks and balances between Laura and the council. I call this the "voters as very astute students of political science and constitutional history" theory, and I think all of us who vote should feel extremely flattered and pipe-smokerish. Puff puff!
Another Morning News theory, espoused in an op-ed column by Hank Tatum, whose writing I very much admire, was that voters held Staff responsible for a general lack of niceness on the school board when she was there, which may have been unfair because she was one of the nice ones, in which case there is a danger that leaders in the future may decide just not to lead anymore if people are going to unfairly blame them for not being nice when they were the nice ones. And I think this is, from his own point of view, exactly what happened to Saddam Hussein. (Extreme case.)
One of the things I did this week was whip up a little two-bit spreadsheet with results that I found interesting. I know that turnout in runoffs is always much smaller than in general elections, but this district really didn't come back. The turnout for the runoff was barely 51 percent of the turnout in the general election. Laura Miller got more votes out of District 9 in the general election than the total number of people who voted in the runoff.
More than a half-dozen precincts had turnouts less than a third of the turnout in the general election. In Precinct 2212 in Lake Highlands, 9 percent of the voters came back. The tough part for Staff was that she tended to take only a third or less of the few voters who did manage to show up. So, a third of less than a half: You begin to get the picture.
Griffith did much better, obviously. He wound up with a tally in the runoff that was 92 percent of what he took in the general, in which he had placed a close second. Staff wound up with only 56 percent of what she had received before. Lesson drawn: 90 percent of second place beats 50 percent of first place. (Don't work on that one too long.)
I talked to the campaign managers on both sides, interviewed both candidates and talked to the usual motley crew of observers, fixers and hit men. My own conclusion, along with virtually all of the people I talked to including both candidates, was that this was a typical city council race--so local that the issues came down almost to block-level politics, so personal you'd have to know who dated whom in high school to really get to the bottom of it.