Tracy Logel’s defeat at the hands of David Dunning last fall (in the race for Chili Town Supervisor) was a strange political event for at least two reasons: Dunning’s decision to switch parties (from Democrat to Republican) a few months later and the D&C’s decision to allow community bloggers to turn their sites into arms of the Dunning campaign.

We sat down with Tracy Logel recently to get her take on all of this. She was kind enough to give very detailed answers so I’ll break the interview into two parts. Given what went on in the comments of the D&C blog on this topic, I’ll be screening the comments here pretty carefully. We also plan to contact David Dunning to see if he’d like to respond.

Here’s Part I of the interview:

RT. What do you believe prompted David Dunning to run against you?

Tracy Logel: To answer your questions, I will need to provide a history of the 2 events leading up to Dunning’s appearance on the political scene. First, I was elected Town Supervisor without the support of the Town Council members. At least two council women were very close with Steve Hendershott who I beat in a Primary. They enjoyed free cell phones and several other perks that I took away to save tax dollars. Chili was the only town providing tax payer paid cell phones to council people anywhere in New York State. I scored no “brownie points” with that move and one councilperson (Sperr) was very public in stating she wouldn’t rest until I was out of office. Overall, the general Town Council attitude was that the County was trying to take over the town government as I had just spent 10 years as the County Legislator representing Chili. They had never gotten over the fact I had been named County Legislator over their guy in 1994. Throughout my 10 years as Legislator and several elections, I had never received any financial support from the Chili Republican Committee. For that matter, I never received any during my 4 years a Town Supervisor either. To sum it all up, I had never been their choice for any office and never had their support.

Second, David Dunning surfaced as a typical NIMBY (not in my backyard) through the “NO MALL ON PAUL” movement. His home sits directly across from a new mega-church (Our Father’s House) that was being built in a cornfield. David, along with a few others in the general vicinity, resented this change in their surroundings and started using the D&C Blog (David’s favorite form of entertainment it turned out) to take verbal shots at the congregation. They stepped up the rhetoric and began a ‘vicious’ attack when they learned the church was planning to sell off 16 acres to help fund their building project. Words such as “cult”, “dad’s pad”, etc. began to pepper the postings.

A large developer from Atlanta had offered to purchase land east of the existing Wegman’s site to build a Target and Lowe’s shopping area. This land literally could not be seen from Dunning’s home but the increasing resentment about the size of the church building spilled over into anything happening in the vicinity. Blog postings escalated into discussions about traffic jams, fear of robberies from the increased influx of shoppers and every other form of fear mongering they could dream up. Cars were being flagged down on weekends and misleading information handed out.

The “NO MALL” group decided to hold public meetings at a local restaurant and I think this is where his candidacy was born. This group of 20 to 25 regulars (numbers fluctuated week to week) began turning their attack to the Town Government and as Supervisor I was the number one target. Town Board members began to see a way to incite more trouble for me and I believe the rest is well known. David wasn’t a member of any party so it was easiest for him to join the Democrats who had not run a candidate against me in the previous election. I believe he was encouraged by at least 3 of the 4 members of the Town Council and given campaign assistance on the side.

RT. What do you believe are the reasons that many Chili Republicans backed Dunning’s race against you?

TL: There was a good Democratic turnout in addition to some very misleading campaigning by the two town council candidates, Ignatowski and Slattery. Our Republican Committee Chairman Bernie Iacovangelo (who is also the largest developer in town) put up large 4X8 signs for just Slattery and Ignatowski early in the summer as they were in a Primary. Throughout the Primary, both candidates and the Chairman, blamed me and thought I was supporting the opponents financially. I never gave any money to the opponents and they should have known that from the political filings. At the end of the Primary, the Republican Chairman did not have my names added to those signs. So large signs for just the two council candidates were up along with Dunning signs from August through November as Dunning was also conveniently in a Primary. In Chili you cannot put up political signs until mid September unless you are in a Primary. I was forced to wait until late September to put up signs and then I had to rely on the normal size lawn signs. Throughout the Primary, Ignatowski and Slattery had their signs on lawns with Dunning. This sent a very confusing message to the Republicans. I was continually asked if I was running. I believe that by the time I was allowed to put up sign and put out literature the die was cast against me. In addition, I heard from reliable sources that Slattery and Ignatowski were actively asking people to vote for Dunning. Councilwoman Sperr who was not up for re-election was working in her large district in South Chili for Dunning. I lost by a large number in that district which heavily contributed to my overall loss. I found literature on doors left by Ignatowski and Slattery with my picture/info page torn off the tri-fold handout piece. I have kept one as a reminder.

Throughout it all, the Chili Republican Chairman accused me of supporting the primary against the Council candidates. He refused to have them remove their signs from lawns with Dunning signs and didn’t add my name as a candidate to the large signs. He worked overtime it appears to create an opening for Dunning.

Dunning was not above spreading erroneous information as he went door to door either. He had repeatedly stated on his blog that a new home had been built for my husband and I by the developer who wanted to develop the area near Wegmans. They made statements about not having a mortgage etc. I thought for sure the electorate was smart enough to check if it were true but I was wrong as I have recently learned. People have asked me if what they had been told during the campaign was true. I tell them the truth – we built a handicap accessible home to keep my husband who has M.S. out of a special care facility as long as possible. My house was built by a small local builder and I have a large mortgage.

I also believe many people didn’t vote as they never dreamed Dunning would win. The polls showed I had a 74% approval two months before the election. Over the past 7 months I have been stopped at church, in stores and on the street by people asking me to run again. Far too many have told me how they thought I was a shoo-in and hadn’t had a chance to vote. Some have said they were totally misled by Dunning and they too have asked me to run again. All in all I think it was a unique combination of reasons why I lost.

RT: Do you believe that Dunning intended to switch parties all along?

TL: Yes, I think Dunning intended to switch parties from the beginning. He was never on good terms with his Democratic running mates and one of them ran a Primary against him. I understand the County Democratic Party offered to help him and he turned them down which had surprised them at the time. He spent all of his time talking with the Republican council candidates and was often seen with them. I understand he met with the Chili Republican Chairman also. His lawn signs were never on lawns with his Democratic running mates. I was continually asked if I was aware of what was going on. I couldn’t understand why his Democratic running mates weren’t complaining. My complaints fell on deaf ears in Republican Chairman, Steve Minarik’s case. Steve said I was quote “over reacting” – his typical response to all female candidates. I should know after 16 years.