Tuesday's local elections produced their share of ho-hum results -- to no one's surprise, the incumbent mayors won easily in Carrboro and Chapel Hill, for example -- but they also turned up a few startling outcomes.

Matt Czajkowski -- it's pronounced "Chai-cow-ski," although we wonder whether he'd mind if we borrow a page from a certain basketball coach and just go with "Councilman C" -- pulled off a dramatic upset of incumbent Cam Hill to win a seat on the Chapel Hill Town Council.

At least it looks that way; Czajkowski's 60-vote margin appears likely to hold up, but it won't be official until it's official, which should happen later this week.

For poll-watchers Tuesday night, Czajkowski's victory was the equivalent of a come-from-behind buzzer-beater. Ever since, the local politerati have been deconstructing Czajkowski's surprise victory. How did he do it? What does it signify?

During the campaign, Hill and Czajkowski offered starkly opposing views of downtown Chapel Hill -- Hill called Franklin Street "amazingly healthy," while Czajkowski said "much of Franklin Street is simply not attractive" and called for measures to improve parking, decrease panhandling and recruit desirable retailers to fill vacant storefronts. Was that the key? And does it mean voters want to see significant changes in downtown policies?

Ballots don't ask voters WHY they voted the way they did, of course, so all such analysis is necessarily speculative. But as impressive as Czajkowski's win is, we'd be wary of reading a 60-vote margin, especially when the other incumbents won handily, as a clarion call for dramatic change.

Also eye-opening was Jim Ward's vote total, the highest among any of the candidates running for Town Council. Ward raised and spent essentially no money on the campaign. Regardless of where you stand on Ward's politics, it's refreshing to know that around here money isn't the measure by which candidates succeed.