Former 34/35-Backed Alder Swings Back

Puppet Notes:

A candidate who is backed by any group whose membership and leadership is largely comprised of people who do not live in this city should immediately be disqualified by voters as a viable representative of the interest and needs of New Haveners.

The manipulation of this city's rescoures in a way that does not benefit the citizens of this city starts with this kind of political shenanigans, and results in a classist and racist barrier to addressing the needs of the city's most vulnerable residence.

The Rev. Mr. Samuel T. Ross-Lee

It matters little if city dwellers or suburbanite door busters intrude on the voters of the 28th ward for this primary, in the 2013 mayors and alderman primaries the number of city wide actual voters coming out to the polls was 29%, in ward 28 the % was 35%, Robinson- Thorpe with no opponent received 518 votes on the machine out of 2210 voters eligible. The number of voters is decreasing each successive election cycle out of discuss and frustration for this lack of leadership.

It matters little whether Robinson-Thorpe had showed up for 100% of committee and full board meetings, the clerk's office recordings of all meeting demonstrates that on all full board votes the count is unanimous, usually 25 for none against with five absent, and to add insult to injury this past meeting on Sept 8th the full board voted out 12 items unanimous consent without debate or dissent. In the past only one or two items were even requested as UC, now it is a formality requiring the alders to only meet once a month rather than the standard two, while masking their vote with a voice vote rather than roll call is now SOP.

See that background story here:
http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/farm_plumbing_deals_get_unanimous_ok/

$350K borrowed credit card money to Bender the largest small business in the city who mover across the street on water just 1/12 yr, ago and pays $37K a yr in property taxes, like Bender really needed that bond money.

So there you have it.. It matters little if the alder is Robinson-Thorpe or Jill who? Same result... We get what $150.00 a month salary can buy.

Alders beware! Live by the union, die by the union.

Some one answer this question for me.Who was in control before the so call union take over?

The real question is whether Mikey Stratton is coming up this weekend to campaign for Claudette. (After digging her political grave.)

I do wish the gang in charge could tolerate a little dissent from someone like Robinson-Thorpe. They're heavy-handed effort to squash her is a bit frightening, and reminiscent of the worst of the DeStefano era.

34 and 35 are for 34 and 35....NOT for the city of New Haven. Its a smokescreen.

To suggest, as the Board president does, that the unions do not flood the neighborhoods with out of town people to door knock is naïve at best and disingenuous at worst.

I have had people come to my door asking me to support Mrs. Marks when I have never seen them nor her in the ward doing any community work. I know this because I have been doing work in my ward for 10+ years and I would have crossed paths with these people at some point and I can assure you I have not.

The fact that the Democratic ward committee endorsed Mrs. Marks means nothing because one of the ward co-chairs is a union member, so I wouldn't use that as an example of non-union influence.

I agree with Noteworthy, Rev. Ross-Lee, and UBHolden on everything they've said. I would also add that we need to be just as vocal with city hall and our elected officials as we are in the comment section here. There are some great thoughts and discussions here and city hall needs to hear them!

OMG! Of course Tyeisha would say what she is saying, because if not, they will find a way to Unseat Her! She has to go against Claudette because the whole union is against Claudette. For Tyiesha to say..Given her attendance record, she has to grab onto something.
For real Tyiesha, you are trifling! Do you really think YOU(Tyeisha) are controlling the board of Alderman? Are you really calling the shots? Can't wait to see you speak out against 34 & 35, then let the real unseat for you begin....

When she first ran for the Board of Alders against an incumbent, Claudette Robinson-Thorpe was only too happy to receive the help of union members and nonunion members no matter where they lived.

I am one of the latter and I live a few blocks outside ward 28 where there is no primary election. She once had the support of those on her Democratic Ward Committee, union and nonunion, who have decided that Jill Marks is a better candidate and will make a better Alder. Scapegoating union members or others helping Ms. Marks is an excuse by Ms. Robinson-Thorpe for not taking responsibility for her own actions.

The unhappy fact is that only a small percentage of people in this country vote and a far smaller percentage of people actually take on political work. Each candidate has to convince that very small percentage to take time out of their busy lives to do the legwork of walking the neighborhood, knock on doors and make a case to get votes. For those who haven't done any canvassing, in case of doubt, it's tiring but rewarding.

Those of us supporting Ms. Marks do so because we have become convinced she will do the job that we had hoped Ms. Robinson-Thorpe would do but is not now doing: Actively representing the citizens of her ward and this city in our government.

I find this odd, since I clearly remember a union member who lived in West Haven knocking on my door the first year our current alder ran for the office. Why was that just fine then but not so fine now?

Claiming that the incumbent Alder received support from out of town Union members in the past as a way to justify her opponent receiving such suppot now does not a tenable argument make, nor does it address the central point several of us have made here.

The issue here is the fact that an out of town group can wield so much influence over our elected officials that they can actually determine who is and who is not elected, and then how those who are elected must vote, for fear of losing their seats.

Such an illicit practice is tantamount to colonizing the city under foreign domination and rule. The better part of this is that New Haveners still have the right AND RESPONSIBILITY to run the colonizers out of town, by rejecting, out of hand, their hand-picked overseers.

The incumbent nor her opponent should be controlled by these interlopers, and the New Haven voters must have enough dignity and intelligence to stop electing the "Chosen Ones".

The Rev. Samuel T. Ross-Lee

Noteworthy hit the nail right on the head.This is the fear many of us had when Harp got into office.She is a pawn as is Walker. They are indebted to the unions and the bills are coming due.The union is becoming far too powerful and we the people of New Haven are doomed.Our crappy neighborhoods will continue their downhill slide.We will never have decent, safe areas for our families and eventually New Haven will be the New Bridgeport.The lessor of 2 evils is still evil.

What has Jill Marks done for Ward 28 besides be married to Scott Marks?

Ward 38 needs paved sidewalks, the completion of Bowen field, an outlet for youth—-all projects and then some that Claudette Robinson-Thorpe has helped to initiate.

In Marks interview with the Independent, she said her plan was to take up where Claudette left off. So, obviously Claudette was doing a good job if she wants to continue it! Marks has not proposed one single original plan
or initiative that isn't a shameless attempt to ride on Claudette's coattails.

The assertion that all union members who work for candidates in New Haven come from out of town is nonsense and baseless. Union members on the Board of Alders, union members who are Democratic Ward co-chairs all live in New Haven. The vast majority of the union members who take time away from their families to work for candidates in New Haven live in New Haven.

The assertion that unions are somehow subverting progress in New Haven is further nonsense. Demanding that good paying jobs go to New Haven residents, the priority of the Board of Alders in the last 4 years, is a union priority.

Those who post here attacking unions seem to ignore cause and effect. We pay high taxes in New Haven because New Haven takes on tasks that suburban towns refuse, because nonprofits in our city don't pay the property taxes the rest of us do, because the federal government spends 55% of its discretionary budget on war and because the super rich are sucking up all the wealth. If potholes aren't fixed, one reason is because the city's resources are spread among so many desperate needs. Poverty is not caused by unions.

We are between a rock and a hard place. Unions protect workers. Corporate raiders abuse them. The union movement opposed slavery and was actively involved in the civil rights movement. Unscrupulous capitalists were behind the slave trade and most of the financial scandals in American history. They were also behind the environmental abuses. Our system needs checks and balances and I fail to see how poor urban residents would be against unions in a country with a growing income gap. Stop blaming unions for our problems. Fat cats who want more, more, more are the real problem. Greed will destroy us all. We are fighting over scraps to the delight of our rulers. Let both of these good women present their best argument for election and vote for the one who can help us climb out of this pit. Neither of them is the enemy.

This problem can be solved.Go to a multi-party system.Then the unions would have there own Labour Party like they have in the UK and other countries.

There is no assertion that "all" Union members live out of town. But, the fact is that the Union leadership does.

Your focus on the wrong "assertion" might just suggest that you want to ignore that salient fact for one that is more acceptable, but less relevant to the overall point.

And that point is: Those within the Unions who are pulling the strings, i.e. its leadership, do not live in the city, but control much of the city's politics through the elected official, whom they also control.

I worked canvasing last weekend for Jill Marks at the invitation of a friend of mine, who's a member of New Haven Rising. For the record, the person in charge of the canvasing campaign is both a member of the union and a resident of Ward 28; no one I saw was from anywhere but New Haven (admittedly, I live across Whalley in Ward 24).

I was initially skeptical of the union presence on the board, but for all the bluster against outside labor interlopers, it seems like they're trying mighty hard to bring jobs to New Haven residents. I'm open to the idea that the union is indifferent to the residents of New Haven and has taken over the local government in a self-serving coup, but I've yet to see any evidence of such beyond blanket mistrust.

Dear Rev. Ross-Lee.

I remember from a service honoring Dr. Martin Luther King from January 21, 2002, these words: "The church is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, he said, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority."

I hear criticism, but neither guidance nor conscience. I hear no prophetic zeal, nor moral or spiritual authority but rather bitterness. I wonder whatever soured the speaker of those uplifting words.

There are several assertions that you make. 1) that union leadership lives outside New Haven. 2) that those leaders are in control of decisions that affect our community. 3) that those leaders control members of the Board of Alders. 4) the assumption that the decisions made by those leaders and by the members of the Board that they control are detrimental to the people of New Haven. 5) that members of the Board are not in control of their own decisions. 6) that the voting public don't make their own decisions but rather are also under the influence of the nefarious union leaders. Such power the unions and their leaders have in 2015.

It would be enlightening if you were to put facts behind all these assertions and assumptions. Otherwise, Sir, and sadly it looks a lot like you are promoting a witch hunt.

Part 1 of 2

HenryCT,

If you had ANY idea what "Prophetic Zeal" means you would not have used that qoute to make the arguement you are attempting here. Clearly, you don't. The speaker of those words was Martin Luther King himself. And he was soured by the constant hypocrisy of a nation that consistently failed and refused to live up to the high ideals it put on paper or proclaimed in political declarations. I used the quote to make the case that King's words are still relevant and we still have a chance to heed his sage advice.

King's devotees, who are guided by the same biblical prophetic zeal and witness, a zeal and witness whose purpose is first and foremost to speak truth to power, are only considered "soured" by those who fail to take seriously the meaning of that concept when we don't serve the purpose of the status quo but merely become an obsequious tool of it.

You hear neither guidance nor conscience because it doesn't sound like agreement with that which leaves our poorest and most vulnerable citizens stuck in conditions that will never free them and assist them with the tools that will allow them to reach their fullest God-given potential. You should also note that the prophet tradition that King and I ascribe to is necessarily full of criticism, as he lived and I live in a world that desires only acceptance and confirmation of its present state.

The attempt to sanitize King's words and my use of them to acceptable "uplifting" platitudes will fail everytime if the hearer of said words fails to understand that the uplift is not, nor was it intended to be, in the words. The uplift, if there is any, is in the hearts and the determination of the listener whose responsibility it is to give the words life.

You've had more than a decade since I quoted those words to consider their true meaning before you appropriated them here to make your case. Unfortunately, you have not used your time with them well.

Part 2 of 2

As to your response to my criticism of the Union and its manipulation of politics in this city, you should prove me wrong and not merely say that I am.

Show me that those who control the Unions do live here in New Haven and that their work changes the conditions of the city's most vulnerable citizens.

I see vote pulling machines and endorsing candidates who support their agendas and withdrawing support from those who don't, but as for "guidance and conscience" I see little, if any.

P.S. The next time ypu expect a response from me, be courageous enough to stand by your words with recognizable identity.

The Rev. Mr. Samuel T. Ross-Lee

Dear Rev. Ross-Lee.

You assert that the leadership of the unions comes from outside New Haven. The burden of proof is on you to identify them. All the assertions you make are not backed up by any evidence. It is not up to me to prove you wrong, because up to now all I have to argue against are a set of assertions without substance. Please provide the substance.

The number 1 priority that the new Board of Alders stated immediately they took office in January 2012 was jobs and good paying jobs for residents of New Haven who live in our low income neighborhoods. This is also the number 1 priority of New Haven Rising, in which Jill Marks is a leader. New Haven Works resulted from the Board's efforts. It has found over 300 jobs for New Haven residents, average wage $16.52. You can read in its 2014 report online. The map of where the residents live shows a pretty good distribution across the city, including the most impoverished neighborhoods. Is this not improving "the conditions of the city's most vulnerable citizens?" Yes. Is it enough? No. But it is a good step in the right direction.

That is one example.

The quote I used was intended to challenge you to "give the words life." So far what you have provided lacks substance. So, dear Rev., rather than blanket condemnations, provide specific criticisms. Give your words life.

I am Henry Lowendorf.

Although I don't live in Claudette's ward, I have been impressed with what I have seen and heard from her at District 10 Community Management Team meetings and seeing her interact with people in the community. She usually attends the management meetings. She always has alder, ward or community news to share as well as her positions on various issues. When someone has a different opinion on an issue, I have observed that she listens well. If she explains a situation incorrectly, and someone knows more than she does, she listens and learns from them. She keeps in touch with her constituents with regular emails. She seems to be a person who cares about New Haven and her ward and represents her consituents well.

Mr. Lowendorf,

I stand by my "assertions" and suggest that you prove them incorrect.

As far as me "giving (my) words life", two things.

Dear Friends and Fellow Citizens,
Your Honor,

Guilty until proved innocent is not acceptable. It appears that the prosecutor has rhetoric but no evidence. His arguments have evaporated into thin air.
How embarrassing!

Case dismissed.