Curtis Beats Caldwell 99-99

Just as Harvard "beat" Yale in the famous 29-29 come-from-behind-with-only-42-seconds-remaining-on-the-clock accrual of 16 points to tie The Game, and thus the Ivy League championship, so underdog Paul Curtis "beat" odds-on favorite Joan Caldwell by accruing an amazing 99 votes in his quest to become Moderator Pro Tempore at the January 18th RTM meeting. Equally amazing, Joan herself pulled 99 votes as well.

At the time, this little bit of "Ripley's Believe It or Not" Greenwich history was known to only four people: the three officals from the Town Clerk's office who tallied the votes, and the Moderator of the RTM, Tom Byrne. Tom, himself a duly-elected RTM delegate, then did something he had done, by his own account, only three times before in his 14-year tenure as Moderator: he voted.

But--and it's a big but--he didn't tell this to the body. He merely announced the vote total as Paul Curtis 99, Joan Caldwell 100.

There was an audible reaction throughout the auditorium. No one, including Paul Curtis, had expected the vote to be so close. No doubt many members had second thoughts about the way they'd cast their ballots. But the vote was the vote, or so we all believed at the time.

When it later came out that the Moderator had intervened to break the tie, quite a furor began to erupt. Traditionally, Tom Byrne, like his predecessors, had merely voted "present" so as not to affect the outcome of the RTM's voting procedures. But now he had broken with tradition, in order to do exactly that.

Does Tom have the right to vote? Well, as an elected member of the RTM, he presumably does. Does he have the right to vote in a manner different from the rest of us, which is to say not with his district, like everyone else, but only after all the other votes have been cast, and the district cards have been signed and certified by the district chairmen? That, dear reader, is the question.

Tom himself now acknowledges that if he could do things over, he would have been more open with the RTM about what he had done. Presumably, he would have said something like, "We have a tie vote of 99 for Mr. Curtis and 99 for Ms. Caldwell. As an elected member of this body, I have the right to vote on this issue. I therefore cast my vote for my colleague of fourteen years' standing, Ms. Caldwell."

There would have probably been some catcalls and boos, and no doubt even some applause at this point. But at least the voting process would have been transparent and open. Which it was not.

One of our local rags, the Greenwich (Dumb as a) Post, has written an editorial today calling for a do-over. While it is not your scribe's favorite journalistic outlet, perhaps it has a point. Right now there is a bad taste in many people's mouths. Let's have a second vote, as perhaps we should have done on the 18th, to break the tie. The thirty members absent on the 18th would thus have a chance to have their say. And Tom Byrne should certainly be allowed to vote as well, perhaps asking Town Clerk Carmella Budkins to act as Moderator Pro Tem while he joins his district for the voting process.

This is, it would seem, the best and fairest way to clear the air. Even Popes and Presiding Bishops of the Episcopal Church are not usually elected on the first ballot. Surely we can manage to take a few minutes at the next RTM meeting to take a second vote that will lay to rest this controversy.

Unless, of course, the March vote turns out to be 115-115. Well, if it does, your scribe will offer a motion on the floor that the two candidates share the office, perhaps alternating on a month-by-month basis. This would allow Mr. Curtis to gain some familiarity with the job, while allowing Ms. Caldwell a chance to share her fourteen years of experience with him. Everyone would be a winner, not least the Town of Greenwich.

UPDATE 1/30/10:

Check out the "comments" section for more on the above post.