With a turnout of only 25 percent, Anchorage allowed another skewed election that leaves us with only the most liberal and conservative candidates in a runoff. The two centrist moderate candidates, Andrew Halcro and Dan Coffey, arguably with the most management and Anchorage-based issue experience, were left in the dust by their narrowly focused opponents. Without the leavening effect of a larger electoral turnout, we empower polarizing candidates at the expense of more moderate voices.
Municipality of Anchorage employees probably account for 5 percent of the turnout, and educators contribute another 5 percent. Since both groups are affected personally by the outcome of the mayoral race and approval of bonds, we expect their much higher turnout rates. Given the result margins, these special interest groups drive the results in predictable directions. No wonder these one-off elections usually result in approval of bonds that include operations and maintenance costs rather than true capital expenditures. A quick review of the salary of our public servants, compared to a median per capita income of $34,500, indicates they are not voting solely out of civic duty.
As the race devolved into values-based discussions, Ethan Berkowitz established himself as the most liberal candidate. Given his background and general focus on education and quality of life issues, as well as significant union contributions, he garnered the lion's share of votes from current city employees and union members. After all, if he is elected, can anyone imagine him challenging the unions' stranglehold on contracts sustaining their exorbitant wage and benefits structure?
Amy Demboski positioned herself as the most conservative candidate, initially focused on public safety and cementing her bona fides just before the election as a pistol-packing, right-to-life, sign guarding tea party darling. She successfully energized the conservative values folks to get out and vote. If she is elected, do you think she will lead a comprehensive scrub of the property tax rolls ensuring religious organizations only exempt faith-specific properties? Or perhaps review the negative impact of funding for home schooling versus the overall Anchorage School District budget that supports the more centrist majority? I don't think so.
In short, the two remaining contenders got there by pandering to special interest groups who voted to support candidates who might benefit them personally. Had the turnout been larger, the impact of the vested minorities would be reduced but not eliminated. Perhaps we would be left with at least one moderate candidate and the most energetic of the fringe candidates.
One would hope that the key qualification for mayor, facing fiscal uncertainty and ongoing demands for services, would be the ability to manage the business of the city astutely in the best interest of all residents. Unfortunately, the only issues addressed in round one of the elections -- gay rights, right to life, support for better education or family values -- have little to do with managing the business of Anchorage. The two runoff candidates got there by touting their world view to vested interest groups rather than discussing the nuts and bolts of how they plan to implement their vision for Anchorage within an increasingly complex and constrained fiscal environment.
We pragmatists hope before the runoff both remaining candidates address their plans for managing the city. How will they select their staff? How would they manage a 10 percent reduction in funding from the state? Twenty percent? Where can the city economize or generate more local revenue? How? Perhaps the discussion will yield substantive ideas that either can use if elected to benefit all rather than the few.
In some ways, the Anchorage mayoral race demonstrates why our politics are becoming more polarized and dysfunctional. We have spawned politicians who emphasize personal convictions rather than competence, aided and abetted by a media that focuses on the easy and controversial sound bite.
Yes, Virginia, democracy can be ugly at times. But we have the opportunity to make the best of the situation by forcing the candidates to address the real issues before the runoff. Perhaps with a larger and more representative voter turnout in May, the next mayor will bend to the will of the overall electorate and make the tough calls even in the face of opposition from their dedicated minority constituencies.
Well, we can all dream can't we?
Dan Bonney is an Eagle River independent who has voted in every Anchorage election since retiring from the Army in 2004.
The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, e-mail commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com