Last Wednesday, New London Mayor Daryl Justin Finizio announced he would seek re-election in November 2015 after all, seven months after he stated in an April 1 address to the City Council that he would not do so. Back then, the Democratic mayor said he feared his political opponents, wanting to block his re-election, would oppose for political reasons critical policy initiatives aimed at restoring the city's fiscal health.

"I cannot simultaneously lead the city out of this situation ... if every proposal from my adminsitration is perceived as a politcal maneuver designed to get me re-elected. It is for that reason that I have decided I will not be a candidate for re-election next year," said Finizio at the time.

The mayor cited as the major factor in his reversal the approval by comfortable margins of five questions on the New London ballot Election Day. They included a $168 million plan to complete the replacement and modernization of city schools, part of a program to convert the New London public schools into a regional, magnet-schools system. Also approved were the education and municipal budgets and a program pushed by the Finizio administration to rebuild the city's depleted fund balance.

Day Editorial Page Editor Paul Choiniere spoke to the mayor soon after he made his announcement. The following are excerpts from the conversation.

Question: Why was the approval of the ballot questions so pivotal to your decision to reverse course on your prior pledge and seek re-election after all?

Answer: To say what happened yesterday was a home run would be underselling it. It was a grand slam for the city and for the policies of the administration. And I never could have foreseen that or predicted that. I also did not know six months ago what the pulse of the people would be on this. But since I said I was dropping out, I've been getting calls from people in the city asking me to reconsider.

(The vote) confirmed for me what I believe I've seen in New London over the last four years, since I made my run for mayor. When you poll the political in-crowd in town you get one reading on what the politics of New London are. But when the broad population of the city votes ... you get a very different reading.

Q: Doesn't this raise questions about your integrity, the fact that you pledged one thing and now you are doing another?

A: I know there probably will be a million criticisms and I have no illusions that these folks that have been on me for three years will not be delighting in the opportunity to say he lied, that there is an integrity issue. I know in my heart that I have been very genuine throughout and that these circumstances are so remarkable and so unpredictable that they've forced me to reconsider.

Q: Some will conclude this was your plan all along. Remove yourself as a political lightening rod, take that opportunity to get your agenda approved, then jump back in the race.

A: I didn't drop out as some gimmick. I really had no intention of running again.

I can tell you if you had been in my house for the last six months, and has asked me or my husband, (you'd learn) there was no ploy and no gimmick. I was out (of the race) and some days I was grateful to be out. Believe me when this ends … the day after I am no longer mayor will be a very, very good day in my house. I'm not looking for a career here. I certainly don't want to be mayor for life.

When I dropped out I fully believed that the city was going to run out of cash. We weren't listening to our financial advisers. I had no idea if the Coast Guard Museum land transfer would move forward, if the magnet school program would move forward at all. (The) ability to predict where we would be today, six months ago, is almost impossible.

What people have been telling me over those last six months is that I should stay and finish the job. Until (election) night, I didn't know if finishing the job was going to be even an option, but now it clearly is. We have a clear mandate, we have a strong partner in the governor of the state and I am confident if I am re-elected ... I will be able to finish that job and I think that's just too important for this city not to run again.

Q: So the governor's re-election was a factor in your decision as well?

A: Yes ... because we are going to need the state's strong partnership in all of this. But we now have the ability in the next three to five years to convert to the first all all-regional, all-magnet-schools district in the state … to build the National Coast Guard Museum and, if we keep this administration in place, to fully restore our city's fund balance.

If the same folks who ran the city before and the same people who have opposed us and held us up and tried to block these policies were to take the reins of government right now, it would jeopardize whether any of this will succeed. It is very clear what the policies of the former leaders of the city were. They did not work. They led us to the position that we were in when I became mayor and I do not want to see us go back to the old guard and the old policies that dominated New London.

Q: Are you concerned that now that you are back in the race you will again become the focus of criticism and your policies will again stall?

A: I think if that happens now, everyone will know exactly what it is. If - now that we are moving forward and because I have announced by re-election - suddenly efforts are made to grind things to a halt again, it will show that one side of the equation wants to move the city forward in a constructive way and the other side is just obstructing.

Q: Did you make the announcement now (Wednesday) to beat Michael Passero to the punch? (City Councilor Michael Passero, also a Democrat, announced Thursday his intention to run for mayor.)

A: (Laugh) I know my old boxing coach … always taught me that when you punch, be first.