Rolling my eyes at seeing the "Re-Elect Waterman" signs...

If you don't recall, we last decided our choice for Mayor way back on July 12, 2011 in a run-off election where 2,727 voters came out to the polls.  Those that came out chose Mayor Waterman by almost a 6% margin - that's about 155 votes above the margin that would have claimed the minimum majority (The Post referred to this as a trouncing.)  So, less than three months later, the Waterman camp is proclaiming the need for perhaps a whole different set of voters to come out and in November and re-elect her.  Well, that group of voters can't re-elect her if they didn't elect her in the first place.  I think that the composition of that voting group in November will be different than the one that appeared in the middle of July.

Then consider the "pre-baked" notion of the election in the first place.  The June/July series of elections originated from former Mayor Varela's premature departure which, I firmly believe, was conspired and hatched by those wishing to sneak one of their favorites in the Mayoral slot without all of the candidates that usually flood the Mayoral race in Lake Worth.  Instead of the usual choice between ten or more hopefuls, we have a choice of three this time.  Probably voter/candidate fatigue?  I think so.  I am sure that this whole scenario was done with complete forethought and planning by those hungering for more power in our little hamlet.

But what about the condition of that hamlet?  Whoever proclaims "Re-Elect" on an campaign sign surely must think that the voters see a rosy glow when they look at the condition of that hamlet.  After threats related to breaking the contract with PBSO and Fire Rescue, two new assessments with others in the works, one might wonder how rosy that glow is or if that glow is indeed rosy, or if it is more like the glow from a nuclear waste facility.

Remember, our current Mayor Rachel Waterman proclaimed that she couldn't be held responsible for the decisions of others.  We saw this played out this week during the meeting on the beach budget - I wonder  if she can claim responsibility, in her current leadership role, as not being responsible for the indecision of others, including herself now.  We are still left without a strategy to incorporate site lighting and understand options/alternatives to the surprise $2 million cost over-run.  And all we can hear is crickets in response to the finding by the Office of the Inspector General that the casino building is NEW construction.  Regardless, we can predict what is being said at doorsteps around our fair city.

No, this time Rachel will have to rely on more than just being placed on a Marketing Task Force (which I understand was disbanded over the summer and now will actually be made into a legitimate board.) and having appeared in a Palm Beach Post fluff piece about her triumphal return to Lake Worth.  She will have to run on her record and the fact that she still enjoys the endorsement of three of her four dais mates.  Also consider this, her voting on the dais, should Rachel be re-elected, would not be constrained by the need to prepare for an upcoming re-election campaign within the next three and a half months.