Would N.I.C.E. backers resort to dirty dealing just to win?

Walter Connolly says his four-story building at 1 West Richmond Ave, just next to the wigwags, seems to be out of the N.I.C.E. district--after he saw it listed at a meeting in March.

He's a vocal opponent, and this 12,000-square foot building with 40 feet of street frontage would have been a heavy no vote.

He wondered what was up. "I called up the guy in San Diego," he says, meaning the consultant that drew up the map, "and he says, "Well, it doesn't look like it's going to make it.'"

Sure enough, the N.I.C.E. ballot that arrived later listed only his other property, at 116 and 124 Washington Avenue.

June Davies says that two of her four buildings--at 29 and 31 Tewksbury--were taken out of N.I.C.E. after it became clear she would vote no. Under the weighted-voting system, that no vote would have been one more heavy no vote.

On Thursday, I asked Andrew Butt why these were omitted from the district. He said it was the consultant's mistake.

Today, Tom Butt insists via email that all these apparently omitted buildings are indeed within the district.

I'm still awaiting Tom's answer to my latest email: If Connolly's building at 1 West Richmond is indeed still in the district, why didn't his ballot list it?