New Haven Independent

Posted by: angelo | November 3, 2009 11:19 PM

Either:
1. James-Evans has some secret information, different from what everyone else already knows; or
2. James-Evans is unhappy enough to tell a little fib as a way to compensate from her inevitable irrelevance over the nesxt two years; or
3. She can not count to 16.

Posted by: Math Man | November 4, 2009 12:29 AM

Look for Jackie to drop out in a week. If there were the votes for her, then Jorge Perez would be running.

Look for Goldfield to win with a unanimous vote. The behind the scenes vote count is more like 17 to 13 or 18 to 12. But several of those votes that are there for Jorge are probably not there for Jackie.

So if she goes thru with a contested election, look for her to get about 10 votes. But Jorge will not want her to do that because it will force him to vote for her in a losing cause or appear incredibly disloyal.

While it made sense for Jorge to contest a losing election against Goldfield to establish himself as head of the opposition, there is no value for him in contesting this race for Jackie. To the contrary, there is the real downside of remaining an outsider. It's probably not worth looking like the unreasonable (and shrinking) opposition.

Might be time to check in with Jackie on the count.

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | November 4, 2009 9:31 AM

O’Sullivan-Best (pictured at the top of this story shaking Goldfield’s hand) confirmed to the Independent that she supports Goldfield and the mayor.

She just got in and already supports Goldfield and the mayor. At least she is up front,No shame in her game.

Posted by: cat2000 | November 4, 2009 9:31 AM

where people should be thinking about the betterment of their ward and implementing progressives policies, they are worried about strategizing for more power. unfortunately, jackie is too angry; she's not a visionary; nor does she appear to be a collaborator. Alderman Goldfield said it best: “People want effective alderpeople, who don’t just sit there and say ‘no’ all the time.” I suspect constituents don't favor those who appear in the paper or on tv on the wrong side of silly/petty fights.

Posted by: The Count | November 4, 2009 10:07 AM

Math Man:

Your new age math is off. The vote is now 13 to 13, with 4 votes undecided (or not committed). This is still a race, and I think Jackie has the momentum. The real question is will the Latinos stick with Jackie, or do what they usually do, and stick it to the "coalition".

Posted by: Silent Observer | November 4, 2009 11:18 AM

To the "Count":

Will the Latinos stick with Jackie? No. The reason? Racial divisiveness. I need not say more than that. James' group will not support a Jew nor will they support a Latino. If you are in the calling circle of James core supporters you are hearing more and more of this all the time and its getting louder and louder.

Posted by: rubber stampede | November 4, 2009 11:24 AM

lets see how these "imaginitive" (i.e. WASPy and mainstream) alders use their "strong mind[s]" to rationalize why the mayor has been right all along.

Posted by: The Count | November 4, 2009 12:02 PM

Silent Observer:

I think what I hear you saying is that Jackie's supporters are mono-colored (all Black) and will not support others. WRONG - you will see a coalition that includes those you claim are left out, if they want to be included. Clearly, the opposition is starting early to attempt to paint this as a racial thing, you guys always seem to do so when a black is involved. It's OK to when the group is majority white, or Jewish, or Latino. But let a group of black get together and, "oh boy, here they go again".

Posted by: streever | November 4, 2009 12:36 PM

Does it have to be Jackie vs Goldfield? can't any alder who wants to be pres run? I do think Goldfield has done a good job, but would love to see people run because they believe they'll do a good job too, and not hold back because they've picked sides in a never-ending battle.

Posted by: notimon | November 4, 2009 12:49 PM

Ok the power is not with the people, that is why DeStefano continues to win because of low voter turnout in the wards, 2190 register voters, 166 voted in Ward 2. The power is not with the Alders because most of them work for the Administration so they have no choice but to go with Goldfield. How many minorities chair committees. Carl is not all inclusive, this is not about personal power but power given back to the people who elect these officials in the first place. This is about things getting done that are needed in those wards over looked every year. This is about bringing issues to the table that really matter to the people that live in the city of new haven. Jackie James will bring that to the board. New alders, dont be fool by the promises of the administration, because once you bite the hand that feeds you, look out, you will be out of a job, right Madalgia, Katrina, Yusef, Michele, wish you had taken a stand for the people and not accept offers from the Mayor huh.

Posted by: a little honesty | November 4, 2009 1:43 PM

Lets be clear here. In a race between Goldfield and James, I would think that it looks something like this in January....

Goldfield - Jones,Clark,Lemar,Elicker,O'Sullivan,Rhodeen,Bauer,J.Rodriquez,Castro,Depino,Blango,Jones, Morehead,Shah, Paca,Dildine, Sergio,Lehtonen,Goldfield - Total = 19

James -
Calder, James, Jackson-Brooks, Perez,Colon,Smart,Antunes,Paolillo,Edwards,Robinson-Thorpe, Goldson - Total = 11

James won't run and she's lying about having 13 people committed.

What would have been interesting is if Perez and Goldfield would both agree not to run and Destefano would agree to stay out of it. It would likely be Sergio, Lemar or Paolillo.

Posted by: Math Man | November 4, 2009 1:47 PM

Seriously, I think the commentary about people supporting each other because of race is ridiculous and not founded in any facts.

Jackie's support is black, white and Latino as Jorge's was -- and as Carl's is. And such a divide has not appeared on the board in some time. Kudos to Jorge, Jackie and Carl for that. None of them have put their candidacies in terms of race.

There is a simpler explanation, it's called math. With all respect to the Count -- you can't. Make any list you want and you will come back to the math I gave earlier.

Now, that someone does not want to hurt Jackie's feelings or won't tell her that they are committed to Carl is not math-worthy. And if someone wants to get a committee chair from Carl, they also may play games with what they tell her. It's an interesting footnote, but footnotes are appropriate for literature, not algebra.

Get this simple non-math fact straight. If the votes were there, even in the form of undecided voters, then Jorge would be running. He's not. Case closed.

Jorge is after all quite good at math. And counting is a pretty simple math skill.

Posted by: Bob Solomon | November 4, 2009 1:56 PM

The notion that John DeStefano continues to win because of low turnout is revisionist history. John DeStefano won overwhelmingly against Jim Newton Sherry Killins, and, in what was expected to be a hotly-contested primary, Marty Looney. It is not that he is winning because he no longer has strong opponents, but that he no longer has strong opponents because they know how popular he is, especially on election day. I understand that in this forum, he is unpopular with many commentators, but the fact is that very few people comment and we are mostly speaking to each other. To most voters (and I include myself) John DeStefano has been a good mayor. For those who complain about the physical structure of the new schools, some of us remember the old Columbus School and Jackie Robinson. Yes, taxes are too high, but every time an aldermanic candidate raises that issue, I ask what services they plan to cut. The answer is always the same - we are not going to cut services, just run the city better. When I ask how, I hear that their government will be more efficient. That answer, without specifics, which are never offered, convinces me that those people have no idea how to govern.

Posted by: Silent Observer | November 4, 2009 2:21 PM

As you read the blogs it only further proves my opinions and confirms what I hear to be correct.

Posted by: thefacts | November 4, 2009 2:28 PM

Not that any one's counting but

Chair Community Development- Sepulveda- African American

Chair Eduction - Jackson-Brooks- African American

Chair Finance -Shah- African American

Chair Human Services- Blango- African American

Posted by: funky chicken | November 4, 2009 3:55 PM

Hi All:

I went to the city web site and checked out the Alderman page and other then what is listed above by "THEFACTS" guess who is the chair of the AD HOC COMMITTEE ON STRATEGIES, INITIATIVES, AND ALTERNATIVES TO PRESERVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING - Jackie James! I thought that Carl didn't ever do anything for her?! Oh well

Posted by: The Count | November 4, 2009 4:30 PM

Math Man:

You are wrong if you think that Jorge and jackie votes are interchangeable. I know for a fact that several alds that will vote for Jackie WILL NOT vote for Jorge, that is why her count is higher. I'll bet all of you lunch that she has more then he does.

Posted by: The Professor | November 4, 2009 4:31 PM

James-Evans said she would be a “more inclusive” president than Goldfield. “I would even work with Carl,” she said. In two terms, Goldfield has not reached out to her or several other aldermen, she said.

That's a flat out lie by James-Evans. I encourage readers to take a gander at the committee assignments on the BoA website, where they'll find this gem:
AD HOC COMMITTEE ON STRATEGIES, INITIATIVES, AND ALTERNATIVES TO PRESERVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
James (Chair)

James certainly didn't appoint herself chair of that committee; Carl Goldfield made that decision. How did the NHI miss this important fact? NHI's reporters should've asked her how she can reasonably claim that she's never been reached out to when she holds a committee chairmanship that she was appointed to by Carl Goldfield.

Posted by: The Count | November 4, 2009 4:31 PM

He being Carl

Posted by: notimon | November 4, 2009 4:32 PM

To Funky Chicken, maybe you didnt know this, but committees can be made up, sound important, and some Alderman who dont know any better, can be appointed to take that position, with no power to make a difference in anyones life

Posted by: The Count | November 4, 2009 4:33 PM

Bob, With all due respect, when was the last time you went out and knocked on doors. Looney, and Newton were a lifetime ago. He is not as popoular as you think. He only led the ticket in 3 wards.

Posted by: The Count | November 4, 2009 4:35 PM

The Facts:

What are you trying to say? What's the point of your list?

Posted by: Bob Solomon | November 4, 2009 4:49 PM

The Count - In 1967, I sold pots and pans, door-to-door. Can I count that? I'm pretty old, but i did go door-to-door for Andrew Jackson, but that may have been a mistake.

Posted by: The Professor | November 4, 2009 5:04 PM

Notimon,

I have a hard time believing that a committee on Affordable Housing policy has "no power to make a difference in anyones life" in the middle of the largest foreclosure crisis any of us has ever seen.

In fact, if an AFFORDABLE HOUSING committee can't produce anything in this climate, that's a pretty massive failure of leadership, and represents yet another reason that James should not be Board president.

The fact of the matter is that Goldfield appointed her chair of a committee that was created specifically to deal with an incredibly important municipal policy issue, and she proceeded to lie and say he never reached out to her. Did she really think she'd get away with that?

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 4, 2009 6:12 PM

Streever I agree,
and I think a growing number of people do. This lets take sides thing is not making things better! I admit to being a person that wants change and term limits. Only because I believe that was the way government was designed, to get fresh thoughts and have checks and balances. But we have grown stagnate because of the lack of that kind of change, that we are fighting against each other instead of working with each other. Each saying the other is bad because their ideas are different. I don't agree on alot of things and get angry about them because the majory may not be understanding it. But if we all worked together to find that middle instead of butting heads maybe our city can start healing!

Posted by: Troy | November 5, 2009 7:22 AM

O'sullivan Best ...you talked about the Mayor for years and now you are in his back pocket...i am not a fan of Robert Lee but he had his own mind..you and co-chair Patty should be ashamed of the back door politics you pulled.....

Posted by: Maureen O'Sullivan | November 5, 2009 7:30 AM

I would like to clear something up. In the picture, Carl Goldfield is shaking my hand to congratulate me on my victory.

No one on the BOA has asked me about the vote for President.

What I told Melissa is yes, I know Carl and am looking forward to working with him, why wouldn't I support him or others who want to move New Haven forward.

Keep in mind, I'm the independent alderperson.

Posted by: Mister Jones | November 5, 2009 9:47 AM

Hard to believe that after an election in which the mayor consolidated his power on the Board of Alderman, that Goldfield wouldn't have the votes. Counting counts, and it's a fun parlor game, but you have to figure it will be no contest.

A one-party monopoly is not healthy for democracy, but the different constituencies among New Haven Democrats perform the functions that other parties might otherwise. As we know, for most elections, the primaries are where the action is. But in the end, Bob Solomon is right. Love him or hate the mayor, detest his lock on power, argue about your pet peeves, I still say the city is in better shape than I can remember. Of course it could be better, and we'd all like lower taxes, but seriously folks, tell me:

In our lifetimes, who was a better mayor than the one we've got now? When was the city a better place to live and work?

Posted by: J. Bauer | November 5, 2009 3:51 PM

As quoted by Ms. MAUREEN O'SULLIVAN: "Keep in mind, I'm the independent alderperson".
Although I admire your determination please do not make the mistake of referring to yourself as the independent candidate how else could you have run if not under the Independent Party. To that end, if you're so independent why did you have so many of the Destefano party machines people working for you at the polls? What I suggest you do is change your party affiliation ASAP and save the hypocrisy. The reality of the matter is you will be judge by your votes on the Board. Lets see how often you vote independent. In addition, save yourself the aggravation of replying to these articles they will always get the best of you. If you are paid and bought for by the administration embrace it love it and do not be embarrassed by it. In the end you will vote for Carl because you have no choice. Take this challenge, refuse any meetings regarding the topic and on the day of the vote, vote based on your own feeling and see what happens.

Posted by: esther k. | November 5, 2009 6:31 PM

As for Carl Goldfield, he is a very good alderman, he did a lot for my street. I would vote for him for mayor.