Greetings from the Fourth Middlesex delegation. Remember us?
We were up in Section 218 of the DCU Center. For those who don’t know the geography, Section 218 contains the two for $3 seats that never get sold for Worcester Sharks games. These seats were so far away from the large screens surrounding the podium, it was a challenge to read the closed captioning.
Senator Ken Donnelly is proud of his district. He carries around, in his wallet, a summary of the results from the twelve municipalities with the largest vote totals for Ed Markey in last year’s special US Senate election. Two of his towns, Arlington (8) and Lexington (12) are on the list. The top twelve gave Ed Markey a plurality of more than 126.000 votes in an election Markey won by 117,908 votes. Yet Arlington and Lexington were in the farthest corner of the upper rafters in Section 218.
So a clearly miffed delegation, containing two towns that generate a ton of Democratic primary and general election votes, was looking around at who got better seats (everyone), including districts with Republican senators (sections 112, 113, 213, and 215) as well as guests (section 111). When Warren Tolman’s video showed Ed Markey’s desk in the statehouse hallway, the prevailing thought in Section 218 was “who did this to us and why?”
Of course, being perched in the midst of an angry delegation in the rafters certainly gives one a different perspective on conventions and convention seating. However, the Fourth Middlesex experience raises some important questions of what a delegate has a right to experience at a state convention. What are reasonable expectations when you send your $75 to the party, and what level of equity should be provided for all delegates attending the convention?
My observation is that the DCU center is a horrible venue for a convention if you need to park delegates in the rafters. Just getting from the entrance on the floor level up to the concourse level, which was used to access many of the 100 level and all of the 200 level seats, was challenging. There were only a couple of aisles that would lead you up from the floor to the concourse, which made it a difficult trip through congregating crowds of folks who had seats in that neighborhood. Heading up into the 200s, the stairs were steep, shallow, and difficult for many of our delegates to transverse.
Once you were in the rafters, the experience was very different for delegates in exile versus delegates on or near the floor. There’s a flow of interesting people moving through the convention floor, but even the young campaign operatives giving away campaign signs were discouraged from finding folks in the rafters. Steve Kerrigan found his way up to Fourth Middlesex, but then again his senate district (Worcester & Middlesex) was next to us in Section 219.
Clearly, there was a major difference in the quality of seats and the convention experience between the Third Essex (in front of the podium) and the Fourth Middlesex (behind the Canadian flag in the rafters). Yes, somebody needs to get the prime seats, but should there be such a significant difference between the best and worst seats in the hall? Shouldn’t there be a reasonable expectation of the quality of the convention experience? Shouldn’t we hold the event in a venue that can be set up in a manner that guarantees a reasonable standard for a convention experience?
There will always be better and worse seats. Shouldn’t there be some sort of transparency for assigning seats? Should a district’s performance in generating Democratic votes have an influence in seating patterns? That might be controversial, but during the wait for voting results, we came up with a really fun idea. You know those districts that were announced by the chair for being late and very late returning their ballot books? Next time, they get the worst seats.
Christopher says
…they’ll take even longer to get their books to the Sargent-at-Arms.
A couple other thoughts:
They should have the closed captioning on the jumbotron and not just the front screams. Even as a fully hearing person I sometimes relied on reading the words over the noise in the hall, but the screens were too far away and not at a good angle for everyone.
It seemed like there were enough empty seats that the delegations could have sat more closely together and possibly avoided the nosebleed section.
For Friday night (if Friday is even necessary – it seems we could have done that business and had those speeches during the counting), I would recommend opening only the floor and not the bleachers. Just have all credentialed delegates sit on the floor and don’t worry about sitting by Senate district. When I came in Friday night and looked to see how high up my district was I decided I was too lazy to climb the stairs, so I took an empty seat in another district and could just as easily shout my ayes from there.
kevin-mentzer says
Pablo! I was right next to you in 217. You know – that WHH&M District. I call it the junk draw district. 4 counties but only 60 total votes. Give us your poor, your tired… oh wait – that was something else.
Our angle was slightly better so I was able to read the close captioning, but I agree with the jumbotron statement. We also had quite a few with physical impairments that really struggled with the stairs (and getting in and out – I was convinced the woman in front of me was going to break a leg trying to step over the seats).
It didn’t help that the person helping us find out sections told me to go to 1W instead – and I thought I made it big-time sitting right in front only to find out that, no, up to the nose-bleed section with you young man. Access to the floor was a pain – otherwise I would have parked down there the whole time (except the vote).
I saw some tweets about people complaining the speakers were too loud, but at times they were difficult to hear up there…
bean says
Don’t think we should hold another convention in this hall. DSC members concerned about disability access were told that there would be arrangements for accessibility. But when older members of our delegation tried to use the elevator on Saturday morning that several of us had found and used on Friday night, they were told “there is no elevator” and forced to walk up the multiple flights of steep, narrow stairs from the floor. At 50, I’m considered a young ‘un in our committee, but the multiple trips up and back in the course of the two days wore me out. For others, getting up the stairs was impossible. Members of the delegation in wheelchairs could not be seated with us at all.
Pablo says
Here’s a list of the top 20 towns for total votes cast in the Markey-Lynch senate primary. The number 7 and 16 towns were exiled to Section 218. If I am a statewide political leader, I would be looking to make friends in Arlington and Lexington, and not angering folks you may need in the future. It’s just good political common sense.
1 Boston 60,420
2 Cambridge 13,202
3 Newton 11,927
4 Quincy 11,335
5 Worcester 9,213
6 Somerville 8,707
7 Arlington 8,102
8 Brookline 7,767
9 Medford 7,244
10 Springfield 6,237
11 Weymouth 5,922
12 Milton 5,911
13 Brockton 5,508
14 Braintree 5,503
15 Framingham 5,171
16 Lexington 5,109
17 Malden 4,917
18 Lowell 4,800
19 Lynn 4,620
20 Waltham 4,417
fenway49 says
The good people of Arlington and Lexington won’t just take their ball and go home over lousy seating at a quadrennial nominating convention. One could just as easily argue that the MDP should be extra-nice to those working to build the party in politically hostile areas of the state.
Pablo says
Go ahead. Make an argument for an assignment plan that is open, transparent, and reasonable.
I just fail to see any argument for this year’s seating plan.
marynwill says
I don’t usually look for Exit signs when I enter a place but I did at the Dem Convention. Had there been a fire, our whole district would have been toast. Poor lighting, dangerously narrow stairs, no visible exit signs, and seats so crowded that it was hard to pass even when others stud up to give us room.
tarbelsanklebiter says
The passageways were narrow, the stairs steep, no handrails, bumps for tech equipment on the floors. And lots of unstable and or elderly people not used to climbing stairs…or using canes and such…this is an accident waiting to happen.
tarbelsanklebiter says
And a delegate who couldn’t sit with our delegation because of her inability to get there. Not to mention those brave souls with weak knees and issues with heights who did get up to the seats. I was fortunate and did get up and down those stairs to hold signs and get to the bathrooms and concessions but it wasn’t easy for many of the delegates I saw in our section…although for me the greatest failing of the convention was the inordinately long time for delegations to get their books in. Were there back door deals people were working on or can those tallying the votes really be that slow??? At least it was fun voting for some really good candidates in the race.
sabutai says
Having been in ten conventions running, this year’s had the best seats (on the floor, in the corner). I’ve been in the second balcony. Aside from the state chair’s district being front and center — and nauseatingly unorganized — I assumed simple rotation of some sort was at work. Perhaps someone from the committee could illuminate us?
As for the DCU, there was more seating space available, but for some reason the organizers put the curtain closer to center ice than necessary. Had they pushed that closer to one end, I think more floor space and first balcony space would have been possible.
Christopher says
…are the host delegations, in this case 1st and 2nd Worcester. I think the home districts of key players such as the Senate President and House Speaker usually get the floor as well.
Trickle up says
the “host delegations” should have to eat the nosebleed dogfood, if that would (perhaps) lead to some remediation down the road.
Christopher says
…and the quality of the venue is not the fault of the host delegations. That needs to be taken up with the Site Selection Committee. Host delegation and host committee are largely honorary designations based on being local to the venue.
Pablo says
Thomas M. McGee D 3rd Essex (Lynn)
James T. Welch D Hampden (West Springfield)
Anthony Petruccelli D 1st Suffolk and Middlesex (Boston)
Michael O. Moore D 2nd Worcester (Millbury)
Harriette Chandler D 1st Worcester (Worcester)
Brian Joyce D Norfolk, Bristol and Plymouth (Milton)
Therese Murray D Plymouth and Barnstable (Plymouth)
Linda Dorcena Forry D 1st Suffolk (Boston)
Jason Lewis D 5th Middlesex (Winchester)
Stanley Rosenberg D Hampshire and Franklin and Worcester (Amherst)
Marc Pacheco D 1st Plymouth and Bristol (Taunton)
Pablo says
103 James Timilty D Bristol and Norfolk (Walpole)
104 Gale D. Candaras D 1st Hampden and Hampshire (Wilbraham)
105 Benjamin Downing D Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin, and Hampden (Pittsfield)
106 Cynthia Stone Creem D 1st Middlesex and Norfolk (Newton)
107 Patricia D. Jehlen D 2nd Middlesex (Somerville)
108 Mark Montigny D 2nd Bristol and Plymouth (New Bedford)
109 Sal DiDomenico D Middlesex and Suffolk (Everett)
110 Sonia Chang-Diaz D 2nd Suffolk (Boston)
111 Guest
112 Richard Ross R Norfolk, Bristol and Middlesex (Wrentham)
113 Donald Humason, Jr. R 2nd Hampden and Hampshire (Westfield)
Pablo says
201 James B. Eldridge D Middlesex and Worcester (Acton)
202 Will Brownsberger D 2nd Suffolk and Middlesex (Belmont)
203 Barry Finegold D 2nd Essex and Middlesex (Andover)
204 Guest
205 Kathleen O’Connor Ives D 1st Essex (Newburyport)
206 Thomas P. Kennedy D 2nd Plymouth and Bristol (Brockton)
207 Michael F. Rush D Norfolk and Suffolk (Boston)
208 Richard T. Moore D Worcester and Norfolk (Uxbridge)
209 Michael J. Barrett D 3rd Middlesex (Lexington)*
210 John Keenan D Norfolk and Plymouth (Quincy)
211 Eileen Donoghue D 1st Middlesex (Lowell)
212 Joan Lovely D 2nd Essex (Salem)
213 Bruce Tarr R 1st Essex and Middlesex (Gloucester)
214 Michael Rodrigues D 1st Bristol and Plymouth (Westport)
215 Robert Hedlund R Plymouth and Norfolk (Weymouth)
216 Karen Spilka D 2nd Middlesex and Norfolk (Ashland)
217 Stephen Brewer D Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire and Middlesex (Barre)
218 Ken Donnelly D 4th Middlesex (Arlington)
219 Jennifer Flanagan D Worcester and Middlesex (Leominster)
220 Dan Wolf D Cape and Islands (Harwich)
*Note that Lexington, which is split between two senate districts, was seated with the Fourth Middlesex in Sec 218.
Pablo says
This sort ranks districts based on the plurality/deficit in the 2013 special US Senate election, Markey v. Gomez.
Sonia Chang-Diaz D 2nd Suffolk 20,047
Patricia D. Jehlen D 2nd Middlesex 19,792
Cynthia Stone Creem D 1st Middlesex and Norfolk 19,625
Stanley Rosenberg D Hampshire and Franklin and Worcester 15,965
Linda Dorcena Forry D 1st Suffolk 12,465
Sal DiDomenico D Middlesex and Suffolk 12,383
Benjamin Downing D Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin, and Hampden 11,729
Will Brownsberger D 2nd Suffolk and Middlesex 10,752
Anthony Petruccelli D 1st Suffolk and Middlesex 8,138
Ken Donnelly D 4th Middlesex 7,480
Michael J. Barrett D 3rd Middlesex 6,349
Michael F. Rush D Norfolk and Suffolk 5,435
Jason Lewis D 5th Middlesex 5,296
James T. Welch D Hampden 3,603
Karen Spilka D 2nd Middlesex and Norfolk 3,402
Thomas M. McGee D 3rd Essex 3,208
James B. Eldridge D Middlesex and Worcester 2,601
Mark Montigny D 2nd Bristol and Plymouth 2,189
Brian Joyce D Norfolk, Bristol and Plymouth 1,527
Joan Lovely D 2nd Essex 1,167
Michael Rodrigues D 1st Bristol and Plymouth 714
Harriette Chandler D 1st Worcester 395
Dan Wolf D Cape and Islands -318
Thomas P. Kennedy D 2nd Plymouth and Bristol -391
Eileen Donoghue D 1st Middlesex -395
Barry Finegold D 2nd Essex and Middlesex -454
Richard Ross R Norfolk, Bristol and Middlesex -720
John Keenan D Norfolk and Plymouth -1,196
Donald Humason, Jr. R 2nd Hampden and Hampshire -2,109
Kathleen O’Connor Ives D 1st Essex -2,154
Gale D. Candaras D 1st Hampden and Hampshire -2,981
James Timilty D Bristol and Norfolk -3,189
Michael O. Moore D 2nd Worcester -3,376
Marc Pacheco D 1st Plymouth and Bristol -3,911
Bruce Tarr R 1st Essex and Middlesex -3,960
Jennifer Flanagan D Worcester and Middlesex -4,942
Therese Murray D Plymouth and Barnstable -5,118
Robert Hedlund R Plymouth and Norfolk -5,639
Richard T. Moore D Worcester and Norfolk -5,948
Stephen Brewer D Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire and Middlesex -7,339
Christopher says
Would you mind explaining why you downrated Pablo’s comments which were simply giving factual information about who was sitting where and how strongly they voted for Markey?
AmberPaw says
And YES I did tell the security guard, his supervisor, and his supervisor’s supervisor [claimed to be “head of security”] about the aritificial hip and osteoarthritis of the knee. They all solemnly nodded their heads and said “There is no elevator”. There were also NO fire exits, almost no lighting [those lights that go on during power failures would have been ON in #218]. There were also no lavatories absent going up and down three flights of cement stairs, one side of which had NO handrail. The seating for the 4th Arlington, especially the packed together aisles with almost no leg room assigned to Arlington were NON- ADA compliant, unsafe, and unpleasant. Oh – and so dangerous as to present a liability issue. So now the DSC is on notice. I will personally vote NO on the DCU as a venue going forward. I did not get $75 worth of convention – maybe $15.
Christopher says
I know you mentioned it briefly to me in person yesterday, but I have a hard time believing a venue like that does not meet the requirements to evacuate a packed arena in an emergency.
Pablo says
I think an evacuation of the hall would assume folks in seats had the mobility required to get in and out of the seats. Here, we were assigning seats in areas that folks with limited mobility would have never chosen for themselves.
sco says
We (2nd Suffolk & Middlesex) were across the arena from you, in section 202. You can see us between the flags in your picture.
Like you, pablo, we were asking “why us!?” We have two statewide candidates in our district (Galvin & Tolman) and gave Ed Markey over 15,000 votes in 2013. Sure, Mitt Romney once called our district home, but he’s quietly sold his Belmont condo. He didn’t win a single precinct here anyway.
But besides that, we had several delegates who could not deal with the steep steps. That meant that half of our delegation was sitting high up, while the other half was down closer to the front. Very inefficient for voting. The worst was the two delegates who could not do stairs at all — one of them in a wheelchair — and who had to be segregated from the delegation entirely. The party knew we had a wheelchair user, but apparently that information was not important. The delegation next to us had two delegates in a similar situation. I would say I spent the majority of my time at the convention making sure our delegates were not disenfranchised due to our location basically on a stairwell.
In talking to one of our state committee members, he relayed to me that the only place he knew of that could fit all convention delegates on the same level was the TD Garden, but the party stopped having conventions in Boston due principally to the cost and availability of parking.
We have four years to figure it out. We won’t have another nominating convention until 2018.
Pablo says
You, and our friends over in Cape and Islands (directly across from you in Section 220), had the side angles, but at least you were closer to the floor. We were in the pie-shaped section where the seating started several steps up because the stairway to the concourse occupied the entire width of the section. With the pie-shaped section, there were very few seats behind the stairwell; the bulk of the seats were way back. We were literally at the farthest possible point from the stage.
AmberPaw was right, the steps were narrow, steep, and lacked any handrails. However, I think she was generous in saying she was in a $15 seat. I think $1.98 is more than generous.
sco says
We were beset on all sides, as were you.
I went through my files and that the configuration of the DCU center was pretty much identical this year as it was in 2006. There were about as many delegates that year. I was looking through the BMG archives to see if there were any complaints about the stairs or the configuration. Were we all just that much younger & spryer then and didn’t notice? Did the party do a better job with mobility impaired delegates that year?
(By the way, going through the BMG archives from 2006 brought back a lot of memories and a lot of old names from those heady early days of MA political blogging…..)
rcmauro says
I’m glad the Professional Fire Fighters of MA were out in force at the convention. Maybe they will have some recommendations for next time.
rcmauro says
… their wallpaper is awesome.
Scootermom says
First AND last time I will ever take this on. Have been coming to Convention annually since 2008. Our delegation has NEVER sat ANYWHERE but in nosebleed section since I have started. Doesn’t matter which facility we are in… always susceptible to nosebleeds. We were in Section 215. I do not like heights. The side without a railing was frightening to me. Falling down those stairs would be a disaster for anyone over 21. Add to that the heat,lack of lightening, and narrow steps. Fortunately, I had made the people around me aware of that so several of them reached out to be sure that I had decent footing. Yes, the other side did have a railing. Nice. EXCEPT some people decided that leaning against that railing was an acceptable way to spend the day. Never occurred to many of these DOLTS to step out of the way when people were trying to pass. Time to opt out of the DCU or tell them that the very least they can do is add railings to the center aisles. I don’t want to take up space for the REST of my review of the accommodations. BTW, the people in my district, Plymouth & Norfolk, banded together and worked hard to elect the first Democrat EVER to a Rep. seat in 2012.
Jasiu says
After having attended a handful of conventions, I decided a few years ago not to participate anymore for many of the reasons mentioned here and elsewhere. I do not (yet) have mobility issues, but the long periods of nothing going on (with no estimate of when something will be happening again), the lack of decent food and drink, the feeling of being “stuck” within the venue, and (moreso in non-nomination years) having to sit through speeches that seem meaningless have made the conventions very unattractive to me. So I don’t bother run for a delegate slot anymore. I’m not opposed to being inconvenienced if it is for a good reason and can’t be avoided, but a lot of these problems have solutions that shouldn’t be that hard to implement.
I wonder how many others who might participate have been turned off by the way the conventions are run.
tarbelsanklebiter says
One nice thing about being up high is you can get to the more out of the way food stations…I guess. I had a butternut squash bisque and then a chicken on salad pre-packaged but fresh…maybe it helped that I was bored so went to get lunch around 11 instead of waiting later…and then I lucked out as our delagates brought along cookies and bon bons for the afternoon munchies.
dunwichdem says
First of all, I agree that the cheap seats suck, and are especially unfortunate for anyone with mobility issues, that goes without saying. I’ve only been to the last two conventions, but I thought Lowell’s was in a better configuration; I’m sure each possible venue has its own flaws and so on.
I was actually right next to you, Pablo, in the Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire, and Middlesex district (the WHH&M, or “The Wham!,” as I’ve taken to calling it). We did not have two of the top twelve Markey-voting towns. In fact, of our 28 towns, only one voted for Ed Markey, and that was with well under a thousand total voters. So you say that *you* don’t deserve to be seated in the back. But do we?
Someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but I have to assume that it’s based on number of delegates, to some extent. The WHH&M (The Wham!) only had sixty delegates vote, and only had about ninety people or so at our peak, counting delegates and alternates. When I first looked on the map and saw that we had been squeezed into the corner, I was dismayed, but not surprised. We don’t usually send a lot of people, so they (I assume) squeeze us in in the empty space. It’s unfortunate, but it makes sense.
Pablo says
We had 44 delegates from Arlington, 128 in the total delegation. We’re a big group.
I don’t think any delegation deserves the awful conditions we experienced, and there has to be a much smaller gap between the quality of the best and worst seat in the house. This is clearly aligned to arguments against huge income gaps between minimum wage workers and CEOs. There can’t be front row seats for everyone, but there needs to be much better parity in terms of the convention experience between delegations. It’s obvious DCU center can’t provide that environment.
Yes, I do think there should be some preference based on election results, but I do admit I am taking this view as a member of a very energized and successful community. We deliver significant numbers for Democratic candidates, and I think the party needs to recognize that fact.
However, I will say emphatically that I wouldn’t pay $1.98 to watch any event at the DCU center from Section 218, and I don’t think I should have to pay $75 to sit in such awful accommodations. Nobody should. This needs to be fixed.
sco says
There’s a big difference between a convention & a Sharks game or a concert. Typically at a sporting event or a concert the action is in a single place (the stage, the ice, the court, etc). You get to your seat and maybe you get up once or twice for food/drink. A typical event may last as long as, what, 4 hours for a hockey game that goes overtime? For the convention, there’s maybe an hour where there’s an event on the stage (the candidate presentations) where there’s an expectation that attendees will be paying attention. The rest of the convention experience (apart from the voting, which is also difficult to accomplish efficiently when delegations can’t sit in a compact area) is meeting and talking with candidates and fellow attendees. Well, candidates don’t often come up to the cheap seats and socializing is difficult when you’re effectively rooted to one spot for fear of cracking your head open.
ryepower12 says
Districts that deliver the most votes should get the best seats.
That’s a sense of entitlement that does not belong in this party.
The issue at this convention was the lack of elevators and handicapped accessibility.
It wasn’t that someone in the state party failed to give Lexington and Arlington the best seats in the House.
jconway says
As the party of inclusivity, we should prioritize ensuring all our delegates have access to whatever facility we use. As the son of a partly paralyzed father, I know the pain of seeing broken elevators and having to climb he upper decks of narrow arenas and buildings. I know I would’ve been mad as hell had I been there as a disabled delegate or the friend or relative of a disabled delegate.
Pablo says
Well, not really. But if you look at the way districts were seated, there was some sort of political hierarchy in the seating plan. Unless the seating plan is totally random, which the seating arrangements would certainly disprove, there really isn’t an algorithm that would place Forth Middlesex in Section 218.
Or for that matter, anyone else.
Yes, I want to know who is doing the seating, and what their criteria is for assigning delegations, because I think accountability is a wonderful thing. I may be a liberal from Arlington, but I don’t drive a Prius, I don’t eat granola, and I don’t hug trees. Right now, I am not very fond of trees at all, as the tree pollen is driving me nuts. I cut my teeth in politics in NY, in the midst of major battles between regular (machine) and reform organizations. Those seats felt like someone was sending us a message, and I would like to acknowledge receipt to the sender.
That said, the real point is that the seats in the rafters at the DCU were abysmal. They did not meet any standards for accessibility, and certainly was a major barrier to participation in the event. As I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, DCU should be disqualified as a convention venue if any delegation is forced into these seats. There should be some sort of a standard for the convention experience that members of every delegation should enjoy, not just the haves (1% analogy) from Third Essex and First Worcester.
ryepower12 says
Your attacks on the 3rd Essex are a little obnoxious. This is the first year they had really good seats in my memory, so if the metric is fairness and fairness is defined by waiting ones turn, I think they waited it. So please stop calling them the “1%” “haves,” most of them from Lynn, and Lexington and Arlington the “have nots.”
Getting to more important issues, I think your efforts may be better spent in getting the DCU ditched in favor of other venues in the future than changing the seating arrangements.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Abington, Winthrop and Plymouth have had pretty darn good seats for the last few conventions, too… but I never saw a BMG post about it.
Are you going to tell the Speaker or Senate President to go sit up in the nosebleed seats for two hours for roll call? Which state party member will you volunteer to do that?
Should the Party Chair have to climb up to the nosebleed seats to get with his delegation? (As I’m sure they all like to do for at least a little bit when they get the chance.) And what would that do to the convention schedule?
Personally, I’d prefer we focus efforts on finding venues and good set ups for those venues that makes sure everyone has reasonably good seats, where they can easily read close captioning and hear the speakers.
Lowell sort of fits that bill, but isn’t much (if any) better than DCU in terms of accessibility.
I don’t even remember Springfield well enough to know how that fares on both, but I seem to remember liking it as a location… were it not for the fact that it takes 3 hours to get there.
Short of TD Garden or maybe the Boston Convention Center (if it’s even large enough), I don’t think there’s any great location.
I certainly hope the state party would investigate alternative Boston-area locations like the Agganis Arena and Conte Forum. If they were big enough, they’d at least fit the bill on making sure everyone had reasonably good seats. I have no idea about accessibility issues at those locations, though.
Pablo says
I am not attacking Third Essex. But they certainly were the big winners, and I use the have versus have not argument because of the extreme order of magnitude between front floor seats and the back rows of Section 218. It feels like the difference between a WalMart CEO and a minimum wage worker.
The difference is far from trivial. It is extreme.
Maybe. What are the rules for seating delegations? Is it purely random? Is it a meritocracy? Is it the good old boy system? What’s the rationale? If the senate president’s district gets the best seats, who gets the worst seats? The minority leader’s district? Then you make the argument that we should rank order districts based on Democratic electoral performance, and you don’t place highly productive Democratic towns in the worst seats in the hall.
Scroll up to the list of districts and senators. Make an argument of how you would sort these districts in terms of seating. Make a case for what happened Saturday, or any other scheme you think might work.
Find me a way to reduce the gap between worst to first. Find me a rationale for determining seating that makes sense. Defend the 2014 seating chart. Choose one and go for it.
jconway says
Is this a serious argument or satire? You go to convene with the seats you have, not the seats you want or ought to have.
ryepower12 says
but it is my role to say that anyone who would compare Lynn residents to Walmart CEOs — and Lexington/Arlington residents to minimum wage workers — needs to get a grip.
Pablo says
I am arguing about the order of magnitude in the quality of seats, not the merits of residents of Lynn or Lexington.
By the way, if it makes you feel any better, the Third Essex includes Lynnfield, Marblehead, and Swampscott.
sue-kennedy says
when the delegates in wheelchairs were out in the hall peering in to watch the convention instead of being full participants of the convention.
MW was placed on the far edge of the rafters for the 2nd year in a row even though we have several activists in wheelchairs who are regular delegates.
We had 2 valued delegates in wheelchairs this year and they were clearly noted prior to the seating plan. When I received the seating chart I called leaving phone messages and emailed. When I received no response, I contacted the chair of the co-chair of the disability committee who also emailed with no response.
Upon arriving Friday evening and seeing there was no elevator or other access, I approached the disability table at the convention center to ascertain the plan and pass it along to my delegates. There was no plan. I then went to the sergeant at arms table and found Deb Kozilkowski who jumped into action and arranged seating near our district and runners to record their votes.
It would have been ideal to have these valued members of our delegation sit with us, but Deb did an amazing job with limited time and resources.
After several years of doing an excellent job providing accommodations, the last couple years have been a disappointment. Several members of the disability committee agreed that we need to be more pro-active next year in relaying expectations to staff and are committed to providing proper accommodations.
kevin-mentzer says
Sad that “No Response, No Response, and No Plan” was better than last time. Your delegates have you to thank for their accommodations but it shouldn’t have taken the amount of effort that it did. It certainly seems that you were pro-active and I’m not sure how more pro-active you could be. Who do we write to instead of just posting here? I assume they are already lining up the next one…
Scootermom says
rotation in the seating arrangements. As I stated above, our delegation hasn’t been anywhere BUT in the top level at ANY convention since 2007. The center stairways without handrails are treacherous and dangerous. I don’t recall the lighting being as poor previously. I like Worcester as a locale even if we do have to travel for 90 minutes. Seems to be a good idea to have it in a central location. My issue is with the DCU. I am not knocking any other delegation’s seats. I don’t feel like ours needs to have floor seats but at least a place where a trip to the restroom doesn’t take your breath away.