by Maxx Fidalgo
Driving down the big roads in New Bedford and Dartmouth, I couldn’t help but be startled at how many large “Keep Tom Hodgson” signs were visible. State Road, Tarkiln Hill Road, and Ashley Boulevard seem inundated with them. For one, the 2020 ICE federal lawsuit and pullout from the country corrections under Hodgson’s watch left a bad taste in the mouth of many Dartmouth voters. For two, the constant back and forth shut down or don’t with Ash Street Jail has plagued New Bedford voters since at least the 90s. I was surprised at the commercial support.
Side streets off the main roads in both the city and town showed me houses with Paul Heroux signs stuck in the wet ground of their front yards, flapping in the autumn wind on their wiry stands. Sure, there are a few Hodgson’s pockmarked here and there, but in neighborhoods, it’s clear who’s standing out.
So how are there so many Hodgson signs on the main roads?
A few properties dropped a hint. The Aaron’s on Kings Highway had a large Hodgson sign right under its own. The Tropical Smoothie Cafe plaza beside it had the same exact Hodgson sign right under the column of signage that lists all the stores in the plaza. And what did both of those properties have in common? Under the Aaron’s signpost and at the bottom of the Tropical Smoothie signage column: the sign for Panagakos Development. Where had I seen that before?
The answer: up the street on Ashley Boulevard, where a vacant lot with a garage in desperate need of repair that once may have been an auto shop sits. Panagakos Development owns that property as well as the previous two, and right in plain view of the whole boulevard was another “Keep Tom Hodgson” sign.
Of the 65 properties listed on the Panagakos Development website that are in Bristol County, at least 80% of them have a “Keep Tom Hodgson” sign on the property if they’re in New Bedford or Dartmouth.
Panagakos is owned and run by Michael Panagakos, who has been convicted of 77 counts of tax evasion, owned and had terminated several Dunkin’ Donuts chain shops, and perhaps what most folk know him for, owned over 65 properties between the cities of New Bedford, Fall River, and Attleboro; the towns of Dartmouth, Fairhaven, Seekonk, and Swansea; Westerly, RI; and several spanning, Florida, Mexico, and Aruba, if you’re feeling lucky and like the sunshine.
It’s safe to say that Panagakos Development is a prosperous company - take a look at all the properties they have leased already and the ones in development! That prosperity leads to capital. And the people who control the capital have better means than, say, a part-time blogger who works on a farm during the day and takes board classes at night. Put plainly, Panagakos Development can afford to buy dozens of the large “Keep Tom Hodgson” signs held up by two-by-fours and hard work that people spanning the cities and towns where they own property can see.
The kicker is that this gives them net 60-ish (large) signs across several constituent cities and towns in Bristol County right when election season is hitting. The other kicker is that this is one group’s opinion that gets to be repeated 60 or so times - not 60 or so groups or people that have this individual opinion. This can be misleading for voters who see the signs, as campaign signs are a way for voters to see how much (visible) support a candidate has.
Under the First Amendment, this is their right to free speech on properties owned by Panagakos, and I’m all for it. But it’s also the public’s right to understand that these signs are not representing multiple groups and folks. Let’s not skew the data: this is one group, folks. Tom Hodgson does not have 60-ish large groups and companies supporting and putting out signs for him - just the one (he actually may, but the point is that it’s not these highly visible establishments).
Perhaps the folk who are leasing these places have an opinion and want to vote for Hodgson; then again, perhaps they don’t. But as they don’t own the property, the signs stay. Massachusetts doesn’t strictly regulate campaign signs on the state level, aside from state law 950 CMR 53.03 that states campaign signs need to be removed from areas 150 feet from a polling station before voting actually begins. Therefore, these campaign signs cannot be legally removed as they are legally placed. They also cannot and should not be tampered with or vandalized - if anyone had that thought cross their mind.
What can be done is education about this misinformation - misinformation, and not disinformation, because this skewing perspective may not be intentional on the end of Panagakos Development. They most likely just want to support their preferred candidate and they have the means to do so, and visibly. I called the Aaron’s on Kings Highway and the staff didn’t know who had put up the sign. Across that intersection with Church Street where Kings Highway turns into Tarkiln Hill Road, the maintenance staff at Citizens Bank, of which their lot is also owned by Panagakos Development, had been told to clear out the Hodgson campaign signs there. Maintenance staff stated that Citizens Bank hadn’t been asked to put up the signs and management didn’t want them there. I called Panagakos Development for some information on the campaign signs and this lack of knowledge on the side of their leasers, but was never contacted back. While I found no Massachusetts state laws or ordinances that outlawed putting up signs on property that one technically owns without the knowledge of those leasing it, it doesn’t seem to be courteous or even ethical, some would argue.
It should be noted that some of Panagakos’ properties on the outskirts of Faunce Corner Road that are tucked away, or those in development that don’t garner a glance, are signless. They put the signs they can afford where the people will see them most: on the properties in high traffic areas. Smart, but maybe not quite fair.
No one ever said that campaigns were equitable. But that’s another story for another day.
Today, the day before election day, we look at how an election sign can work on the human psyche. Basically put, the more people see an election sign with a candidate on it, the more likely they are to vote for them, and not just in that area. A 2016 study on lawn campaign signs found that there was a spillover effect for areas that weren’t included in the experiment; i.e. the campaign signs affected the neighborhoods around them, even when they weren’t placed there. People have to drive through different places than where they live to get to work, school, or even go grocery shopping. For example, even if Panagakos Development has no properties, and therefore no signs, in Fall River (part of Bristol County and the vote for Sheriff on Tuesday) but a Fall River voter works in a place where Panagakos does have signs, they will be exposed to these (many, many) signs of support for Hodgson, and can come away believing all those individual businesses put up the signs themselves.
It’s simple: these signs are lambasting people every day with someone’s name - especially a big sign which increases visibility, which leads to more folks seeing it, and therefore how likely a person is to vote for someone and how many voters that candidate gets. If someone sees a sign in multiple places all saying the same thing, the assumption is that all of those places individually want this person to be in that role of office.
This week's editor, C. Otero, an outreach case coordinator with degrees in sociology and international policy and development, pointed out, "This is especially misleading because yard signs are inherently different from [other forms of] advertising. The public implicitly understands that internet and TV advertising may be funded by big money and special interests. Yard signs, however, much like bumper stickers, appear to voice the opinion of a specific individual. By using yard signs, a tool accessible to and associated with ordinary people, Panagakos Development is leading people to believe that there's a widespread, grassroots support for Hodgson." Again, Panagakos may not have had that intent, but the impact is there regardless.
So, the public assumes that the candidate has multiple outlets of support like them, is more popular, or has some worthwhile angle garnering attention. It can go so far as to make folks think that the candidate therefore will get the majority vote since there are so many signs out (and assumed supporters who put up the signs). Why not vote for them?
That’s what these many signs put up by one group can do. Panagakos Development using their multiple properties as their soap box turns into a false projection of what Tom Hodgson support looks like. All those places individually put up signs to support Tom Hodgson? No. Just Panagakos Development on properties that are legally owned by them.
New Bedford claimed a little over 100,000 citizens last census estimate, of which around 77% (≈77,000) are of voting age. Dartmouth claimed a sneeze over 34,000 citizens last census estimate, of which about 84% (≈28,560) are of voting age. In New Bedford and Dartmouth, the voting turnout averages for the 2022 primaries in September were approximately 21.4% (≈8,500 people) and 18% (≈6,000 people), respectively. That’s not too big a number to work with or manipulate, if we project that Tuesday’s turnout will be similar. Add in that, since the 2020 presidential election’s false claims of voter fraud and the 2021 Jan. 6th capitol domestic-terrorist attack, some folks are hesitant or scared to vote. Look at the folk out in Arizona right now! If a judge has to rule that one can’t intimidate other voters simply dropping off a ballot and one must be explicitly told one is prohibited from carrying weapons while one watches you drop off ballots, something seems to have been broken in our voting system (or crushed underfoot, if we’re going off the basis that the system has been broken). At this point, even a multitude of campaign signs spamming someone on State Road or Kings Highway/Tarkiln Hill Road can tip the balance - all based on misinformation.
I’ve had a family member say to me that they didn’t care, they weren’t voting because their vote didn’t do anything. Well it sure didn’t! Because they didn’t use their vote. However, my vote on the other hand has changed legislation on the state and national level, voted for president and members of congress, and now my vote is going to contribute to whoever gets to be sheriff of our county.
As the saying goes, you are not immune to propaganda. Stay informed. Stay vigilant. Then, go out and vote.
Author's Note: Panagakos Development is welcome to contact me via the telephone number I left in my voicemail messages to them or the email on this website's contact page if they were not the ones setting up signs on the majority of their Bristol County properties. I would love to investigate who could have been doing such a thing without the company knowing and what can be done to rectify it.
Special thanks to this post's editor, C. Otero.
Comments