Town of Watertown A map of Watertown’s Districts: Peach is A, Red is B, Lime Green is C, Green is D.
The results of the Watertown Election are in, and the winners have been announced, but if the election had followed certain precincts the results would have looked different.
The Town Clerk’s office released the precinct-by-precinct counts from the Nov. 2, 2021, election. The turnout was bigger than recent Town Elections, with 24 percent of the 25,693 registered Watertown voters casting ballots, according to the Town Clerk’s office. In 2019, the turnout was 17.24 percent.
The town had contested races for all but two seats up in the election. The uncontested candidates were Town Council President Mark Sideris and District C Councilor Vincent Piccirilli.
There were also two ballot questions regarding changes to the Town Charter.
At Large Councilors
The Councilor At-Large race featured seven people running for four seats on the Council. Tony Palomba got the most votes, followed by John Airasian, Caroline Bays and John Gannon. Daniel D’Amico was fifth place, followed by Megan O’Halloran and Jimmy Mello.
See the precinct votes below with the winners in bold.
AT LARGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL Place Airasian 214 228 257 298 223 156 319 288 162 466 306 260 3177 2 Bays 207 303 408 403 284 189 307 309 188 238 159 181 3176 3 Palomba 198 298 409 406 303 189 304 332 195 260 173 184 3251 1 D’Amico 135 196 311 321 233 149 259 301 164 282 171 140 2662 5 Mello 93 88 85 123 99 81 178 195 91 275 197 157 1662 7 O’Halloran 139 161 157 177 155 116 236 243 126 371 250 218 2349 6 Gannon 170 232 303 355 281 170 287 304 182 304 152 176 2916 4
Palomba won six precincts: 3, 4, 5, 6 (tie), 8, and 9. Airasian had strong showings in Precincts 1, 7, 10, 11 and 12, where he took the top spot. Bays took the most votes in 2, and tied for first in 6.
While Gannon took the fourth seat on the Council, D’Amico (who finished fifth) had more votes in Precincts 3 and 11.
O’Halloran had her best showing in Precincts 10, 11, and 12, where she got the second most votes. Mello’s best precincts were 10 and 11. He placed third in 11, fourth in 10.
Mark Sideris got 4,516 votes for Council President. There were 143 write in votes.
District Councilors
Three of Watertown’s four districts had contested races in 2021. In District A, the East End, Nicole Gardner won over Michael Hanlon for the seat that has been held by Angeline Kounelis. In District B, incumbent Lisa Feltner won another term over challenger Tiffany York. In D, where Ken Woodland stepped down earlier this year to take a job with the State, Emily Izzo won the seat over Connie Henry.
Each district is made up of three precincts. The winners are shown in bold.
DIST A 1 2 3 TOTAL Place Gardner 242 369 498 1109 1 Hanlon 141 106 126 373 2 DIST B 4 5 6 Feltner 425 305 194 924 1 York 149 158 132 439 2 DIST D 10 11 12 Henry 198 127 129 454 2 Izzo 515 309 271 1095 1
Gardner won all three precincts in District A, but Hanlon had his closes showing in Precinct 1.
In District B, Feltner took all three precincts, but York was within 62 votes in Precinct 6.
In District C Vincent Piccirilli, running unopposed, got 1,091 votes, and there were 56 write ins.
Izzo swept the three precincts in District D, and Henry had her best showing in Precinct 12.
School Committee
At least one new face was guaranteed on the School Committee with John Portz’s decision not to run for another term. The two incumbents won re-election to the School Committee, with Amy Donohue getting the most votes, followed by Lily Rayman-Read. Jessica Middlebrook won her first term on the School Committee.
In fourth place was Jennifer Nicholson, followed by Rachel Kay and Colleen Mahoney Faherty.
The winners are shown in bold.
SCHOOL COM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL Place Rayman-Read 172 238 327 337 273 174 278 294 158 235 157 182 2825 2 Kay 139 221 311 253 176 122 176 189 156 167 110 107 2127 5 Mahoney Faherty 100 113 98 119 98 88 178 193 85 270 180 183 1705 6 Nicholson 108 134 119 177 156 105 238 234 94 375 246 197 2183 4 Donohue 183 199 248 296 200 176 315 295 156 377 254 225 2924 1 Middlebrook 137 203 291 328 229 139 245 281 147 266 155 151 2572 3
The top two candidates split the precincts. Donohue had the most votes in seven precincts (1, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12), and Rayman-Read won five precincts (2, 3, 4, 5, and 9).
Nicholson had her best finishes in Precincts 10, 11, and 12, where she got the second highest tally.
Kay finished second in Precinct 2, 3, and 9 (tie), and third in Precinct 1. Mahoney Faherty finished third in Precincts 10, 11 and 12.
Library Trustees
In 2021, the Library Trustees had a contested race, with four people running for three spots on the board. Incumbent Leanne Hammonds got the most votes, and she will be joined by Sara Keary and Rose Mary Su. Maja Young took fourth place.
LIBRARY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL Place Keary 169 232 268 261 282 174 230 279 186 304 212 167 2764 2 Su 191 228 340 280 225 143 248 263 176 319 186 158 2757 3 Hammonds 218 266 350 384 293 209 358 375 198 397 247 230 3525 1 Young 168 224 267 313 201 134 225 216 126 232 145 155 2406 4
Hammonds won all 12 precincts. Keary received the second most votes in Precincts 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 12. Su got second place in Precincts 1, 3, 7, and 10. Young took second place in Precinct 4.
Ballot Questions
Both ballot questions asking voters to approve changes to Watertown’s Town Charter were approved. Question 1 changed the name of Watertown to City of Watertown from City Know as the Town of Watertown (commonly referred to as Town of Watertown). Question 2 included a wide array of changes, including adding a preamble, allowing the Council to hire staff, adding communication requirements, creating a Community Engagement Officer, and adding a Human Rights Commission.
Question 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL Place Yes 224 307 416 368 308 202 294 309 208 321 214 208 3379 1 No 138 158 191 229 152 121 254 282 118 399 221 192 2455 2 Question 2 Yes 250 332 470 451 338 225 323 349 227 366 238 221 3790 1 No 105 127 124 135 116 95 203 230 90 341 188 170 1924 2
The Yes vote on Question 1 won with 57.9 percent of the vote. Question 2 passed by with a larger percentage of the vote, 66.3 percent.
Yes on Question 1 won in 10 precincts, while No had more votes in Precincts 10 and 11.
Voters backed Yes on Question 2 in all 12 precincts. The closest margins were in Precincts 10 (25 votes), 11 (50 votes), and 12 (51 votes).
Hi
I’m not following your point and would like to understand regarding the election not following certain precincts? Thanks in advance
I may not have been clear. What I was saying was the winner of the overall election did not always win each individual precinct.
Congratulations to Councilor Tony Palomba. He is the consummate councilor; a real man of the people. Congratulations to Mr. Airasian, Councilor Bays, Councilor Gannon, Ms. Gardner, Councilor Feltner, Ms. Izzo, Ms. Donahue, Ms. Read, Ms. Middlebrook, Ms. Hammonds, who garnered the most votes of all, Ms. Keary and Ms. Su. To all who ran, the was a very engaging race because of the competitiveness. To the current town council, please appoint Ms. Young to the vacant Library Trustee Committee position. Ms. Young contributed to the very congenial and good natured Library Trustee race along with the other three candidates. It was a very bright spot to see these women run together.
Correction: School Committee Member Donahue, School Committee Member Read, Library Trustee Member Hammonds.
With the election over I am wondering if the candidates that aligned themselves with the “We are Watertown” group are now regretting that choice. That group was promoting 8 candidates and NO votes on both questions. Overall they were not successful with only 4 of those candidates getting in. Some of the candidates they pushed ended up being the lowest vote getters also. Both questions passed too adding to their failed message.
My advice to people that want to run for office is be careful who you associate with. I believe in this case that anyone associated with the misleading messages, fear mongering and so on actually took a huge risk. For many in town, that platform was a complete turnoff whether it was the angry letters to the editors endorsing them yet insulting others, the misinformation being spread around, and more.
I know for me, I voted completely opposite of their suggestions. The overall tone of that group was a complete turnoff.
We are Watertown was started by a couple of local men who love our town/city. I agree it should have been more focused on the positive of the candidates they chose to endorse. It may or may not have had a negative result. John A, Amy and Emily,sure did well enough!
I believe the people of Watertown have a mind of their own and would not allow negativity from others, unrelated to the candidates to sway their vote. If they did, shame on them for not taking the time to get to know each individual candidate before voting and allowing a Fb group to make decisions for them.
Congrats to all the candidates!!
I’m confused why the “We are Watertown” group got slandered, by so many progressives especially?? “My advice to people that want to run for office is be careful who you associate with” and “I believe in this case that anyone associated with the misleading messages, fear mongering and so on actually took a huge risk”. The only posts I saw where posts the actual candidates made? That they stood by and ran on. What for example was “Misinforming”? How is quoting a candidate fear mongering? I think calling out a candidate, for going to a constituents house, is fear mongering. Last I looked there where over 6oo members, and it was a whose who of our community? Cops, Fireman, numerous Teachers, small business owners, families here for generations and some who just moved here. Yet, they somehow got branded as angry, right wing-nuts
Just the title “We are Watertown” suggests that some folks aren’t Watertown. Please explain. I’ve lived here 13 1/2 years. Am I Watertown?
Who isn’t Watertown? There seems to be a chauvinist tone to the whole thing. Who’s excluded from “We are Watertown”.
Who isn’t Watertown? The people attacking the police, and who jump to the conclusion that since someone got killed halfway across the country that the same thing would happen here, and that Watertown’s finest need to be punished and reined in and pretty much ruled by a bunch of people who think they know better than people trained to do the work. That is who isn’t Watertown.
There are those who give no credit to the work these people do, want to kick them out of the schools when it has been demonstrated that they are a trusted resource and remake the town so that it serves their own agenda.
They are the people who want a Human Rights Commission when there has never been one event that has happened in this town to warrant having one. They want the town council to speak out about national issues that have not one thing to do with running the town, fixing the roads or keeping people safe. If they want national issues, they can run for national office, not the towns and try and turn it into something more than what it is.
Most people in this town are concerned with the state of the roads, that there are small businesses being encouraged here over the box stores, that people robbing their parents and grandparents through schemes, and protecting their children and making Watertown a nice place to live. Not bring the world’s agendas into our front yards. And I think some of those people just had enough.
So people who want a Human Rights Commission aren’t Watertown? That speaks volumes.
Remember that just because something bad hasn’t happened to you doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened to someone else.
It is perfectly consistent with American democracy to question authority, and that includes the police. Where authority cannot be questioned, authoritarianism will prevail.
I wonder why the writer above didn’t sign her full name to this hateful, mean spirited screed?
A reminder, one comment per story if you don’t sign your full name. Feel free to resubmit
I am Watertown, and it has nothing to do with my attitude toward the police, where I grew up, if I care more about the streets or the schools or anything else. I live here, so I am Watertown. And I am very proud to say so. I love living here.
Congratulations to all the candidates who won, and thanks to all who put in the time and effort to run a campaign to serve our community. It is not a small thing to take on a campaign. We who simply vote for our preferred candidates appreciate your hard work and service to us all very much.
Echo Joe Levendusky below here. A good number of the members did not live in Watertown. Last time I checked, Watertown had not annexed Waltham. Plus there were a handful of fake accounts. Lastly, some individuals on the page followed people around virtually and in person like some Eastern European government in the 1990s. Some photos of people holding signs for other candidates were posted on one of the sister FB pages of which there are two. If you don’t like a candidate, the candidate’s positions or that candidate’s supporters, then fine, but you don’t get to malign those people and follow them around without some pushback.
Ironically some of the individuals on the slate were very nice, friendly and warm in person as were their families and partners. They should have touted those positive traits of their candidates. One even worked on the charter, and in my opinion did some great work there. They should have really touted that. Instead we know nothing about those individuals other than there were born in Watertown, and I am a born and bred WatRat, which in my opinion should have been our mascot – Marauders v WatRats! We needed a lot more info about their candidates. We do know that candidate X said this or candidate Y belongs to this FB group or that supporter of candidate X attends many zoom calls. None of this provided any context and all it did was make people run screaming away from the page. Fortunately, no one who was looking for a fight took this page’s information and physically harmed someone. For that I am very thankful.
This “townie v. newcomer” battle isn’t new or unique to Watertown. It’s a sad way to define candidates and officials. Luckily, it didn’t really work. I think Watertown has a nice mix of individuals and experiences on the incoming Council. Very happy that the “slate” approach didn’t work!
Yes and I look forward to working with everyone on the Town Council. I think we got some smart people who can work together and discuss the issues like affordable housing, growing pains from development, digitizing public records, shifting the residential tax burden, brining in more destination-type businesses, exterminating the rats (I really hate certain rodentia!) and integrating everyone in this community. Creed, gender, orientation, color or disability should never disqualify someone from being treated fairly and with dignity. Being dismissed sucks for every human being.
I have trouble understanding the need for a Human Rights Commission in Watertown. We have very many laws in place that protect the rights of people in this country. The US Federal Government and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have such commissions in place. If there is such wide spread human rights violations occurring in town, where can I find these cases to read up on? If things are that bad here, maybe Watertown isn’t such a nice place to live after all. Or maybe we need one because Cambridge has one and we need to keep up. We missed this chance to properly change Watertown to a real new name. West Cambridge would have been a perfect fit. The lawyers will love this new commission for sure.
Hi Dean,
You’ve expressed some feelings that I have as well. If anyone’s human rights are being violated in any way in Watertown then that should be confronted vigorously with state and federal resources as appropriate and needed. Baring that, do we really need to allocate resources to something that seems redundant to other functions of government? If our school curriculum needs updating let’s leave that to the school committee and ed department. If our policing needs different training, focus or resources then we can explore that, too, within the current framework of our government. What’s the compelling need for this new committee?
I’m not sure that this issue was adequately explored and debated. It was a shame that this issue wasn’t separated out from the rest of the charter for consideration like the name change was. The council should understand that there may not be a mandate for this committee in the same was that there was for supporting the charter changes in general. Hopefully not too much time, attention and resources will be devoted to it at the expense of the many other challenges our community faces right now.
Please comment, all! I could be wrong and possibly could be convinced otherwise but right now feel that this committee hasn’t been given adequate discussion and will only serve as a distraction and waste of our limited resources.
Curious how many votes Sideris received even though he was running unopposed. He was, after all, on the ballot.
Mark Sideris got 4516 votes for Council President. There were 143 write in votes. In District C Vincent Piccirilli got 1091, and 56 write ins.
I didn’t know that certain people were running unopposed. I need to get an advisor to help out with precinct business. I’ll have to hire someone who has experience in the polls.