LOCKPORT — Today you’ll find our endorsements for the City of Lockport races. Residents will choose a Common Council. All wards have a race, technically, but we found two that we think are slam dunks because of one party within those two races not doing too much in the way of actually running.

First Ward

In the First Ward it’s incumbent Richelle Pasceri versus Bill Richardson. Bill told us he wouldn’t go through our endorsement process because he’s not accepting any endorsements. We respect that. But we also haven’t seen anything from him showing that he’s actually running.

Pasceri, on the other hand, can be judged by her actions. From the pointed questions she’s asked about neighborhood parking shortages and a flawed City Hall security plan, to her unabashed advocacy for curbside recycling, she’s demonstrated spunk and spine. The city’s youngest alderman does not politely defer to Council veterans, she challenges them when they need challenging. Pasceri gets our endorsement — and not just by default.

In the Fifth Ward it’s two newcomers: Scott Hughes versus Ken Genewick. Hughes couldn’t find a time to meet with us because of his busy schedule and coaching soccer, so we’re endorsing Genewick. We’re sure Mr. Hughes is a fine person, but if he’s too busy for an hour at the newspaper, we wonder how much time he’ll have for his constituents. Genewick gets our

endorsement.

Here’s a look at the other three wards and Alderman-at-Large

Second Ward

Incumbent Amanda Alexander was good at offering “sound bites,” i.e. political speak, but offered very little substance. She struggled to remember what “we did,” and by “we” the Editorial Board assumed she meant the Common Council. At one point when talking about housing blight and rules of the annual foreclosure auction, she had to ask our city beat reporter what changes has been made in the bidding rules.

Asking a reporter what she and her fellow councilmen did is pretty scary.

Honestly, when given a chance to talk up her successes, she had none.

Her challenger, Jack Smith, brought his A game. He’s fed up with a lack of city participation in all of the volunteer work taking place in his ward, including his efforts with a block club.

He’s president of that block club, which has worked to mend relationships in the neighborhood, developed a park and reached out to the police department.

He questions the management of the fire department, the lack of recycling, stalled plans for the parking ramp, out-of-control overtime expenses, you name it. They’re all issues on the mind of the US&J; Editorial Board, and more importantly, residents of the 2nd Ward and the city generally.

His opponent, if only in office for two years, has done nothing to address any of the city’s outstanding issues.

Now, Smith seems to be a man who says what he believes and is not afraid to stand behind it. So much so that when the interview turned to the topic of to policing in his ward, which typically is one of the higher crime areas in the city, Smith suggested female police officers on the Lockport force are not “intimidating” enough to trouble makers in the neighborhood. He said the department needs “fewer gazelles and more pit bulls.” When asked to clarify, he repeated the assertion and added, “face it, females are physically not as strong as most males.”

Wow. We wonder what he’d say to his daughter if she wanted to be a police officer. Strength comes in all shapes and sizes, and we’ll leave the decisions about who’s fit and who’s not to the chief and the Police Board.

We endorse Smith for everything he said prior to taking his shoe off and sticking his foot in his mouth, but he must work on thinking before he speaks. It’s good to have convictions and believe what you say, but you also need a filter.

Third Ward

Incumbent Flora McKenzie is much like Amanda Alexander: didn’t tell us much and didn’t impress. We’re all fans of McKenzie because she is at every function around town, but that alone doesn’t mean you’re doing a good job. A recycling program, settled contracts with the police and fire departments, lower taxes, figuring out the parking ramp situation — do you see where our endorsements are going?

Again, McKenzie may have only served a few years, but she’s guilty by association and non-action. She points to the Unity Festival as an accomplishment. We’re in complete agreement, but is that it?

McKenzie is so apologetic for the unions, it’s not funny. Everything has to be negotiated, she says, meaning the people who elected her to represent their better interests can’t do what’s needed unless it’s all OK with the employees.

Perhaps there are just too many Delphi/Harrison retirees running the city to appreciate the realities of life for non-unionized folks who, surprise!, outnumber the unionized. In the private sector, you’re not getting 3 percent raises this year and next year, plus 100 percent employer-subsidized health insurance, plus, plus, plus. In the private sector, these days, you’re happy to keep your job.

McKenzie didn’t do much for us.

Her polar opposite, Steve Calhoun, is a bulldog who seems like he’d get out there and tear things up. The guy reminds us of Scott Cercone, past 3d Ward alderman, and has the energy and fight of a Phyllis Green.

One of the only non-Delphi retirees running for office, Calhoun has a working man’s sensibility about him that we feel better represents the people.

He has fought the good fight for his Little Loop Football players and their field, seeing to it that there are some improvements made at Outwater Park.

He’s a feisty character who doesn’t seem afraid to take on the unions, bang the drum for recycling and more. That’s what we need.

Calhoun gets our endorsement.

Fourth Ward

Incumbent Patrick Schrader has given a good portion of his life to serving the city and has always worked hard for it. We commend him for that.

But, this is a new year, full of fresh faces and ideas and a need for energy.

The days of “that’s the way it’s always been” are over.

Schrader is Lockport through and through and has shown that over the years, but at some point, voters need to look at the candidates and ask themselves: “If I don’t agree with where things are going, who has been responsible for that?”

In this case the blame falls on nearly every incumbent, longest-tenured Schrader included.

Still no recycling, still no union contracts, etc. Broken record, right? Well, we said the same thing two years ago.

Andrew Chapman has ideas and seems willing to explore the city’s options.

Maybe there’s a possibility of going with a volunteer fire department, maybe a hybrid option is viable, or maybe there’s another idea that just hasn’t been suggested yet. Chapman made it clear he’s willing to investigate. The current Council just keeps approving 3 percent raises and “negotiating” with little leverage.

Schrader’s a lifelong Lockport guy. That’s all well and good, but if you’re always in the same place you run the risk of nursing a parochial outlook. Chapman is a well-traveled businessman who’s lived and worked all over the United States; his resume promises the benefit of a broader perspective.

Still, we have some reservations about Chapman. He’s a bit abrasive, which in his own business may help drive his success, but the business owner needs to know that nobody takes over the city corporation single-handedly. To be effective, he’d have to play nice with his fellow councilmen and the mayor. Saying “no” simply because it hasn’t been said enough in the past does not serve the public interest.

Issue-wise, we’d ask Chapman to rethink his opposition to rezoning of South Transit Street, as well as his opposition to citywide property revaluation. It appears there’s a good deal of under- and over-assessment all over the city now, and he’s bright enough to know why that’s unacceptable. His aversion to re-val seems a bit selfish, given that he owns one of the most valuable residential properties in the city.

Clearly Chapman relishes a challenge. He’s gotten his hands on city documents, asked questions, talked to his neighbors in the 4th Ward and he’s ready to roll. He’s got one horse in the race — turning the city away from its same-old wasteful ways — and fire behind him. We’re willing to give him two years and see what he can do.

Chapman gets our endorsement.

Alderman-at-Large

In this race, residents throughout the city can cast their ballot, and it’s one of the tougher races to decide.

Incumbent Joe Kibler is a no-nonsense Lockport guy through and through. He has a stellar volunteer record, including more than 50 years with the Midget Baseball League, and leading the successful Community Pride program, which puts non-violent offenders to work doing various jobs around the city on Saturday mornings. He serves on the Cold Springs Cemetery board, helps out at the Niagara County Fair, steps up at his church, served on the Salvation Army Board … Well, you get the idea. He has devoted a lot of his life to community service.

Kibler also says he relishes constituent service. As the at-large alderman he takes phone calls from residents every day and prides himself on getting their problems addressed, or at least explained, as quickly as possible.

He’s fashioned an image of himself as a fiscal hawk, favoring recycling only if it doesn’t bump up the tax rate and speaking bluntly about the excesses of city employee unions.

His rival, Anita Mullane, is also a tireless community servant. Her laundry list of accomplishments includes getting Emmet Belknap Middle School’s $10,000 signboard up entirely from donations, helping lead the Lockport High School Foundation, raising money for breast cancer research and American Cancer Society ... It all speaks of someone with a can-do attitude and energy to burn.

Mullane, a teachers’ union representative, is campaigning partly on the belief the city has to take a new tack with its employee unions. A “fresh face” like hers might be exactly what’s needed to ease tensions between administration and the firefighters union and clear the path to contract settlement, she suggests.

Mullane is insistent the city can “find” the money to implement a curbside recycling program by cutting wasteful spending and/or tweaking operations to wring savings out of them. Her stance — decide what’s important and what’s disposable, because surely some things are disposable — is most sensible.

City residents are fortunate to have their choice of two smart, hardworking picks for alderman-at-large post. We believe both would work hard at constituent service as well as macro-level city issues. The fundamental difference between them, it seems, is the manner in which they’d deal with the employee unions. So we leave it up you — if you agree that a hard line needs to be taken with the unions, cast your vote for Joe Kibler. If you favor a new, softer approach, vote for Anita Mullane. Either will give their best to the job.