This is one man's opinion.

I don't live in the city of Northampton, although, like many people in the Pioneer Valley, I regard it as an important center of political, cultural and economic activity in our region. Northampton has been an important place to me personally since I was a child. I spent many of my formative years in the city, attended elementary school there, and, when my parents' work forced us to move away, maintained a connection to the city, returning often to visit our friends. For the last 15 years, since I moved back to the Valley, I have lived never more than 10 minutes from Northampton and have felt its gravitational pull both personally and professionally.

Despite my connection to the city, I consider myself largely an outsider—a journalist who follows Northampton's political scene from a healthy distance. I offer my opinion of this year's mayoral race, which will be decided at the polls Nov. 3, from that perspective.

As I drive through the city, I see that it has fared much better over the last 45 years than many other places I know. It is a largely stable, often vibrant place, a community strengthened by the civic involvement of longtime residents and newcomers alike, a city continually refreshed by the schools in the Five College area and the students they attract.

In recent years, however, Northampton has lost a bit of its earlier luster. Like the rest of the nation, the city has been affected by recent bad economic times, and even before the latest crisis, it suffered from decades of anti-government public sector spending policies at the national and state level.

With rising municipal costs and falling state and federal aid, Northampton has struggled under increasing financial pressure, trying to preserve a high standard of public service in the face of dwindling outside resources. At the same time, many of the city's businesses have felt the impact of a global recession, forcing a few to close their doors and others to downsize.

In addition to the visible signs of decline—the decline that proponents of Northampton's new Business Improvement District saw when they began their work last year—there has been a change in the city's political dynamics. In the last few years, there have been signs of growing unrest within the polity. A number of recent initiatives—special zoning for Smith College, the effort to expand the municipal landfill, the plan to build a Hilton Hotel downtown, the continuing redevelopment of Hospital Hill, the summer's tax override—have drawn strong public opposition, with many residents saying they feel unheard and unrepresented by city government.

During this time, Mayor Clare Higgins has made forceful and at times successful efforts to withstand pressures to cut spending and lower the quality of government service. In big and small ways, she's fought back against the growing anti-government ethos gripping the state and the nation. She has also pressed forward, often in the face of tough local opposition, on an agenda that she feels balances the city's need for economic development with its commitment to the environment and the needs of its residents.

*

Clare Higgins is a skilled politician and a stubborn advocate for her agenda. But in recent years, she's demonstrated an increasing inflexibility, a resistance to changing her agenda in light of changing circumstances and public opinion. This may be the nature of incumbency itself; long-term officeholders can become hardened in their positions and, surrounded by many of the same people year after year—supporters who, quite often, have the greatest access to and influence on incumbent leaders—isolated from the broader public.

As the mayor has pushed forward, she has appeared increasingly unresponsive to the many people who express doubt about more controversial aspects of her agenda. In the case of the landfill, for example, Higgins has done little to reassure those who raise concerns about the safety and efficacy of expanding the dump over an aquifer. Her continued reiteration of studies that a number of serious scientists as well as members of the public find unconvincing is not a sign of strength, but a sign of calcification and tone-deafness.

In many cases, it's the mayor's methods, rather than her policies, that have reinforced and widened divisions in the city. While her policies are often in line with the values of a majority of voters, she has gained a reputation for being autocratic, largely disinterested in fostering a healthy debate or engaging openly with the views of those who disagree with her. As recent controversy surrounding public records under her watch underscored, openness and transparency have not been a hallmark of her tenure.

*

I believe Northampton needs a change in leadership. I also believe Northampton is fortunate to have a candidate in this race who represents the right kind of change.

Michael Bardsley is not just "Anybody But Clare," to borrow a line from one of his opponent's campaign ads. He is a 16-year incumbent city councilor, a well-known progressive leader and community and labor organizer who has for many years shared many of Mayor Higgins' views. While he has been the mayor's ally in many fights, Bardsley has demonstrated that his first allegiance is to the people who've elected him. In recent years, he has been responsive to individuals and groups who feel ignored or marginalized by the current mayor and a majority of the City Council, using his office to keep dissenting opinion and criticism from being summarily dismissed.

While he has been criticized for not providing clearly defined alternatives to Mayor Higgins' proposed policies, Bardsley has shown good sense and wise restraint in not opposing the mayor to establish a contrast purely for political purposes. Rather than being a grandstander, Bardsley is a careful and thoughtful person who approaches each issue on its own merits, guided by a commitment to democratic process—to open and accountable government, intellectual honesty, basic fairness and respect for other points of view. In his campaign, he has not offered a vision of a radically different set of initiatives than the current mayor's, but a vision for a different kind of leadership based on openness and inclusion.

In my view, Mayor Higgins' re-election campaign has been mainly about fear—fear of changing leaders in the midst of economic crisis, fear of a segment of the polity who hold views contrary to hers, fear of a challenger who is attempting to bridge divisions she has helped to create. I believe Northampton should reject Mayor Higgins' fearful message and embrace this opportunity to make a fresh start. Rather than stick grimly with a mayor who, despite her many accomplishments, appears increasingly unbending in the face of public criticism, I believe Northampton should turn to someone who isn't afraid to listen or to reach out broadly for new ideas, tapping into the city's great wealth of talent and passion.