I was interested to see coverage of the aldermanic debates this morning. Nine of the 10 candidates were available, with the 10th having to attend to an emergency. Discussion was wide-ranging.
The questions, submitted by the Creative Economy group, practically begged the candidates to articulate their visions for the future of the city, so I guess it's predictable that the word "vision" appeared in the lead and the headline. For the record, the word itself came up once that I noticed, 88.5 minutes into a 90-minute debate, when Sean Sargeant answered the final question.
I think the debate worked in that at the end of 90 minutes, I had a clear view of what the candidates stood for without hearing the standard platitudes. And maybe the word "vision" is one of those platitudes, but there's a clear division between the candidates on whether we need to pull our horns in and hope a rising tide raises our boat along with everybody else's, or push the city of Rutland as a great place to live and work. And there's a clear division in terms of how the board of aldermen can best achieve that.
It's impossible to summarize a 90-minute debate in an article or a blog post, but I encourage voters to look at the video on PEG-TV's website. They also have candidate statements up, and we'll be publishing a grid of answers on some more basic questions in tomorrow's paper.