|
First
of all, thank you to the 27,232 voters who supported my grassroots
campaign for Denver City Council At-Large.
I knew going into this campaign that 95% of incumbents are re-elected
and that an upset would be a long shot. I am grateful for all
the incredible support and networking done on my behalf by voters
across the city. Your efforts brought us very close to the long-shot
upset we were all working towards. My thanks to everyone who
was a part of that networking effort. Special thanks to Rick
Taylor and Kathy Davie.
Although we ultimately were unsuccessful, our numbers made this
challenger proud to be a part of the democratic process and grassroots
campaigning. What a great process we have! What a great effort
we engaged in! I encourage more concerned citizens to throw their
hat into the ring and make a difference in our community.
Do
not let a lack of money be an obstacle. I made a decision early
on, to not actively seek endorsements nor financial support from
any special interest groups. It was very important to me that
I remain an independent voice for change and common sense throughout
the election process. I did not want to become beholden to anyone
except to the voters... and I'm very proud to have accomplished
so much with so little.
An initial analysis of the election results as reported on May
2nd showed:
-
My campaign received 26,941 votes and spent
$12,199.99 or $0.45 per vote
-
Carol Boigon received 31,744
votes and spent $85,333.99 or $2.69 per vote
-
Doug Linkhart received 41,356
votes and spent $120,345.25 or $2.91 per vote
-
John Hickenlooper received 67,943
votes and spent $242,982.51 or $3.58 per vote
The final vote counts are:
COUNCILMEMBER AT LARGE 420/420 100.00%
|
Votes |
/ |
Total Votes |
% Votes |
| Carol Boigon |
32,028 |
/ |
101,543 |
31.00% |
| Doug Linkhart |
41,644 |
/ |
101,543 |
41.01% |
| Carol E. Campbell |
27,232 |
/ |
101,543 |
26.82% |
| (Write-In) |
639 |
/ |
101,543 |
0.63% |
A few thoughts:
-
Precinct walking was insightful. The best
part: seeing, up close and personal, all the incredible gardens
that people
have created
and being wowed by some fantastic paint jobs. The worst
part: a lingering angst about what was going on with the
people living
in blighted properties with broken out windows, neglected
yards and piles of junk everywhere and a concern about how
best to
tackle this citywide issue beyond insisting on proactive
code enforcement.
-
The media failed in it's duty to provide
the voters with the kind of factual information that they needed
to make
an informed
decision.
How is it that two incumbents could have
28% and 30% attendance rates and receive the papers' endorsements?
In
the real
word, that type of job performance would get you
fired.
How is it that a candidate could have
multiple arrest records and have two documented encounters
with
law enforcement in 2006 that suggests he did not fulfill the residency
requirement or was lying to police about where he lived
and that
not make the
papers?
How
can there be so little discussion in the papers about the
cost per vote—like the
candidates in Council District 7, for example,
who spent $23-$29 per vote—with
donations from special interest groups and
what the implications that
kind of
per-vote-spending indicates.
-
Being
a candidate for Denver City Council At-Large has been a great
experience for
me. I regret that I wasn't able
to pull off
the upset—especially when confronted with the
type of dysfunction and ineffectiveness that modest neighborhoods
all across the city
experience so frequently—like the fact that the
graffiti-covered garage at 2100 W. Custer, which I reported
at the beginning
of February is still not abated as of
May 14, 2007. The
city explanation
for the lack of abatement is exactly the type of inefficiency
I'd have liked to have tackled on Council. I'd have loved
to take the
type of dynamic community-building projects that I've
organized in my neighborhood citywide to positively impact
the larger
community and create the kind of positive change so many
neighborhoods so
desperately need. I'm ready to go citywide with my energy,
dedication, know-how and vision. Perhaps another time.
I send my most sincere thanks to you all, for the support and the
votes. I am grateful. Drop me a line so we can keep in touch.
carol
The
following is an article written May 5, 2007 by Rick Taylor,
my campaign treasurer, with thoughts on the campaign from his
perspective.
"
Grass roots campaigning can work!
Check out these stats on campaign finances:
-
Carol Campbell received 26,941 votes and spent $12,199.99 or $0.45
per vote.
-
Carol Boigon received 31,744 votes and spent $85,333.99 or $2.69
per vote.
-
Doug Linkhart received 41,356 votes and spent $120,345.25 or $2.91
per vote.
-
Mayor Hickenlooper received 67,943 votes and spent $242,982.51
or $3.58 per vote.
Carol Campbell did not receive, nor did she ask for, any special
interest money. The bulk of the money raised came from a soup
bowl fundraiser. One hundred and sixty seven soup bowls were
changed into art pieces by local artists and auctioned off at
the Grant-Humphries Mansion on March 12. The proceeds purchased
printed materials that a great group of volunteers delivered
around the city in late March and April. The people who donated
cash did so because they wanted to have Carol represent them,
not because they wanted to push their special agenda.
Coming
up short in a close race is like losing a basketball game by
a couple of points. “If only that three-point shot had
gone in or if only we had made a few more free throws.” It’s
the same thing with this campaign; what could we have done
to raise the vote count a few more percentage points?
What went well:
An amazing group of volunteers delivered literature in 18% of Denver’s
precincts. Some went beyond the call of duty to deliver in April’s
cold and wet weather. Recruiting volunteers is more important
than raising money. A legion of dedicated volunteers is worth
more than
all the money special interests can raise.
Carol did a great job at candidate forums staying on message,
emphasizing public safety. She never told one group one
thing and the opposite
thing to another group.
There were no personal attacks directed at any candidate
in the race.
What went not-so-well:
The campaign began in mid-January. Had there been an earlier start,
double or triple the number of volunteers could have been
recruited. If we had delivered literature to 36% - 54% of Denver’s
precincts, the outcome would have been different.
The late start also led to organizational problems. Carol often
found herself doing too much of the campaign administration on
her own instead of making voter contacts.
The all mail-in ballot created a new dynamic for campaigning.
It was difficult to determine what should be done in the
final days
of the campaign. Carol seemed to have a higher percentage
of the early votes than those who waited to the last minute.
We could
not figure out how to make the new dynamic work in Carol’s
favor.
It was like campaigning in a vacuum. We don’t want
to blame the media for the defeat as we had problems of our
own, but it
seems incredible that the media, in particular the Denver
dailies, failed to cover any campaign in this election. There
were interesting
races in Council Districts 3, 7 and 8 that were ignored by
the Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News and we should expect
better!
Internet bloggers provided more coverage than those we have
traditionally relied on for information.
Carol
Campbell’s campaign proved that grass roots campaigning
CAN work! Let’s see if grass roots campaigning WILL
work in the future!"
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
