New Haven Independent

Posted by: Bruce | October 25, 2007 9:13 AM

"If you want services, you have to pay taxes,"

What services do New Haven residents get that we don't get in the suburbs?

Posted by: anon | October 25, 2007 9:36 AM

Individuals/families like the Murphy-Dunnings are the last people who should be complaining about high taxes - anyone who sends their kids to private school is opting out of the public system BY CHOICE - if one was dissatisfied with the public education system they should get involved rather than run to an alternative

- if a family decides to send their kids to private school that is their rightful choice - but those extra costs are THEIR burden and should not be part of an argument against higher taxes.

Imagine if all that private school tuition was put into the public system what a different system we would have no matter who was running it - it would be incrementally better!

Posted by: a big taxpayer | October 25, 2007 9:42 AM

Bruce,
To answer your question, many suburbs and small towns do not provide full time police and fire services, do not provide weekly trash pick up or bulk trash services, do not provide the many and varied educational options, community services, etc. Towns that do provide many of these services, such as Hamden, do have comparable taxes to New Haven. I'm not saying there isn't considerable waste and inefficient spending in the New Haven government, but these are a few examples.

Posted by: robn | October 25, 2007 9:56 AM

Its true that funding from DC has dried up. In the past 7 years we've seen the biggest shift in tax distribution in the history of the US. True to their bizzare ethics, the Republicans have done it through huge tax cuts to the rich, as well as privitized conduits...i.e sending a huge percentage of our tax dollars to crony war profiteers.

So for those of you who voted for Sen Lieberman, hoping the senior Senator would watch out for the State of CT, guess again.

And for those of you considering voting for a Republican alderman as a protest vote, think about why he's Republican. Maybe you should consider an independent candidate. If there isn't one, maybe you should run!

Posted by: cedarhillresident | October 25, 2007 10:21 AM

...rising taxes the result of a decrease in state and federal funding

The programs that are started with this state and federal money are started because they are paying for it right?? Well at least some of them. So If the state and feds stop paying for a program that was approved because it was being subsidized by them would we not end them if we lose that subsidy??

Posted by: Gary Doyens | October 25, 2007 10:57 AM

Ina is proud of her track record. Let's review what she's proud of:

1. The West Haven magnet school will be built with New Haven tax dollars; West Haven will presumeably get the PILOT dollars from the state. We'll get the long term debt - who carries the operating costs? Most likely New Haven.

2. Ina's senior tax freeze, transferred $3 - $4 million of tax bills to non-senior homeowners. This move artificially escalated higher than normal the bulging taxes of working families, many with kids. If spending was reasonable and responsible, seniors wouldn't need a freeze.

3. Ina voted against every proposal to cut city spending in the last budget cycle. She did agree to increase parking fines by more than 25%; increase building permits and other fees too. Altogether, she approved new and incremental increases a record $30 million this year.

4. Shartenburg - This project is riddled with welfare for the well-heeled. It requires an immediate taxpayer subsidy of millions from the housing authority; $4 million in property for free; a delay of years for building permit fees; and the million dollars in PROJECTED property taxes from Shartenburg will not be realized for at least five years, perhaps longer.

5. Ina has rubberstamped every proposal from the mayor's office - and supported every tax increase in the last four years. To my knowledge, she has proposed no cuts in anything.

6. It is not true that cuts in federal and state aide have caused tax increases in New Haven - Ina's votes together with the other rubberstampers including my own alder (26th Ward), have lead to these tax increases. The New Haven delegation has consistently provided more state aide each year - and over the last four years, state aide is up substantially.

7. Ina and others are way too fast to blame Hartford and Washington for property taxes. At the end of the day, it is her uncontrolled spending that is driving tax increases.

Posted by: One example | October 25, 2007 11:14 AM

Cedar Hill --

Here's one example where the city did what you suggest with problematic results. Bush & Co. gutted the COPS program which helped pay cities to increase the number of officers walking beats. Not having this money, the city did not replace cops as they retired or left the force. As well, it laid off lots of civilian employees from positions that officers then had to fill. (The city laid off civilians because no one would have supported laying off cops but getting rid of civilians handling records doesn't mean you don't have records to handle, just that officers come off the street to handle the records.) This all seemed okay because crime appeared to be falling.

Then we wound up with too few cops working the streets as violent crime started to move up, in some categories (shootings) dramatically.

So now New Haven is paying tons of overtime, and hiring lots of new cops, all without federal support. Who pays for this -- New Haven taxpayers.

That's the example that comes most immediately to mind.

Posted by: RealEconomy | October 25, 2007 11:36 AM

State funding to New Haven has NOT gone down!!! http://www.cga.ct.gov/ofa/Documents/BudHlts/BudgetsHighlights2007.pdf

It would be useful if the Independent's sometime blogger, State Representative Pat Dillon, who lives in the 25th ward, might share the facts here on state aid this year compared to last year and compard to five years ago. It has gone up and up. We in New Haven cannot thrive on a strategy of blaming others, but should make best use of the resources we have.

Posted by: Esbe | October 25, 2007 1:51 PM

Bruce -- I'll answer your one question with three questions.

[1] What sorts of revenue sources do suburban towns have that New Haven doesn't have? (Think about housing values, retail location and non-profits.)

[2] What sorts of expenditures does New Haven have to make that suburban towns don't? (Think about crime, aging housing stocks, brown-field closed factories, struggling kids, etc.)

[3] What do the suburban towns actively and selfishly do to make the situation in New Haven and the region much worse? (Think about zoning out lower and middle-income housing, contributing to sprawl by encouraging big-box retail on former farmland, failing to support the expansion of Tweed airport, dumping the suburban homeless population on the New Haven Green, offering political support for ever more highways, but not for regional public transit, etc., etc., etc.)

Posted by: cedarhillresident | October 25, 2007 3:00 PM

RealEconomy

THANK YOU! I was told by someone maybe the increase we were promised was cut in half.... not sure. But wow are there more of these PDF's

Posted by: westvillecharlie | October 25, 2007 4:39 PM

I've lived and voted in the "mighty 25th" for four years now. i've never gotten a phone call from ms. silverma. mr. malone came a knockin', forgave himself for interrupting my day (which he wasn't but i hate random solicitors) - talked to me for 15 minutes and got back to me on the questions i had asked him.
in these last four years my property taxes have gone up, and i've been towed from in front of my place about four times for street sweeping that has never happened. Also in that time ms. silverman's own husband has been robbed on the street, the cars at the stop lights have gotten louder, and as they peel away - faster.
I say "throw the rascals out" and lets see what a new clean slate brings. i'm voting across the board for everyone different.
By the way, i do appreciate her lifelong residnecy - i myself was born at st. raphales, grew up in east rock ,and lived for several years in california, so i can't say i'm a westville lifer, but there is no question to my love of and devotion for this ailing city.

Posted by: transituser | October 25, 2007 5:02 PM

I can attest personally to Alderwoman Silverman's down-to-earth willingness to constantly be in touch with her constituents from all walks of life and to promptly address their concerns. As an older citizen, I do not think the likes of Mr. Malone would be anything but patronizing to me.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | October 25, 2007 6:12 PM

One Example: There you go again...drinking the koolaide of blaming the feds for our crime problems. COPS was never meant to be a forever program - it was a short term surge to help cities get a handle on crime. During its many years of funding, cities were expected to put into place programs and people to keep crime down. New Haven didn't - it took the money and included it in its regular operating fund - when the money dried up - we took a bath. This is the fundamental problem of city management - depending on handouts and short term funding to bridge fiscal problems. It's short sighted to say the least.

A Big Taxpayer: Suburban Towns know they have to live within their means which is why they don't offer a bulging menu of services for which they can't pay. New Haven with support from the rubberstampers like Ina - just spend and spend, borrow and borrow more. We have a fiscal mess that's been years in the making - somebody better get serious about bringing sanity to spending or we will all be broke.

Anon: This is America. A family is free to send their kids to the school of their choice and to pay for doing so. Westville pays some of the highest property taxes in the city - and reaps precious little for it. That's the point.

Posted by: LAFAYETTE | October 25, 2007 6:21 PM

What does City government spend its money on? The salaries and benefits of teachers, cops, firemen and essential regulators (like code inspectors.) That makes up roughly 85% of the spending. More to the point, purchasing labor is almost exclusively where the GROWTH in spending comes from; said growth comes from salary increases and more importantly, medical benefits which grow in double digits every year. That's the real culprit in hikes.

The problem is not the $25k from bottled water for city employees. Or the $900K for the airport. Even if you got rid of all of those items it would make no real dent because those items are not growing at all. Paying for medical benefits continue to explode relative to inflation and have been in the double digits.

The nominal dollars from the state might be growing, but that doesn't mean that its share of the City budget is staying the same given the growth. There is no way it is growing fast enough to cover medical benefit growth.

If Malone is serious about stopping taxes, then either he intends to cut positions/take away medical benefits from teachers and cops (Good luck getting positions filled if you do that!) or he's just going to posture and go for tiny spending cuts that will be symbolically pleasing (like the bottled water) but have no real impact on budget size. Worse, as a Republican, he might go for cutting things like homeless services, cultural affairs, and pre-k that will create savings for an iota of time but loads of fiscal problems later. His vagueness about specifics and appeals to process hint at the substantive emptiness of his campaign.

Posted by: homeowner | October 25, 2007 9:21 PM

I'll be voting Republican for the first time in my life, but I'm going to do it. Change is needed and that status quo won't do anymore.

The tax burden is too high and almost everyone knows it. If we need to cut services, then so be it. Cut wisely and see where the chips fall. The status quo is not worth hanging on to.

Posted by: WEBbloger 1 | October 25, 2007 10:09 PM

"Over breakfast in her home on Tuesday morning Silverman called rising taxes the result of a decrease in state and federal funding. She said the answer lies in more economic development".

What.. Was in your cheerios Ina, or were you just having a senior moment, or, is it just plain prevarication. (Deviation from the truth).

Fact #1, you voted for all measures calling for increases to the 07-08 budget, while at the same time voting against all recommendations to reduce the budget.
Fact # 2 the overall New Haven budget increased 25M over the 06-07 budget with your help. The main cause of the increase was new hires for police and fire and education, 5M for the Board of education alone.

The State actually increased funding to New Haven by 6M over 06-07. The federal funding decreased, but mainly due to completion of federal projects reductions to empowerment zone funding.

Ina, don't get it twisted girl.

Posted by: on whalley | October 26, 2007 8:22 AM

You know her property taxes wouldn't be nearly as high if she wasn't paid to send everyone else's kid to some government school. She made a choice to send her kid to private school so the government should giver her money back. After all she's paying for resources her kid will never use.

Anyone else notice the outrageous lines at some of the private school open houses over the last two weeks? Cars all parked up on lawns and parents waiting in lines just for the opportunity for the chance to get their kids out of public school. Yeah, that seems healthy.

Sure she may have physically "opted" her child out of the train wreck that is government education but she's still financially responsible for sending a ghostman to class.

As far as services the city gets that the suburbs dont goes....well.....besides the abundance of halfway houses, shelters, clinics and somebody having to pay the bill every time a drunk needs to be picked up off the street goes the city has absolutely nothing. Some other poster mentioned trash pick up? Well, whoop di do. Back room deal making have made it more expensive and inefficient than ever before to get trash picked up. God forbid we had to throw the trash in the back of the car and take it to the dump once a week or whenever we just had too much trash on hand. Maybe the enviro-naughts out there could look at making each and everyone of us personally responsible for our waste disposal as a deterrent to unnecessary waste accumulation? As it is now I can dump all sorts of things from batteries to light bulbs to TV's to aborted fetuses in my blue bin and nobody says boo about what's recyclable or not.

This city, like all cities, like all of government has done wonderful things in the way of manufacturing phantom problems to facilitate theoretical needs to tax and spend to offer non-solutions. Anybody else notice how the answer is never to stop screwing up but is always to spend more and hire more to work on the screw up? From the war in Iraq to the streets of New Haven government is all the same. This gigantic new god has taken it upon itself to educate the people and surprise! Generation after generation the mass of followers grows larger and larger.

This candidate is probably full of crap like all the others but it doesn't change the fact that government is the new god and taxation is the new tithe and the flock of sheep is larger than ever.
Promise me an afterlife in heaven or a decent education or a safe neighborhood. Neither is more fancifully than the other. But government can do no evil, right? We're all being charged top dollar for the great push to mediocrity. Mediocrity if we're lucky.

And while I'm at it, property tax is nothing more than simple slavery.

Posted by: Fedupwithliberals | October 26, 2007 8:56 AM

Comrade Robn.

You really have to open your eyes a bit and stop with the agitprop of the 60's. Bush tax cuts a bad thing? Can you tell me what happened to this economy despite 9/11 and a global war against terror that Clinton punted to him? Where are the soup lines in New Haven?

I can never understand why liberals hate the idea of incentive based compensation on performance and responsibility. What do you think rich people do with their money? Spread it around on a mattress and roll around on it naked? When's the last time a poor person employed you?
Who do you think pays for expensive durables that employ people? How do you think we can afford the 10k a year in property taxes that responsible homeowners pay Comrade John to educate illegals and provide them with free services like housing and healthcare? Boy, things would really be better if I just paid more taxes to Comrades Hillary and John.

Jeez, get a job and grow up!

Posted by: Ned | October 26, 2007 8:58 AM

Wow, someone who lives in New Haven who doesn't consider their children community property! I keep reading about "our children", but I've never had sex with any women in New Haven - go figure? What evidence is there that more cops = less crime? (none) - seems quite the opposite: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-04-10-cops-cover_x.htm Do "youth" programs prevent crime? - evidence please.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | October 26, 2007 9:42 AM

LAFAYETTE: It's interesting that you belittle potential cuts in spending for Tweed - $800,000 this year, $27,000 in bottled water and other "small cuts" that Mr. Malone may be willing to support. All these small cuts amount to big money. More efficient government comes with small spending decisions and large. All savings opportunities are important. If you can't save on the small things, how will these alders, not known for their bold strokes ever come to grips with big spending cuts?

You are correct that the large savings will come from changes in the benefit package afforded city employees and to the number of city employees. We are barely paying the actuarily required minimum - that is, taxpayers are paying in barely enough to cover what's being paid out in terms of retirement. There is an unfunded liability in excess of $100 million.

And yes...programs need to be cut; city employment needs to be cut and overtime in the police and fire departments need to be brought in line with reality. The police department has burned through nearly all of its overtime budget for the entire year, in only a couple of months. It reflects poor management and shows a stunning lack of respect for the budget the police department was allocated.

I don't agree that trimming the benefit package will make hiring employees difficult. It used to be that public service meant working for lower wages and in exchange, getting a robust retirement and medical benefit package. That's no longer the case. Pay for city employment is very competitive and the benefit package is pretty rich - much better than the private sector.

Bottom line: Status quo has got to go. This city needs fresh ideas and a new set of eyes on fiscal matters. Rubberstamping endless increases in spending, subsequent taxes and new programs with a tin ear to our families' ability to pay is not right. Somebody has to bring it back into balance.

Posted by: Jay | October 26, 2007 10:56 AM

I want to remind the readers of what "insider" wrote back in Janurary, when he or she reviewed all of the board members:
"25- Ina Silverman may be impossible to beat. Maybe the smartest person on the board in terms of available IQ. Should be the Board President or should replace Pat Dillon as a State Rep. Running against her is a waste of time unless it is just a vainity exercise. She is one of the few alders who can debate anyone who shows up to testify regardless of the topic at hand. She works hard and is in constant contact with her residents. She seems like the nicest woman in the world, but she is more than capable of skewering you if you cross her. I think she could emerge as a Mayoral candidate in the very near future. Slightly more conservative than the other liberals on the board, she may not have the right support of unions or the business community. But City Hall loves her and if this race becomes tough, they will send everything they have to protect her. Westville is a tough ward to replace an incumbent in as it is filled with longterm homeowners who always vote. They know Ina, they know that she is great, and they will come out in droves to support her. I don't know how to beat her and I don't think anyone should. She is my pick as the best of all the alders."

Posted by: LAFAYETTE | October 26, 2007 2:12 PM

What 300 positions (in a ~3,300 position government) do you want to cut?

Last year bugdet spending grew by $25m to cover public safety and education positions. The state allocation grew by $6m, that leaves a $19m gap. To go back to previous spending and tax levels, you would have to whack out $19m of personnel spending. Assuming an average savings of $65k per position eliminated, that's 292 positions you would have to cut! Sure, you could soften that blow by getting rid of the airport and the water but since those items don't grow every year, they are not part of what is providing the real pressure. And that's just the beginning because even if you could wave some wand and start unwinding the SETTLED CONTRACTS with public unions, there is going to continue to be labor cost growth that exceeds grand list growth so you have to keep cutting positions.

Nobody likes higher taxes. But the problem isn't some rubber-stamping by left-of-center alderpeople in New Haven. It's about how we pay for and provide for healthcare in this nation. I am taking you and Mr. Malone at your word that you are serious about holding the line on taxes...so, how would you go about ensuring appropriate service levels after you cut several hundred positions? I don't think cutting bottled water or an increasingly fiscally irrelevant operational subsidy to the airport is the way to do it.

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | October 26, 2007 3:37 PM

Apparently "Insider" was dropped on her head as as child, or the other alders are even worse than I thought. I have never been impressed with Ina's IQ, and that includes when I was a supporter of hers. The first time she met me, I invited her into my home and spent 45 minutes with her, allowing her to gain my support. Two weeks later, she "introduced" herself to me again, not recognizing someone with whom she had a lengthy conversation, and followed that by again introducing herself one week later.

I am absolutely positive that DeStefano would love to have her as the Board President, because of her unwavering support of anything he proposes. It seems he has no need for anyone who disagrees slightly with his personal agenda, and primaries them out for a "better" candidate.

In regards to her skills for debate, if they were so keen, then she should not have declined the opportunity to debate her challenger. It would have been interesting to see whether or not she could "skewer" someone without cliff notes from John D, or without misstating the facts.

I am one of the homeowners who do not think she is great, rather just the opposite. I do not think an elected representative's main contribution to her constituents is to set up tea parties/baby sitting/and food drives, though each has merit and should be done. Their main objective is to be the representative of their ward, not of the mayor, and relay our interests to City Hall and not vice versa. When someone complains about an increase in property tax causing them to contemplate moving, their alderman shouldn't respond by asking them "where are you going to move, Arkansas?"

I have no problem voting Republican in this election. Since I moved to New Haven almost a decade ago, I have not had a voice in government, have been promised everything and delivered nothing but increased costs. I will not send my children to public school, especially since New Haven has failed the no child left behind formula. Yet the mayor's response is to spend more money on the board of ed, rather than make those persons he hand-picked more accountable. Everyone who lives in New Haven should be very concerned about the way this City is going. I was not here in the 1970's, but heard that things were bleak. Without blaming anyone but ourselves (feds, state, etc.), can someone tell me how things in this City will change for the better if each of us does not hold our elected officials accountable. How we can blame the president for everything, but our mayor is blameless. At what elected position does someone become accountable, and not have to answer for years of missteps? There are no checks and balances as our charter was designed, so everything falls back onto DeStefano and all of his aldermanic supporters.

If John D did not want Nancy Ahearn out because she opposed his school reconstruction projects and get $25,000 contributed to Ina's first campaign, maybe our ward's democratic committee could have chosen its own candidate rather than having one chosen for us. In other words, we might have had an alderperson worth voting for, rather than having to face the fact that, for maybe just this once, the best candidate is from the other party. And that especially includes the mayorial race.

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | October 26, 2007 7:31 PM

Lafayette: If you include the Board of Ed, I thought that there were approximately 6,800 municipal jobs in New Haven, and as well as the Board is doing, I am sure there is plenty of fat to trim there. In NYC, Bloomberg has negotiated incentive based contracts with all of the unions, thereby making them earn their money as opposed to a sense of entitlement. Maybe a new administration could model itself after one that has shown itself to be successful.

Also, at least Malone and others such as NHCAN are attempting to find ways to cut spending as opposed to everyone currently in office who feels the need to rubber stamp whatever emanates from City Hall.

Posted by: OES | October 27, 2007 8:21 AM

My concern with Mr. Malone is what does he know about New Haven and Westville having moved here in March of 2007? He registered to vote in April 2007, the day after the Republican convention. The thought of someone swooping in when they haven't lived here long enough to truly understand the issues and the people is absurd to me. I am all about choice and all about democracy but can we at least have an opposing candidate that actually knows our community? Ina may not be perfect but she is very smart, cares about this community and this City and has the ear of the Mayor. In a one party town, being able to call on Mayor John and have him meet and listen to you is a BIG thing. Think about it, if Malone were elected, he, like his Republican conterpart, Arlene DePino, would be relegated to sitting out when the other 28 alders caucus before the Board of Aldermen meeting. If you know ANYTHING about politics, that is when the issues are debated and decisions are made, in the privacy of the Democratic Caucus. So, if you think what you see on the floor is debate, think again. I personally want to be represented by someone who actually has a voice in that room and that would NOT be Malone.

Posted by: jms | October 27, 2007 9:03 AM

(I pretty much agree with everything Jay just wrote.)

I own a home and have lived in Westville for more then 30 years. Every day I walk my child to Edgewood along the same route that I walked many years ago. Unlike some folks I don't have the luxury of sending my child to fancy Foote School at near Ivy League tuition costs. I choose Edgewood and have been very happy with the whole experience there... an experience and opinion that I know I share with many of my neighbors and their children.

Ina get's my vote hands down. She is the sharpest and best alder this ward has ever seen and clearly the best in the city right now. (Go sit in on a BOA meeting or event and listen for yourself) Like me she has lived in Westville long enough to have a real understanding of how things work around here. I think she's doing a fine job and will continue to support her as long as she wants to commit her time and efforts to representing our interests.

JMS

Posted by: homeowner | October 27, 2007 11:46 AM

I'd be willing to bet that most of us could find 300 positions to eliminate. I think when homeowners are being asked to pay some of the highest property taxes in the country, while having one of the worst school districts, that serious cuts do need to be made.

Heck, let's start with a good number of employees in city hall. How much does the Mayor's spokeswoman make?

It's time for change.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | October 27, 2007 5:07 PM

LAFAYETTE
Makes a good point about health care..One thing I do know is our mayor is a supporter of Universal Health care for that very reason....but yet know one is out there fighting for it??? I saw ONE alderman in Hartford protesting for it?? It is easy for all these people to say they want it but who is fighting for it??????? You want all the changes Universal will make the other changes possible!! I still support change in the alderman chambers soooooo Good luck Mr. Malone!! But I hope you are reading all of this and can post some response.

Posted by: westvillerez101 | October 28, 2007 9:54 AM

Jay posted a quote from an earlier article, "She is one of the few alders who can debate anyone who shows up to testify regardless of the topic at hand."

If this is the case why won't Ina debate with Tom Malone? Come on Ina, we've heard from Tom, now lets hear from you--or are you going to ignore all of the issues being discussed like you've ignored Ward 25's concerns for years?

Posted by: jms | October 28, 2007 7:21 PM

Homeowner,

"It's time for change."

You do know that this was Ina's campaign slogan when she first ran against Nancy Ahern? (I assume this is humor on your part in which case I did get a giggle out of it.)

But here's the really funny thing. EVERY SINGLE candidate that has ever run against an incumbant in any race (local or national) has used the "time for a change" slogan... or something similar. But being an American and watching what amounts to a revolving door of politicians who all seem more similar then different once they get into office does anyone really think any of the folks are going to bring about any kind of actual meaningful change? In New Haven have a system in place that makes the best of managing a pretty good sized municipality despite suffering from an obvious imbalance of equity distribution in this state. It's not perfect. Don't like it? Leave. Flee to the suburbs and pick out some new countertops or bathroom fixtures.

Sorry... but it just cracks me up when people talk about "change" being the motivating factor in deciding which political candidate to support.

Ooooh... "change"... that sounds so familiar. Ina's doing a fine job and the notion of some (Republican renegade) Westville newbie marching into a BOA meeting with guns a' blazin' and correcting all the wrongs in this city is laughable. He would acomplish nothing... of that I am pretty sure. Do we really want what amounts to no voice speaking on our behalf? I don't think so.

JMS

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | October 28, 2007 7:49 PM

OES: "If you know ANYTHING about politics, that is when the issues are debated and decisions are made, in the privacy of the Democratic Caucus. So, if you think what you see on the floor is debate, think again. I personally want to be represented by someone who actually has a voice in that room and that would NOT be Malone." If this is politics, I want to know nothing and start from scratch. The only thing that goes on in the privacy of the Dem Caucus is to determine how quickly to rubber stamp the mayor's next hair-brained idea.

I don't believe that you need to be from an area to know if there is something wrong with it. I believe Malone stated that he has had a business in New Haven for some time, even though he recently moved to our ward. Are the many major differences between one ward from another in regards to higher taxes, bad schools, crimes and immigrant cards???

If you want to call Ina our alderwoman thats fine, but to the best of my knowledge, she has never represented our interests when they have conflicted with the mayor's.

And by the way, I have in the past had the ear of the mayor and had him listen to me, and I think what is more appropriate is after he listens, to act. So far, I have seen nothing from him either that would benefit the ward and that is why I am now supporting Malone and Elser.

Posted by: homeowner | October 28, 2007 11:00 PM

JMS, I'm not going to move, I'm going to vote. And vote Republican. Which will probably be as painful as moving, although less trouble.

If you are endlessly willing to open your pocket book up in order to pay higher and higher property taxes- well, I admire your positive attitude. For the sake of the rest of us, I'd perfer you not advertise your willingness.

Mine is a protest vote.

Posted by: jms | October 29, 2007 9:41 AM

Homeowner,

I fully understand your protest vote if it is directed at King John's monarchy and it's complete stranglehold on the local electoral process. But I still feel like you would be doing an injustice to Ina who does the best job anyone could expect in representing us within the current local political system as it stands. A protest vote is one thing... but (in theory) it really ought to have some merit in that you should actually believe that the alternative candidate would do a better job. In this case I simply find that to be an impossibility. We can certainly disagree on that. But again I would encourage you to seriously think about just how much of a lame duck a rogue Republican alderman would be when he pulled up a chair to the round table in King John's court... if they even gave him a chair. They'd probably make him wear a dunce hat and wait outside in the hall.

And no I don't celebrate high taxes. But I accepted the fact that higher taxes were a reality when I first decided that it was more important to raise my children in the culturally diverse and rich environment that is New Haven then to worry about taxes. The idea of moving out to the boring sanitised burbs is frankly more terrifying to me than any tax hike. Life sure isn't perfect and all things have a price. People have been complaining about taxes in New Haven ever since I can remember first learning what the word meant in grade school. It's never going to change. And again I am not a tax apologist or money donating sadist. I'm just a realist.

JMS

Posted by: Fedupwithliberals | October 29, 2007 9:48 AM

Digruntled Democrat, right on! You could have landed from Mars yesterday and spot a dying city with unrealistic spending patterns and pandering on every level. How long can that last? It is absolutely unsustainable!

You want to cut spending? Take a look at the staffing levels of one school, any school, and see if the employees have not at least doubled in the past 30 years and positions being created for the sake of just gaining votes and consolidating power. We certainly did not get commensurate boost in performance from the students with this kind of explosive spending. Actually went dramatically down. You can cut the staffing by half and still get the same results.

Remember, if you want Elser to win, you have to support him. Everyone put your money where your mouth is and donate whatever you can. www.elserfornewhaven.com

Posted by: westvillecharlie | October 29, 2007 12:27 PM

Hey, about my earlier comment about never having contact with ina in my four years in westville, just this morning when i was taking in my trash, right there on my front porch was my very own copy of "in the neighborhood: news you can use" ms. silverman's newspaper. the ny times it aint. it's a two sided list of excuses and explainations about how she can't stop the war in iraq, and made difficult cuts.
perhaps had this little nugget of literary wisdom shown up on my doorstep in say.... may, i might think she was honestly concerned with me.
too late ina. mr. malone, whoever you are, you've got my vote.

Posted by: Been Called Worse | October 29, 2007 12:34 PM

Mr. Doyens, please state your premises for the proposition that "Pay for city employment is very competitive...with the private sector". I would very much like to know which source materials you are referring to which shows private vs. public sector pay rates, as they relate to New Haven. In my personal experience, I find private sector jobs to pay, on average, 15% more. The only compelling reasons to work for the public sector (outside of those who are community service oriented) are the benefits and pension packages. Add job stability to that list as well. That is the reason why a majority of the city workforce puts in 25 to 30 years and earns such a "plush" retirement - by (generally) forgoing the monetary difference they could have made each of those years working in the private sector.

I am all for pay-for-performance as opposed to the range/step system currently in use by the city. Indeed, let workers earn a salary based on their own merits. Let programs live or die based on their merits as well. In both of the above cases, what/whom would you propose cutting?

Posted by: LAFAYETTE | October 29, 2007 9:01 PM

DISGRUNTLED D: If you count all special fund and Board of Ed positions, then there are 5,200 positions in our municipal government according to the 07-08 budget. What positions would Malone cut? To cover the gaps created by medical inflation, you've got to dig into education and public safety. Past Republicans on the Board have not exactly excelled at coming up with specific lists. Maybe because that's not the problem. And remember, it's 300 in the first year. A structural gap due to raises and medical inflation would remain, so more cuts would be necessary in subsequent years.

As for your suggestion of "incentive" pay...that doesn't really help with reducing SPENDING. It might help with productivity, but while some workers will be paid less due to poor performance and some will be fired, others will outperform and receive bonuses. Not to mention that if the scheme works, you get better workers and pay out more bonuses. Incentive pay is about productivity, which can lead to some cuts in personnel, but in the public sector it is mostly about getting better teachers (as opposed to downsizing education for savings.)

Posted by: jms | October 29, 2007 9:47 PM

Fedupwithliberals,

Your assessment of staffing levels (or the need for such levels) in public schools is confusing to me. Are you talking about teachers and aids and specialists who help out in the classroom? Because the one thing that I really DON'T mind my tax money funding is more and better staffing of public schools so long as it's targetted at a classroom level. This is not pork... this is how we educate our children more effectively... especially in the face of the assanine policies of the current federal administration or any other typcial Republican regime who loves to slash education budgets. I have many friends who teach in public schools all over the state. We talk to them about this stuff all the time. From their inside "in the trenches" perspective your comments pretty off base... again if you are speaking about actual classroom positions.

Liberal bashers love to find "pork" in public education and then complain about the social fallout and related costs of failed school systems that crumble in the face of inadaquate funding. There is plenty of pork at administrative levels... Board Of Ed... etc... but it sure ain't in the classrooms.

Well staffed good schools also attract more participation from local citizens who no longer feel the need to send their kids to fancy Foote or flee elsewhere to the suburbs... citizens like me and many of my neighbors whose kids are attending Edgewood. Investment in education pays for itself in savings from avoiding the fallout from the alternative.

Make sense? (Probably not to you.)

JMS

Posted by: marge | October 30, 2007 1:31 PM

Having your name on the corruption scandal committee is not the same as actually serving on it.

She was awol at most of the public forums the committee oversaw, as, actually, were most of the committee members.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | October 30, 2007 4:26 PM

A couple of points for consideration:

1. Living in a ward for 8 years or 8 months is neither a qualifier nor disqualifier for the Alder's job - neither guarantees you are informed of resident's needs and concerns. That only happens if you get out and walk the neighborhood remembering God gave us two ears and one mouth for a reason.

2. It is alarming to read some posts here who think its fine for the Democratic Caucus to have a private meeting, public not invited, to pre-determine public policy outcomes. I have witnessed it happening and it's not an example of good, transparent government and is one of the primary reasons as a city, we are where we are today: Practicing Faux Democracy with limited and arbitrary public input at the myriad of committee sessions only and specifically designed to limit the public's voice.

3. It is equally unacceptable to promote the idea that you have to be a follower, a member of the inner sanctum of rubberstampers to get anything done or to provide ward representation on the board and its committees. Sometimes, it's good NOT to be a follower - particularly when the water you carry is the mayor's and not the ward's.

4. I have been to many BOA and committee meetings. I don't share JMS's assessment of Ina's involvement or intellect. I see a lot of rubberstamping; a lot of same old, same old and none of the "change" she allegedly ran on four years ago. What leadership role has she provided? What change has she championed? How has the ward become better? Is there more accountability in government or less? Are taxes lower? Are we on sound financial footing or still depending on last minute gimmicks to balance the books year after year including 2006-07? I know she is proud of the senior tax freeze that shifted the tax bills of seniors to the younger, working families in her ward and across the city.

5. As for positions to cut in city government - I'm not going to make a list, although I could with some thought. Rather, I'd like to suggest that the overall goal is to have flat taxes. The question then becomes, how do we achieve that? Such a discussion would then force the mayor and his aides together with the BOA, to clearly define the priorities of the city and to shed any programs that don't fit within those priorities, knowing there is a finite amount of money available. Right now, there are new programs, new spending, all the old spending with increases all leading to faster and faster escalation in taxes to fund everything with nothing being cut. It will also require new thinking and new ideas to address healthcare and retirement funding needs of city employees. There are huge unfunded liabilities here. Performance based management is critical - not to pay bonuses for work done; but to account for work done that justifies keeping the department and the job.

6. Public vs. private compensation - I am not aware of any study comparing the two for New Haven specifically. My comments about compensation being the same in or out of city government, with a robust retirement and medical benefit package for public employees is based on my years in the private sector and my knowledge of what public sector employees are making in New Haven, other nearby communities, and at the state level. There is no big disparity in pay. There is a huge disparity in retirement.

7. Schools and Pork - Many of the new schools are extravagant to the extreme, utterly devoid of common sense from a fiscal or practical point of view. I also understand there are many "contract" employees being used who are "retired" allowing them to double dip on compensation. What about all the "special assignment" positions? I understand there are a lot of them. Are they all doing work that's required? Needed? Accountable? We have three high schools that are "drop out factories" and many more middle schools that are failing No Child. These ought to be priorities with funding and personnel and accountability for the results. It certainly doesn't seem that's happening.

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | October 30, 2007 5:37 PM

Lafayette: I am not a budget maven, such as some of the members of NHCAN. I read many of their emails and was very impressed with how they would attempt to slash budget waste and make New Haven more fiscally sound. I would leave it to those better suited to suggest/make the appropriate cuts. Therefore I decline to make suggestions on behalf of Malone and myself.

There is much waste in New Haven's board of ed, and the system needs to be changed. The fact that you feel that the education provided there is sound is your opinion, just like the posts of everyone else here. I, however, believe that the education provided at supposedly one of New Haven's best elementary schools to be lacking and have moved my children from there into private. I am not going to let my children suffer in the name of political correctness and not wanting to upset Sir John's apple cart.

Well-staffed, good schools attracting good students is a given, but qualified staff is the prerequisite. The staff on hand at the moment seems to be lacking since our schools are unable to pass the guidelines that an overwhelming majority of other metropolitan area schools have met. I prefer my children reading at a level one to three times above their grade, not below.

It seems that after a long run, the smoke and mirrors success that DeStefano has crowed about is finally being brought to light. Thats probably why he wanted to be governor so badly, so that he wouldn't have to answer his critics (apparently all three of us).

It seems, no matter how surreal, that I am turning into a republican and that is thanks to the persons in office here.

Posted by: LAFAYETTE | October 30, 2007 6:32 PM

MR. DOYENS: Even if Mr. Malone was somehow through remarkable persuasive powers able to strip thousands of municipal veterans of their settled (!) benefit packages without major social upheaval in town, it's just not possible that the medical inflation (double digits) in those new contracts would be below the grand list growth rate (low digits) of a built-out city like New Haven.

So, even if 100 Board of Ed positions are total waste and even if medical inflation is magically cut in half under new contracts, you would still have dozens of non-wasteful positions that would need to be cut in just THE FIRST YEAR of Mr. Malone's term to produce your desired "flat taxes." And the cutting would have to continue as long as present medical inflation in settled contracts outpaces grand list growth. This is a national - not New Haven - problem.

Cutting teachers and, inevitably cops, code enforcers, cultural and open-space amenities and so on will obviously lead to lower relative SPENDING. But in the long-term, I doubt it will lead to lower tax bills as you will have a failed city that has even lower grand list growth, middle-class homeownership, and so on. Perhaps Mr. Malone doesn't remember (or know) that New Haven was caught in this vicious cycle before. A lot of the current civic leadership (including DeStefano) helped fix that; and yes, that means big, pricey, schools and a big, pricey, police force.

Your focus on cutting spending to achieve flat taxes no matter the social costs just doesn't make sense given our town's recent history.

Finally, to hold up the allegedly cheap suburbs as some kind of paragon of fiscal and social health is bizarre. Those towns can be cheap, and beautiful, and quiet PRECISELY because other towns like New Haven house low-skill labor and educate their children, host the tax-exempt employment centers, provide for the poor elderly, and so on. If the New Havens of this world adopted policies to become like Branfords, all the Branfords would become extinct and everything would be like some cross of Hamden and West Haven. Some wargue that New Haven's attempts to bust up public housing and gentrify downtown and certain neighborhoods has had precisely that effect on those towns.

I think libertarian, homo economicus types like you and Mr. Malone can understand that there is no free lunch, right?

Posted by: Been Called Worse | October 30, 2007 10:03 PM

Lafayette - There IS a free lunch. As long as it is under $25, and only every other month, and only if you are an alder.

Mr. Doyens - I'll respectfully disagree with you on point #6. Perhaps the differential I see is not for all positions, all skill sets in the job market. I see an average of 15% difference between private vs. public sectors(roughly double that before the "bubble" burst) but I am only speaking from my personal experience.

...force the mayor and his aides together with the BOA, to clearly define the priorities of the city and to shed any programs that don't fit within those priorities, knowing there is a finite amount of money available.

Very good point, I agree. This should be the goal of any fiscally responsible government.

By all means departments and jobs should be justified. The metrics are currently not in place to even begin to analyze how much bang the city gets for its buck in worker productivity. (Hell, you can't even get crime stats.)

Posted by: jms | October 31, 2007 8:19 AM

Disgruntled Dem,

From what I am gathering on this post the general dissent is against King John and his closed door system of government. So why are we debating alder choices on our ward? Not sure. My contention is still that (knowing what we do about "The Kingdom") at the very least with Ina we have a voice that is allowed to participate and take part in the system. Sure sounds lame but it may also just be true folks. As much as some would like to believe that casting a protest (Republican) vote might send some kind of message I don't think it's the right solution. I'm a realist and I know that a Republican alder from this or any ward would accomplish about as much as a guppie in a shark tank. This is the realist view of the situation. The only way things are ever going to change around here is if somebody wants to step up and lead a well run campaign against The Kingdom at the mayorial level. But they have to be a card carrying Democrat to get elected in this town and they have to be qualified, connected and smart as a tack. I have yet to see anything like this in a mayorial election around here. Until that happens we are all subjects in King John's castle.

Short of that I still don't see the point in throwing protest votes at (assuming they could get elected) lame duck candidates who would accomplish nothing. The solution to a disruntled Democrat is not supporting Republicans.. it is supporting better Democrats. See any around here? Anyone? Anyone?

JMS

Posted by: Gary Doyens | October 31, 2007 10:12 AM

Lafayette: Why is it that every time we try to reign in city spending, you and the mayor, and many on the BOA automatically assume, it means cutting cops, teachers, and teachers aides?? It's just not true. What you seem to be proposing is maintaining the status quo -- which will have us all broke in about four years because during that time, property taxes will just about have doubled in terms of dollars to the city. This level of spending and debt acquisition cannot be maintained. We are a half a billion dollars in debt already - it is consuming 13% of our budget; we are approaching a liability in retirement benefits to city employees of $200 million; you have a shrinking middle class; homeownership in New Haven is diving; foreclosures are rising; poverty is rising and there is no appreciable economic development in terms of jobs and business growth.

I'm not saying you have to stick to no property tax growth, I'm saying if you start with that as your benchmark, as your philosophy, it will force you to set priorities, and to dump programs and departments which are not efficient or cannot justify their continued existence.

This year, the mayor and the rubberstampers approved nearly $30 million in incremental and new spending. They more than doubled the spending increases from the previous three or four years. They didn't stick to the budget last year, overspending it by $6 million and only balanced the books through gimmicks and prepaid building permits.

What's your solution, then, knowing the current track cannot be sustained?

Posted by: LAFAYETTE | October 31, 2007 8:38 PM

MR. DOYENS: The reason I am skeptical of your "reigning in spending" or "flat taxes" appeals is that they misdiagnose the problem. The reason we have high taxes is not that our elected officials are dumb or corrupt.

New Haven's economics are stressed because it is a built out city that houses and educates too many low information/human capital people. That's why it requires the large education and police forces that drive growth of personnel spending beyond grand list growth. If you cut taxes, your tax bill might go down, but the population and its needs that drives costs will not magically disappear. It's still there and its needs are not tended to which can make them worse.

It would be nice if the federal government got its act together and created a scaled-up solution to medical costs. It would be nice if the state stopped making places like New Haven carry the fiscal burden of housing, educating, and policing poor children, poor elderly, the homeless and mentally ill.

Assuming those kinds of changes don't happen, New Haven can take matters into its own hands. There's a long list of things that New Haven would need to do to be fiscally sustainable but cutting positions is absolutely the wrong place to start. It needs to decrease (not increase)the amount of subsidized and affordable housing. It needs to fully gentrify niches like Downtown. It needs to do whatever it can to keep homeowners without children (i.e. the elderly) in town. It's got to fully embrace Yale's student entrepreneurs and engineers as the most promising engine of growth and gentrification. Fund them, cajole them, keep them here. It's got to keep every potential growth option on the table (including the still dissapointing but relatively cheap airport.) It's got to make it economically painful for people who work in the city to live outside the city through everything from fees to the experience of finding commuter parking. If just a small portion shift to New Haven, that's a huge win. And it has to ensure that ALL of its young people are aware of how to have safe sex, as well as the full spectrum of reproductive options in the event of an unwanted pregnancy.

These are measures that will affect the real drivers of higher spending. And if they are enacted, they will also change the ethnic/age/class composition of the precious suburbs so often held up as some kind of triumph of civic virtue. THEY are the problem, not our town. Just hacking away at spending due to some blind belief that low tax bills are the default won't change these underlying problems - in some cases it will make them drastically worse.

Posted by: jms | October 31, 2007 9:19 PM

LAFAYETTE,

GREAT response. Thanks for saying everything I was thinking but couldn't articulate on the spot.

JMS

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | October 31, 2007 10:02 PM

JMS: This is not an attack, but your realism to me sounds like defeatism. My protest vote is not intended to be wasted, but rather to get Malone elected to let the other alders know that King John can no longer protect rubber stampers. If Malone is elected then the other alders will know that they now must listen and "represent" their wards, and not be voiceboxes for City Hall. If not, then they will probably face the same fate as Ina in 2009.

And if others who were tired of DeStefano decided to vote for Elser, rather than not even bother showing up at the polls, maybe a new regime would be elected. Then, I believe, you would find the more qualified Democrat candidates you were searching for in your last post in the 2009 primaries and general election.

I am tired of just being told to accept how things are in New Haven. I am giving it a go, and if things don't change, then I will be another middle class person moving to the suburbs. Something that I have never considered, something like voting republican.

Posted by: Rick in the 5th | October 31, 2007 10:34 PM

I am a resident of NH for 28 years. For that entire time, NH has been plagued by big city problems. We have poor schools evidenced by low student achievement. For 2006, Connecticut Magazine ranked NH 15 out of 17 cities in education for cities over 50,000 in CT. (A low number like 1 or 2 is a good score. A high number is a bad score. We have a high crime rate of which, unfortunately, I have been a victim multiple times. This also goes for local businesses in the 5th Ward that have faced armed robberies. Deeply discouraging is the guilty plea of Billy White of the drug investigative unit and his colleagues for stealing money and planting drugs on unwitting victims. This, in addition to the graft and corruption in the NH Bonding Businesses in league with Billy White and his colleagues. In the same survey, CT magazine ranked NH 16 out of 17 in crime, a terrible score. We have a wobbly local economy with a small tax base. (Drive down Whalley Ave. to see the boarded up buildings. Look at the number of not-for-profits like hospitals and Universities that are off the tax roles. Look at NH's small population.) CT Magazine ranks NH 14 out of 17 cities in the strength of its economy, again a very poor score. So why have we run up Bonding Costs of $700,000,000 rapidly. Compared to other cities we have been in the middle of the group of 17 in overall cost factoring in market values and taxes. However, the skyrocketing-top-of-the-market reassessment and the concomitant increase in the mill rates are reversing that modest benefit to New Haven living by raising our taxes this year making it much more expensive to live in.

Where does that leave the 25th Ward voter in the November 6th election. Ina Silverman will not debate Tom Malone. If she had a record to be proud of, it would appear a debate would be welcome chance to showcase her achievements. Ina has voted 100% along the Democrat Party line. She voted for a budget that increased our out of pocket taxes following the large assessment increase. Ina "communicates" as she is proud to remind us, but seems to focus her communications on things such as "our greatest threat...hurricanes" advising us to put canned foods in our basement and bottled water in our basement. I have seen some recipes for baked goods, announcement of community events, clothing drives, etc. These items do not concern me and my neighbors. What concerns us is tax increases,set to double over five years at the current rate, crime which is on the increase (there was an armed robbery adjacent to my home and Ina's husband was mugged by way of example in the past 12 months), the reduction in the police force, the fact that only two patrol cars cover all of Westville, detrimental zoning approvals for oversized developments that degrade our quality of life like Wintergreen behind Westville Village which may be a commercial failure, a mayor who spent three years running for governor while the urgent needs of New Haven were under-attended to, and an Alderwoman who seems out of touch with the fact that the 25th will soon be a Ward of the very wealthy or the very poor. Our Alderwoman is an integral member of a New Haven City Democratic governance structure that will not tackle the tough problems....costly union contracts, ineffective union work rules (How can Billy White and his colleague in crime be stealing $25,000 one week as active members of the police force and,after arrest, file for and receive disability pay for life? It does not add up. And how can they do this knowing that the female "informant" might be murdered for tipping them off to the whereabouts of the money?), corruption in our police department, two year delays in approving zoning for one of the 100 Best Hospitals in America trying to build a cancer center for sick people while employing New Haven City residents and bring patients and business into the city?

We need someone from the 25 Ward to fight for us, not the New Haven Democrat Agenda or John DeStefano's political ambitions. We need an MBA-entreprenuer like Tom Malone working for us downtown. I have never voted Republican in my entire life. The time has now come for me to do it. Please consider joining me in a vote for Tom Malone.

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | November 1, 2007 10:15 AM

I want to have a say in who represents me, and not some secret, clandestine democratic ward committee that rubber stamps JD's nominee. While those persons and other similar ward and city committees are feeling snug and smug that they cannot be beaten, there is a groundswell of support for change. Only after these committees and PACs, like the New Haven Alliance, are humbled, will there be a chance for ordinary citizens to have their voices heard.

How many people reading these blogs have had their concerns addressed satisfactorily by Ina, another alderperson, or someone on a ward committee, when voicing something other than what is the party line? In all my conversations with neighbors and friends, not one person has told me that their views were welcome, but rather, they have been ostracized by the same persons that have deigned themselves to be our representatives.

I am not stating the Malone and Elser are the be-all and end-all to New Haven's problems. What I am relaying is that if there ever was a time for change then it is now. Sending a message to all those in power who believe that nothing can penetrate the New Haven Democratic Machine, whether it be at the aldermanic level or up to City Hall will be the only manner in which we can find good candidates in the future.

Do you think these committees will nominate someone without the input of their constituents if their candidate lost their last election? I don't. I think it is time to serve some humble pie to each and every candidate that has not represented their ward's or city's interest in the manner in which the majority of their constituents desire.

Let those alders who are running unopposed during this election know that in 2009 we will be gunning for them. Make change happen where you can, to alert those officials that are getting too comfortable, that we voters do matter and we will be heard, whether or not they wanted to listen in the first place.

Posted by: westville1983 | November 1, 2007 11:19 AM

Ask yourself this simple set of questions.

1. Why did the Democratic Party/Ina Silverman's first campaign obtain $25,000. That is almost $1000 per registered voter to unseat Nancy Ahern.

2. What is the substance of her work over four years? a stop sign for your block? Connecting all the Block Watches to improve safety?

3.What original proposal has she alone put forward to benefit something in Westville? How many more excuses do we need to hear things can not change because...?

3. Are you better off than you were two years ago, four years ago when she took office?

The record speaks for itself. I gladly will give someone new, owing nothing to a Democratic machine, the opportunity to truly represent the good citizens of Westville. I am voting Tom Malone.

Posted by: jms | November 1, 2007 8:38 PM

Disgruntled Dem,

I hear what you're saying and I don't really disagree with much of it other then the part about voting for a Republican. We can disagree about what that would accomplish even assuming for arguements sake that Malone won the election. Like you I am also disgruntled with my party... locally... but probably more so at a national level. If there were a worthy Indpendent candidates or an outsider Dem's running I would probably not sound so blind in my support of Ina. I simply have too many fundamental ethical differences in my beliefs about the role of government and how it should be implemented to vote for any Replublican... some of these beliefs were just very well outlined in Lafayette's response I appluaded above. Call it defeatism if you like... but to me it's not. To me Ina is the best option if we want to retain ANY kind of voice for our ward downtown. I don't want a Republican mayor. I don't want a Republican anything. Sorry but that's where I draw the line. I wouldn't even vote for a smart well qualified Republican as Mr. Malone may very well be. Because in the end if he did manage to lead some kind of successful revolt against King John I would fear his conservative core beliefs as much or more then any bit of local corruption and monarchy. And really what are the chances of a successful revolt if it comes from Republicans in New Haven... a blue town if there ever was one? That's one point where I think you'll agree that my realist perspective cannot be argued.

Thanks for your comments. I respect your decision even if I don't agree with it 100%. This is not an easy thing to think through... people are frustrated and it's understandable.

JMS

Posted by: homeowner | November 1, 2007 10:45 PM

Why didn't a Green Candidate run? That would save me and many others from voting Republican.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | November 2, 2007 12:43 AM

LaFayette:
First, I've never said city officials are dumb or corrupt. What I do think is that as a rule, political and administrative leaders in the city are shortsighted, secretive and too often default to higher taxes and punitive fees to solve fiscal problems. Those problems are often the byproduct of a policy that was not fully vetted, some incompetence, or the result of aggressive, uncontrolled incremental spending. As a consequence, the City of New Haven is now on a financial cliff.

According to you, our financial stress is due to the city being built out, and that we have "too many low information/human capital people" who require large education and police forces. I guess that's a euphemism for too many old, uneducated, mentally ill, poor and homeless people.

It's laughable that you like other big government nanny state people blame our problems on the state and federal government who you say should solve our problems. Sure, I'd like to see some more help - but that's just taking money from one of our pockets and putting it in the other. It solves nothing and in the end, the city spends all the additional money they get and then some. It's never enough. It's never been enough.
As for your solutions - look around, we're already doing a lot of what you're talking about - and have been, and it hasn't changed much of anything. Gentrification of niche neighborhoods like downtown is well underway and has been for several years. $1500 to $2500 rents; half million-dollar condos and a scaled down version of this is popping up all over Fairhaven. Subsidized housing is being razed; HANH is not maintaining units in effect taking low-income units off the market. The senior tax freeze was designed to make staying here more affordable to them (less affordable for families like mine). You say Tweed's a growth option - I agree it can be. But unless the mayor shows some leadership instead of trying to bully East Haven - it's not going to happen. He just pulled out of the Regional Growth Partnership in protest. Until he does, we're just funding a pig in a poke - $800,000 is not cheap. How many more years are we going to keep funding it?

You want to make it economically painful for people who work in the city to live outside the city through everything from fees to commuter parking. Out of all the things you suggested, this is the weakest. If you really believe that, start with the city payroll - make city employees live in the city. You have high-ranking city officials who are comfy living outside of New Haven in your hated suburbs.

In one fell swoop, you blame, the feds, the state and the suburbs for our problems. "THEY are the problem, not our town," you write. "Just hacking away at spending due to some blind belief that low tax bills are the default" Well, I don't advocate just hacking away at spending. I believe in controlled, priority driven spending, maintaining departments and jobs based on need, efficiency, demonstrated results and accountability. I believe city spending can be strategically cut and that New Haven's poltical leadership makes no effort whatsoever to do so.

Posted by: jms | November 2, 2007 9:07 AM

Gary Doyans,

I think you're dead wrong.

1. Corruption is integral in politics/government... always has been... always will. Let's all get over it and move on.

2. If you have spent any time working in or around most every city agency, social service provider or classroom you would begin to understand that cutting positions is not the solution. Most are understaffed and underfunded. This absolutley CAN be blamed on state and federal funding and more specifically on conservatives who don't want their tax money funding anything even remotely resembling a social program and yet endlessly whine about the fallout from the resulting failure of such programs as they struggle due to the very same lack of funding. (Duh) You want to micro manage spending? Great idea... but it needs to start much higher up the food chain. Municipalities like New Haven are at the bottom of that chain and THAT's what needs to change. (Unlikely I am sure)

Add two and two together and your whole perspective falls apart... passionate as it may be.

Isn't it just great to live in a world where people can be so absolutley certain that their opionions are correct in the face of all those other silly people who are have got it all wrong?

Blogs crack me up.

Have a nice day.

JMS

Posted by: Been Called Worse | November 2, 2007 4:55 PM

Mr Doyens - You have high-ranking city officials who are comfy living outside of New Haven in your hated suburbs.

Until you back that up with which high-ranking city officials are comy living in the NH 'burbs, I have to call you out on failing to assert your claim, sorry,

Posted by: westville1983 | November 2, 2007 4:59 PM

This has been a good forum since we had no debate at Ina's refusal. As a Democrat for 30 yrs, I asked Tom Malone where he stood on some social issues as I had some concerns voting for a Republican.

1. He is pro-choice.
2. He supports a guest card for immigrant workers. It is hardly realistic to deport 12 million Mexicans, yet laws should not be broken. A federal policy is needed, but as people know they lacked the backbone to come up with one.
3. He supports gay unions as stands in the CT state legislation.
4. He is concerned about Edgewood School as he tries to start a family here.

These things matter much less if people are too broke to live in the 25th Ward.

Please consider voting the candidate and not the party with scandal after scandal, an absentee Mayor running for Governor, and a current Alderwoman who stonewalls constituents with platitudes, or irrelevant newsletter information

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | November 2, 2007 10:31 PM

JMS: I appreciate your response, and like you, can understand your sentiment although I don't agree. It is a very difficult decision to go against something that you have believed in for most of your adult life, yet I cannot remain living in a city that has so much potential yet see it all wasted by misplaced beliefs and poor direction from the top.

I lived in Manhattan for many years and transferred to this area almost a decade ago. I know NYC well, and am sadly amused when I hear residents of New Haven speak of our town like it is some great metropolis. It is a backward town that should be leading the state, and the reason it is not is due to poor management. JD might have been the man for the job when he came into power long ago, but recently has shown nothing but vindictiveness to his opposition and disdain for anyone's ideas except his own.

I am not concerned about Malone or Elser's core beliefs because they are not the evangelical right wing of that party, rather they are the progressive middle, something that I have come to equate with Bill Clinton's coming into power fifteen years ago. If I remember correctly, he basically took most of the republican agenda and made it more socially acceptable to moderate dems. Many of both Elser and Malone's supporters are not traditional Republicans. I have spoken with many proponents of theirs that are considered minorities, whether it be their nationalities or their sexual preference, and the common denominator of all of these persons is that they recognize that what we have is not working. I am more impressed when someone tells me that they can look at the candidate rather than the party for the well-being of themselves or their city.

I do not believe that either republican candidate will become George Bush if elected. I do not believe that either will have the power to destroy the worthwhile social programs that are in place. What I am counting on is for these gentlemen to first bring fresh ideas to City Hall and second to take away the fear that has engulfed so many residents here that are afraid to go against the Democratic machine. Some of the things that I have heard border on the ludicrous. If one would read about the fears residents here have, whether it be posting signs or any outward showing of support for a non-democrat candidate, and study German history of the 1930's and the fear that those citizens had of their party, they would see many parallels. That to me is scarier than any right wing conspiracy theories that could possibly sway my vote away from any protest candidate this election.

As the son of a parent who fled Germany in the 1930's, I have heard the stories of these fears. I am not trying to make New Haven seem the same as pre-war Germany, but I would like to live in a city where each resident would speak their mind openly, and not in hushed tones, or anonymous posts. I would like a government that listened to its people; which took the tax-paying majority's viewpoint on policies to be implemented, and which gave its residents a reason to believe that the tax dollars each gave were spent in a manner that benefited the city, making it a better place to live.

So while I will agree to disagree with you JMS, with a clear conscience I must vote for fresh ideas that will bring change.

Posted by: jms | November 4, 2007 10:25 PM

Disgruntled Dem,

Well spoken... and again I can see merit in your perspective. It will be interesting to see the vote count on Tuesday and to know just how many closet Malone supporters there are in relation to the lawn sign count... although I have been seeing more and more of them. Thanks for the constructive and civil conversation and maybe next time you'll talk me into jumping ship. If I had to bet I would bet that Ina will win but by a closer margin then she would have imagined or hoped for. Maybe that in and of itself will serve as a useful protest vote. Not everyone is happy drinking the Kool Aid.

JMS

Posted by: Disgruntled Democrat | November 5, 2007 9:19 AM

JMS: I, too, have enjoyed the discussion. It is a pleasure to share ideas with someone open enough to value another's opinion, whether agreed upon or not. That was something that I enjoyed when living in NYC, but have found that most here do not like to share ideas unless it is with others who feel the same.

You just may be right, in that Ina might win a close one. I am just hopeful that no matter who wins, people turn out to vote their conscience and not just sit back and feel that their vote has no merit. I have grown tired of those persons complaining and yet doing nothing to change their position.

I must say, however, that if Ina and JD win, I just might have to drink the Kool Aid.

Posted by: Rick in the 5th | November 6, 2007 12:14 AM

THE CHICKENS ARE COMING HOME TO ROOST
(Drawn from a news item in the YALEDAILEYNEWS.COM, WED. OCTOBER 10, 2007)

Ina Silverman, the Alderwoman of the 25 Ward, has weighed-in in favor on the issue of chickens as backyard pets in her Ward. A city resident in Westville, a Ms. Weiner,is fighting to hold on to six pet chickens in her backyard. This, against the objections of city officials who cite the chickens as livestock. Livestock are prohibited within the city limits. The yaledailynews reports: "Ward 25 Alderwoman Ina Silverman, Ward 9 Alderman Roland Lemar and Weiner are in the process of bringing together community groups to support bills that would legalize chicken-raising in New Haven. The groups' interests range from sustainability to food safety to animal rights, but they have all been very enthusiastic toward the legislation, Weiner said." I do not understand what any of this vauge and fuzzy language means. I do understand, however, that I strongly oppose chickens as pets in a lovely suburban community such as Westville. So do my neighbors. What next? Goats,pigs,sheep,turkeys,quails,a 4-H Chapter in Edgewood Park, a petting zoo? I would like to be invited to these community meetings being hosted by Ina which are "very enthusiastic" on legislation for chickens as backyard pets. My belief: chickens should be raised and managed on farms in Durham, and not in backyards in Westville. If Ina were not too chicken to debate Tom Malone during the campaign, I would hear her justification for introducing chickes into Westville backyards. I am not Chicken Little, but the sky is falling over Westville: the assessments have almost doubled, the mill rate is set at a level making our real estate tax hikes unsustainable and unconscionable, the crime in our streets is frightening, the crime in the police department is demoralizing and even more frightening, and our one-party, closed panel form of governmental decision-making works best for the Democratic insiders. After four years of Ina's performance, the chickens are coming home to roost in the 25th Ward.

Posted by: jms | November 6, 2007 11:25 AM

Rick in the 5th,

"THE CHICKENS ARE COMING HOME TO ROOST"

Yeah... right here on this blog... and the turkeys... and the dodo birds.

This is what you came up with to post on the morning of election day in a last ditch effort to discredit Ina? Chickens?

Brilliant. Pathetic but brilliant I swear.

LOL

JMS