New Haven Independent

Posted by: Disgusted | December 15, 2009 1:33 PM

Suffice it to say, you all deserve one another.

Posted by: Mary Flucker | December 15, 2009 2:15 PM

Im aresident of the 23 Ward and I hesistated about voting for Shah, but people in our community said that we needed to keep him in because he represented the black community, so I voted for him. Now I wish that I did because now he's letting us down. Alderman Shah you need to vote for this women and show that the Africian American community is together, do let the people start laughing at us because we're not together or next time I will encourage Ward 23 to vote differently.

Posted by: Sunday | December 15, 2009 2:23 PM

Why can't they do what's good for the community instead of their own self-centered views.

Posted by: Morris Cove | December 15, 2009 3:24 PM

Mary

Here's a thought, why not vote for the more competent person, regardless of how much pigment his skin has or lacks. This should not be about race, just look at what she put on her flyers not what she could do for the community, but the fact that she would be the first black female elected president of the board, how shallow and trival.

Posted by: streever | December 15, 2009 3:59 PM

Mary Flucker,

Goldfield is a competent & inclusive president of the BOA. Why should Shah support James-Evans because of the color of her skin? Do you think I should only vote for white candidates?

I believe in supporting the most competent person who will do the best for all of their constituents. I think it's detrimental to all of us when we vote based on other factors than competency and ability.

Shah is a good man and a hard-worker who supports Goldfield because he believes that Goldfield will do better for this city. You should be thankful that you have an independent minded alder representing you who is making solid choices based on the city's need, and not on identity politics.

Posted by: nfjanette | December 15, 2009 4:12 PM

Yusuf I. Shah has shown courage by revealing the regrettable position and language of some of the power brokers in the Black community. One might suggest this provides a "Teachable Moment", with all of the implications most certainly intended - obsolete thinking along racial lines still clearly cuts across the borders of many communities in this country.

Posted by: The Count | December 15, 2009 4:41 PM

So much for this "historic" campaign...

Posted by: Jay | December 15, 2009 5:10 PM

I would never want to be voted in simply because of the color of my skin, and I find it sad that this was the platform that Alderwoman Jackie James-Evans chose to run on. What would the community out cry be if this article was reversed and Alderman Goldfield was being supported solely because he was white. You can't have it both ways.

There cannot be equality among the races when we vote for anyone solely on the color of their skin.

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | December 15, 2009 5:32 PM

Wake up people. This nothing more than poltricks and it is call this!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wePMYM4av6Q&NR=1

Posted by: Fly on the Wall | December 15, 2009 8:32 PM

There are 15 that will vote for Goldfield. They are all Destafano people and will vote on his agenda. So lets have democracy and give Mrs James Evans the President job. Things will get scrutiny and not just rubber stamped. All this is manipulation. Kimber knows most african americans dont like Sharpton. So he gets him to call the african americans so they turn to Destefeno. Very clever. Kimber backing the Mayor but no one know it.

Posted by: Seriously? | December 15, 2009 8:33 PM

So let me get this straight. We have an African-American President of the USA but we as a people would be set back by not having Jackie James as president of the New Haven board of aldermen?

Sorry Jackie, Boisie and Al, but you are a couple decades too late with this argument.

I don't care who wins either way, but this argument for why she should get elected by her peers is silly. We had a black Mayor 18 years ago, and a black State Treasurer before that. Heck we have a very good African-American woman State Treasurer now. She should run against Lieberman!!! (By she, I mean our Treasurer, not Jackie James.) Oh yeah, and we are represented by a State Senator and State Representative who are both African-American women.

With so many positions that are much more important than president of the board of aldermen being occupied by black women, why would anyone think that arguing Jackie's race and gender over her skill set was a smart strategy?

African-American women are elected regularly to Congress. African-American women run major universities. But we should define our success as a people on whether Jackie James is elected president of the board of aldermen?

No doubt the absurdity of this idea is why the majority of Aldermen who represent predominantly black neighborhoods don't actually support her. But it's good to know that African-American Yalies can be swayed by such laughable tactics.

Seriously, is this really a skit on Saturday Night Live or the Chapelle Show? Because in real life it's embarrassing.

Posted by: Inclusion? | December 15, 2009 8:42 PM

The list in support of Goldfield is a representative list of what makes up New Haven. White, Hispanic, African-American, Yale connected, New Haven lifers and even a Republican. Affluent wards, less affluent wards, east and west.

...

People complain about one party town and folks being loyal to the Mayor. Well at least he is elected. ...

Total up the votes in the 16 wards whose Alders are supporting Carl. Then total the votes from the Wards whose Alders are supporting Jackie (a little help on the math here Paul please).

Carl is not perfect but he is open to work with any Alder and has zero corruption in his past and no need to be on the take. Jackie and her backers want to "take over" whatever that means. Imagine this group picking a Police Chief? Or making budget decisions. God help us.

If "inclusion" means a racial litmus test then we really have gone 20 or 40 years backward.

Posted by: streever | December 16, 2009 9:20 AM

James-Evan's one example of a lack of inclusivity was Goldfield not supporting an idea he disagreed with. He told her it was a fine idea & to take it to the board--what should happen.

Would James-Evan bend over backwards, and agree with ideas she disagreed with personally, simply to make everyone feel included?

I think she'd make a poor choice for president and don't understand why it's an issue of race & sex.

Posted by: my | December 16, 2009 9:56 AM

Ok so some people want to degrade Alderman Shah and make comments that ( he's not black), all because he won't support a woman of color. Let me say this its not fair to the people of the community to have someone that wants a vote soley because of her color other than experience. Now if I am not mistaken in the real world folks get jobs on behalf of their skills and exp. not because of the color of their skin, now here we are in 2009 with B.S. honestly do you think that the president was elected for the color of his skin? ( I don't think so) People are arguing an un arguable situation it senseless to and embrassing to know that our people are that hard up for position that they will do and say degrading things about others. I put it to yall like this has anyone every heard of this woaman? What has she done for our community? Who is she? Why vote if no one has the answer to these questions. As for alderman Shah and the people that was hesitate to vote for him, you didn't make a mistake because he has done for the community notice and un-notice, so if you feel like you won't vote for him the next go around than don't but trust me your one vote isn't going to hurt him. Love and Peace my people. Jackie find another tactic to get your votes don't try the race card. I am an african-american woman 30 and I am so tired of ppl using the race card for everything. I can say this cause I am a southerner seen and heard alot of things as a child but whats right is right and whats wrong is wrong and you using the race card is def. wrong.

Posted by: curious | December 16, 2009 10:54 AM

It appears that an important bit of information is left out of the equation here. Goldfield's wife, Gaylord Bourne, was the Treasurer for DeStefano's gubernatorial campaign. It's a very tight little group. This is an issue of control by the Mayor. There are no checks and balances. John DeStefano gets whatever he wants from the Board. He(the Mayor) will not tolerate any disagreement and members who do so incur his wrath and Carl Goldfield is the chief "rubber stanp" who makes sure the Mayor prevails. That's how he is able to accomplish so many secret deals that the public doesn't know about until it's too late to do anything about them. The Board needs a true leader. Maybe Jackie is the answer, or at least the lesser of two evils.

Posted by: streever | December 16, 2009 12:00 PM

Curious: good point! I'm personally very uncomfortable with the mayor's close ties to everyone. even if he does nothing wrong, it's the appearance of wrong-doing that bothers me. One would think he'd be sensitive to appearing to be a controlling force.

With that being said, I don't think the president of the BOA has the power to check & balance him, without strong support from individual alders, which no pres would have in that.

Therefore I think it's best to pick Goldfield, who has opposed the mayor in the past, and who I think votes based on his personal values. Yes, I'm unhappy about how close the mayor is to him, but I believe he's not a rubber stamp. I think he has integrity and is doing the best he can with what he has to work with.

Posted by: Claudia Herrera | December 16, 2009 2:11 PM

�Time for change�
�James-Evans would be the first black and first female�.

Sound and it is NOW an old line of publicity.

James-Evans needs to make public her �resume� let the people of the community know, what is what she had been doing, what has been done an accomplished and if she can proves that she�s ready and has the experience to be in charge and be the leader for the BOA, That�s when the community can call to their alderman and asked them to support her.

...

Alderman James-Evans be a woman and a black woman, ask the support of all of US and make the change for all of US not only from the black community. 50 % of the alderman are supporting you that�s means they want a change. 15 or 14 is a very decent number to still consider you as a serious candidate.

Good luck.

Posted by: James-Evans for Mayor!!! | December 16, 2009 5:02 PM

Go Jackie go!!!

Posted by: The Professor | December 17, 2009 5:38 AM

Curious,

So does this mean that if the wife of, say, Harry Reid, or perhaps if some Congressman were to have had an important position on the Obama campaign, they would be unable to effectively check President Obama's power? Perhaps you should tell that to, say, Representative Artur Davis of Alabama, who served as the Obama for America state chair there. Political alliances are not inherently corrupt. In fact, I'm going to propose the "Obama test"--or maybe the "Reagan test" for you more conservative readers. Basically, before you criticize the DeStefano administration for doing something, imagine that some politician you like is doing it (oftentimes, they actually are--note the Davis example). Do you still oppose it, think it's corrupt, etc.? Fine, then your criticism is fair. Otherwise, it's an absurd double standard.

Claudia,

You say that Jackie James needs to put her resume out and let people know what she's done. What's preventing her from doing that now? She has internet, she clearly has the attention of the NHI. But ultimately, she can't point to a single constructive programmatic accomplishment, largely because her entire career on the BoA has been no vote after no vote (with the occasional 'yes' when somebody from Team Perez proposes some poorly thought out piece of legislation).

I'm not sure how you arrive at the conclusion that Jackie James will create any sort of positive change for all of "us." In fact, I only see evidence to the contrary. For example, Goldfield put James in charge of a select committee to deal with housing market issues here in New Haven. Jackie James is from the Hill, which has been hit harder than almost any other area of the city (save for maybe Fair Haven) by the foreclosure crisis. What came out of her committee? It's not as though something came out and Goldfield shot it down. She just plainly did nothing after being handed what could have been a transformational committee chairmanship. James had a chance to develop policies that would have provided both immediate and long-term solutions to housing stock issues, and instead wasted her time picking needless fights. I can't believe that anyone actually thinks she's going to be good for this city. Good thing Carl's got the votes lined up.

Posted by: Anon | December 17, 2009 8:42 AM

So I assume that if you are not on the list above you are supporting Jackie James? Her list would look like this I guess:

mike jones - ward 1
Gina Calder - ward 2
James - ward 3
Jackson-brooks - ward 4
Perez - ward 5
Colon - ward 6
Smart - ward 8
Jerry Antunnes = ward 12
Joe Rodriguez - ward 15
Migdalia Castro - ward 16
Al Paolillo - ward 17
edwatrds - ward 19
robinson-thorpe - ward 28
goldson - ward 30

I just wonder at what point rodriguez, castro, perez and paolillo were asked? Was it after all the African-American alders were asked?

Posted by: Enough | December 17, 2009 9:55 AM

For those who have no clue - by electing Alderman Goldfield to the presidency you are not seeking that checks and balances you claim you would like in the comments all over the NHI. Lets be honest, Alderman Goldfield was always content with his position on the board for many years thus the reason he never try to seek leadership. The only reason he opted to throw his name in the hat 2 terms ago was because the mayor had his falling out with Jorge. So king John needed someone to topple Jorge. By the virtue of king John just tapping to Goldfield to run shows you who Goldfield is loyal too. He would of never been able to pull this off without the administrations help. He has always been more of a laid back alderman who was content with just representing the people in his ward. Goldfield has also supported EVERY candidate the administration has backed, from PACA to Justin. I have NEVER seen him support the "better" candidate if that's the debate.

Now to Alderman James-Evens. She represents a low-income community that has been neglected from this administration as have many other low income communities due to the administrations mission to develop only downtown. She is a solid social worker with DCF and I haven't met one kid who said she hasn't changed their life which says a lot. Is she very opinionated? YES. Is she a critic of king john? Of course. However she is capable of leading the board and she will have a "decent" number of colleagues who support her who I believe are very knowledgeable and will keep her in check. I ONLY attended a few committee meetings but from what I have seen Jackie is always advocating and I mean ALWAYS advocating for the communities that have been left back. I say the BOA give her a chance. God knows Goldfield wasn't able to collectively bring those together to make an effective change in 2 terms.

Posted by: streever | December 17, 2009 1:05 PM

Enough:

it's not that we "have no clue"--I have several clues. I personally work with many of these alders.

Yes, Carl isn't going to provide a strong check & balance on mayoral power. But do you honestly think Jackie will?

Being a great social worker is a virtue, a saintly one at that, and I'm grateful she's an alder and lives & works in this city. I think she's a great person & a hard worker.

But I don't see the decisions coming out of her on board matters--I see her output as the chair of housing & I'm disappointed.

I don't think she has articulated why to vote for her for BOA pres, either.

Ultimately I don't think Goldfield not being a check & balance is a personal failing, but a systemic failing. We have 30 aldermen. Do you realize how hard it would be for one alder to mobilize all of them?

When it comes to having a clue, look, it's not black & white or good vs evil. It's not like the mayor's evil and we should oppose everything he does. That's the problem with jackie & the other alders who wish to be checks & balances: they frequently oppose sensible and smart policies as often as they oppose bad policies.

I'd rather have a non-obstructionist alderman.

And to the comment that Goldfield doesn't support the "best" alderman, I'm sorry, but Elicker was clearly the best option. Someone who had historic levels of support IN neighborhood, who ran a campaign with zero city help and worked his butt off, on a platform of neighborhood change & transformation. Brison is a nice guy & has a good heart but in his 2 years he did not accomplish as much as Justin did while living in WARD NINE. The best candidate clearly won.

As for Paca it's clear why he won: the guy worked HARD. He went door to door all the time & really had his numbers. Liz did not work as hard, and many in her ward see her as out of touch with the neighborhood's changing deographcis.

Posted by: Brian Clark | December 17, 2009 8:35 PM

Race, Color, Gender, Whatever, should have nothing to do with it. My youth program is in the Hill, this program has been here for years. I have spoken to my alderwoman on 2 occasions. 1 of whih was to invite me to a board meeting to honor Chad Dawson who I trained since he was a kid and now is a World champion. She did not even know how to pronounce his name. I have been running a VERY successful youth program for almost 21 years. I have gotten almost NO help from New Haven. Maybe if I were not a white guy???? Why should anyone get a position based on race, gender religion? Content of your character....

Posted by: Ira Johnson | December 18, 2009 6:24 AM

My name is Ira Johnson I had been a resident in the 3rd Ward for 40 years although I am currently living in Florida, "my 3rd ward" is still near and dear to my heart.

Now to the issue at hand, Alderwoman James-Evans claim that she wants to be inclusive, but it seems to me that she is setting a tone where she is always bring up the race issue.

I am not sure right now who I would support but I no that race would not come into play.

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | December 18, 2009 4:16 PM

People wake up and smell the mackererel. This is about Grooming Goldfield to take over when King john leaves.Poltricks!!!

Posted by: Claudia Herrera | December 18, 2009 5:58 PM

Professor

When I said fight for all of US I was just sending a massage to the alderwoman , that having the responsibility of been the leader of BOA : She will have to have a clear mind to make decisions base of the good and benefit to the community of New Haven, and not base of favorite race and color.

I �don�t like (at all) that she is using the card of races and being a woman to �make the difference�. And that�s why I suggested that she prove to us with facts, her ability and experience to be en such position which requires a lot more of good intentions.

I did not make any conclusion and suggested that if she got the chair, she will be the right person and will be a positive change.

What I think it is VERY interesting to me is that I will love to see a woman in a such position in New Haven, as a mother (that I�m) I think that if a woman get that chair it may be a good benefit and may help to put to work a lot of the requests of the programs for our children and young�s. This is just a thought that may work, I not a feminist.

And last, you have to admit 14 alders vote for her! I not supporting her I WANT to know about HER accomplishments, I not crazy about Goldfield neither I still angry for the �show� that he put together for the alderman�s DUI.

Enough

You make a good point here.

� Now to Alderman James-Evens. She represents a low-income community that has been neglected from this administration as have many other low income communities due to the administrations mission to develop only downtown �.