Box Banned

Sections

Neighborhoods

Features

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

by Melissa Bailey | Feb 18, 2009 8:03 am

(35) Comments | Commenting has expired | E-mail the Author

Posted to: City Hall

After aldermen approved a landmark prison reentry law, advocates headed off to spread the word — to ex-cons in need of a job and to the 13,000 city vendors directed to give them a second chance.

Holding signs of support, dozens of criminal justice activists converged on City Hall Tuesday night, where aldermen approved the so-called “Ban the Box” ordinance — the third of its kind in the nation — by a vote of 22 to 1. Click here to read the ordinance.

“We’re going to hit the barber shops, the hair salons, and let everybody know that Ban the Box went through,” Tyrone Weston, leader of the city’s Street Outreach Program, said after the vote. His program is currently reaching out to 453 young men, about half of whom are ex-cons, to help them find alternatives to a life of crime.

The “box” the ordinance refers to is the section of the job application in which people are asked to mark whether they’ve been convicted of a felony. The new law removes that box from applications so that ex-offenders won’t be automatically refused jobs that they may be qualified for. It also directs all city vendors to adopt a similar approach to hiring people for jobs on a city contract. Click here and here for background.

On the aldermanic floor, Fair Haven Alderman Joey Rodriguez said the bill would address a pressing concern in New Haven: helping out the 25 prisoners per week who are released onto city streets.

When ex-cons reenter society, Rodriguez said, “most are presented false hopes and rejection resulting in, again, a walk down the wrong path.” He applauded the new law for giving them a fair shot at landing a job.

The one “nay” vote came from Quinnipiac Meadows Alderman Gerald Antunes. He said the proposal was fine for the city, but too burdensome for small city contractors. Those small businesses should be allowed to screen for criminal records up front, he argued, so that they don’t waste staff time interviewing candidates whom they’re not going to end up hiring. He added that his constituents have urged him to vote against the proposal.

Before the bill’s passage, Hill Alderwoman Andrea Jackson-Brooks sought to correct misconceptions about what the law is.

“Most of us have been getting negative feedback” on the new initiative, she said at a briefing by the corporation counsel before the vote.

“We need to recognize that we are not just arbitrarily saying, ‘To heck with it, hire anyone,’” she said.

“There is a level of confusion in it,” agreed West River Alderman Yusuf Shah. “People are taking it to another level.”

Corporation Counsel Victor Bolden clarified the process. The law directs the city to remove the box and to refrain from asking applicants about their criminal history during job interviews. If the city decides to offer an applicant a job, then the human resources office will do a criminal background check. If a conviction shows up, then the applicant will return for a subsequent interview to determine whether or not that background renders him or her unfit for the job.

The new process doesn’t limit the city’s ability to screen its candidates, Bolden said. It aims to make sure that for ex-cons, “the opportunity to work in city government has not been foreclosed entirely.”

New Haven is the second city in Connecticut, after Norwich, to remove the felony box from city applications. New Haven took the law a step further by directing city contractors to follow suit. It’s the third city in the nation to enact such legislation, according to the DeStefano administration.

The law will apply to an estimated 13,000 vendors.

Those vendors will not be required to ban their boxes per se, Bolden said. By his reading of the law, companies could keep their “box,” as long as they adopt a hiring process that does not unfairly discriminate against ex-cons.

The law does not apply to vendors with the Board of Education or the city police department, said Kica Matos, director of the city’s Community Service Administration.

Her office will now undertake the task of reaching out to those contractors and getting them to sign sworn affidavits that their hiring process is in compliance with the new law.

As Matos works with vendors, activists like LaResse Harvey will be spreading the word throughout Connecticut.

Harvey (at left in photo at the top of this story) is the statewide policy director of A Better Way Foundation of Connecticut, a not-for-profit advocacy group that works on drug policy and prison reentry issues. The group has long supported this type of initiative, she said.

She said law would help by giving a second chance to an ex-con, for example, who might have had a drug charge or an assault in their youth, but has cleaned up his life and moved on.

Success in New Haven, she said, will build momentum for getting similar legislation passed in Hartford and Bridgeport — and one day, on the state level, she said.

Meanwhile, Weston and his crew will be hitting the streets, spreading the word to ex-offenders in need of a job.

Weston said he hoped the new law would show ex-cons that “if you keep knocking on doors, some door is gonna open.”

“Now,” he said, “it’s up to the people that’s out there, to start knocking on doors.”

Comments

posted by: robn on February 18, 2009 8:16am

Heck…as long as the city does a background check before making an actual job offer, I’m OK with it.

posted by: Tom 14 on February 18, 2009 8:35am

Are you kidding me? The city of New Haven in all it’s infinite wisdom sees this as a good thing. What about all the people who can’t get a job and never committed a crime, what are they going to do for them? I am truly not surprised as they already have a convicted felon on the board of fire commissioners. New Haven has almost become a little San Fransisco, taking care of all those who are not productive in our society and by that I mean those who do not pay taxes or commit crimes, and letting the good people, those who pay astronomical taxes and obey the law, suffer.We are fools to let this happen. I can only imagine what happens next.

posted by: steve ross, human on February 18, 2009 8:56am

Tom,

Paying your taxes doesn’t make you “good”. Being empathetic, however, is.

posted by: steve ross, human on February 18, 2009 9:03am

Err… “does”, rather. But you see my point.

posted by: Walt on February 18, 2009 9:33am

Good, now New Haven can hire the ex-Governor and the ex-Mayors of Bridgeport and Waterbury—-a whole new pool of talent for the City team—-and maybe even rehire Billy White and his allies..

posted by: Uncle Nunzio on February 18, 2009 9:42am

I’m happy that since the City of New Haven has solved all of it’s major problems that they can focus on not hurting the feelings of ex-convicts.

posted by: Heightz on February 18, 2009 9:55am

A good portion of employers tend to focus on the check which marks “convicted in the past” during interviews instead of LISTENING to the one applying. At least this will allow ex-cons to be “heard” during interviews and perhaps highlight some of the skills they might have. Once this happens perhaps by that point the employer has a good “feeling” bout the individual though later on he or she might eventually find out they were convicted it might not even matter.

background checks will still occur regardless.. just give everyone a chance ! GOOD WORK.

posted by: alycia on February 18, 2009 10:00am

I commend the City for its progressive foresight. I’ve talked with many people who have a prison record and this issue quickly became a glaring one as I learned more about their struggles. Many of them are striving hard to make changes in their lives. But when re-entering our communities from the prison system, they cannot find jobs. Many turn back to a life of crime and end up back in the system—paid for by our hard-earned tax dollars. Does it make sense to further punish a person who has already served their time by creating barriers that keep them from getting a job? Doesn’t it make sense to help them find jobs so they can become productive, tax-paying citizens? The more barriers we can remove for people coming out of prison, the better off our entire community will be.

posted by: Michael Lee-Murphy on February 18, 2009 10:06am

New Haven: Compassion capital of America: Municipal ID cards, box banned. keep going New Haven, well done.

posted by: Tom 14 on February 18, 2009 10:30am

Steve, paying your taxes is what let’s people like the mayor set up programs like this and city ID cards possible. Should we now allow felons to vote? When people commit a crime and get caught they forfeit certain rights. Do you think the thieves who stole my car or broke into my home had empathy for me? Probably not, I never got any of my property back and when they found my car it was stripped, and the only thing I got was a higher insurance premium.

posted by: anon on February 18, 2009 12:01pm

Great work. Employment discrimination is never a good thing.

But this really should be combined with much, much higher criminal penalties for deadly behavior like robbery with a deadly weapon, reckless driving and assault. If you pull a gun on someone, you shouldn’t even have a chance of getting out of prison for 50 years.

posted by: D'oh Tom on February 18, 2009 12:41pm

Tom,

Pay attention man, Connecticut has allowed ex-felons to vote for some time now.

Your approach of keeping former felons in a continual underclass, without the ability to find employment or participate in society’s other indicators of civility like voting, is brilliant. No doubt it will ensure that crime goes down to never before seen low levels.

Do you have any strategies for weight loss because I would love to eat endlessly and stop exercising.

posted by: Ellis Copeland on February 18, 2009 12:43pm

Just what New Haven needs—more criminal thugs getting city checks. Johnny MUST GO NOW!!!!!

posted by: Beansie's Mom on February 18, 2009 1:12pm

Melissa,

As someone who has attended the Qunnipiac East Mngnt Team meeting, you should know better than to describe Alderman G Antunes as the Q Meadows alderperson. That was the label slapped on by “professionals” who didn’t know that the E. Fargeorge Preserve and Quin Meadows area of New HAven are south of Foxon Boulevard and not north of it. It’s certainly not how locals refer to retired NHPD Captain Antunes.

Also, I don’t hear the Alderman from Ward 15 referred to as Joey. Please take the time list the elected officals correctly. Also that the Alderwoman from 16 added to be added to the list and voted Si not yes. That Ward 17 translated that means yes to room full of laughter would have been nice to read about.

As a mother, I can only hope that now Kica Matos will look at the School Nursing shortage and come up with a more equitable solution for Fair Haven residents than what they currently receive.

posted by: lance on February 18, 2009 1:56pm

just check ct.gov, you can get conviction info for the last 10 years.

posted by: Bill on February 18, 2009 2:28pm

This was absolutely necessary. The city is running out of people to hire who aren’t criminals.

posted by: City Hall Watch on February 18, 2009 2:40pm

Now that we have special rights conferred on law breaking illegal immigrants; new rights now for the felons who also broke the law, a whole division of otherwise unemployable youth placating gangbangers, many of them also lawbreakers - do you think anybody at City Hall has time to think about those of us to who don’t break the law AND pay property taxes? We’re already at the back of the line. Is it our turn yet?

As a side note: I was never confused about the process. It is that very process that will trip the city up and end up getting us sued. Hells bells, the city can’t follow its own hiring rules now. Just wait until that felon catches us with our shorts down, we will surely pay. Instead of interviewing an applicant once, now we’ll get to interview them at least twice. Maybe more. Sounds like we’ll need to hire more people in the HR office. Sounds like a perfect place to park a caring felon, preferrably one who won’t steal ss numbers - maybe a child molestor would work. That would get them out of the homeless shelters across from a park that Matos was so worried about last summer. But that was then…

And by the way, why are the street outreach workers going to fan out across the city to spread the word? I thought they had a targeted mission of turning gangland into happyland? We’re paying for this too? And, we wonder why we’re broke?

posted by: k on February 18, 2009 3:35pm

“Give everyone the chance to get the job” Well hello, felons HAD the chance to get the job before they became felons.If I didnt have a job I would do whatever I could to legally make money.Shovel driveways or mow a lawn or work at a car wash.Its amazing that we have so many americans on welfare and criminals crying they cant get a job but we have so many hard working mexicans and others working their asses off to make a buck.And please dont say that the illegals took the jobs from americans because they didnt.They do the jobs that americans feel they are too good for.

posted by: Hood Rebel on February 18, 2009 4:10pm

To CityHallwatch,

Life for you is clearly a little less than unhappy right now and you pounding away at the computer probably helps a bit!

But, try not to be so disingenuous and sarcastic in your comments about entire neighborhoods which you refer to “gangland” and sarcastically using scare-tactics by suggesting that ex-felons might all be “child-molesters”

Things are tough in society, but your begrudging of immigrants?...
This level of incivility is a little off-key for you..don’t you think?

Relax, have a donut..take a walk..

posted by: Fedup! on February 18, 2009 6:48pm

Great what next the President rewarding people who don’t pay their mortgages? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

posted by: iwasthere on February 18, 2009 10:00pm

Need job just follow in the foot steps of our fellow convicted mayors and other gov’t leaders. The stone that is thrown does not go very far. With other gov’t leaders committing crimes. They clear the way for them to obtain a future job. The state should mandate that contractors that do state or city contracts need to clear a criminal back ground check. Or anyone for landing a gov’t job contract along with E-verify every new employment through out the labor force. With unemployment hitting almost 20 high it is time to do something.

posted by: City Hall Watch on February 18, 2009 11:30pm

Hood Rebel:

Felons as child molestors was precisely the picture Kica Matos presented to the city last summer when she and the mayor were crusading against “prisoner dumping.” Gangland doesn’t refer to “whole neighborhoods” either, it referrs to a very specific group of people. As for my unhappiness - group thinkers don’t understand it.

posted by: V on February 19, 2009 1:03am

I’d rather my tax money go into paychecks for non-felons. Why is this such a hard concept for the politicos of New Haven to grasp?

posted by: robn on February 19, 2009 9:03am

I think theres really three questions here…

1) If an ex-con is reelased from jail, has she paid her debt to society?

2) Is an ex-con inherantly bad?

3) If the answers to the above are yes and no respectively, then the next question is , is the ex-con qualified for a job? The only way to find that out is to give them a job interview.

I’ll add one more question…

4) If you’re really distrusting of ex-cons, do you really want them to be unemployed and desperate rather than ina paying job with stability and supervision?

posted by: Steve Ross, Human on February 19, 2009 10:04am

“As for my unhappiness - group thinkers don’t understand it.”

CHW,

Please. Because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean they “don’t understand you.” And while it may be intellectually or philosophically convenient for you to to lump these opposing views into some generalized, disparaging category, one could just as easily argue that you’ve succumbed to groupthink as well.

Tell me, what does it mean to evaluate this problem critically? Complaining about where your taxes are going and generalizing that everyone convicted of a crime is less valuable than you are? No, that doesn’t sound like anything I’ve heard before….

I’m surprised that you’d make such an empty potshot.

posted by: IN THE TRENCHES on February 19, 2009 10:24am

I think the passing of the ban-the-box proposal is a great first step in reducing recidivism and crime whether you “social scholars” realize it or not. It’s befuddles me how the same people who want our elected officials to be tough on crime, are some of staunchiest objectors of this idea. We speak of our formerly imprisoned or convicted fellow citizens as if they are trash. We throw the words “criminal” and “ex-con” around as if these labels entirely personify the damned individual that carries them. It is this way of thinking that places such an individual in a dangerous catch-22: Continue seeking and begging for employment to no avail, or getting involved with the “self employment” that landed them in trouble in the first place. To be honest if I was in that situation and knew beforehand I would have to face employers like most of you guys, I probably would waste little to no time on job searching. Most people return from prison with a new and more positive outlook on life, as well as a determination to stay away from the thing or things that landed them there. After dealing with potential employers who think like most of you, the choice to stay on the “straight and narrow” becomes harder to make everyday. All convicted felons are not violent people or sociopaths. Some folks are just trying to feed their families-nothing more, nothing less. Who are we to say that a past mistake forever damns someone to obscurity, poverty, and misery?

posted by: IN THE TRENCHES on February 19, 2009 10:38am

Has anyone on this page ever enjoyed an episode of Home Improvement? How about the block-buster movie Ironman? Ever watch the Martha Stewart show? If the answer to any of these is yes, than you are the supporter of a convicted felon. Home Improvement star Tim Allen was formely convicted for being in the possesion a very substansial amount of cocaine in the past. Ratting out his friends allowed him to receive a reduced sentence and go on to produce and star in a very successful TV show. Robert Downey Jr., star of the summer hit Ironman, is also a convicted criminal who carried an illegal gun, used drugs, and attacked a police officer. He served very little time and went on to land a role in an Emmy nominated TV show as well as several hit movies. We all know the Marth Stewart episode…I could go on but I think you get the point. Is it stardom that gave them a get-out-of-jail-free card? Or is it “complexion protection?” Why are these as well as other “protected” people not referred to as the wretched of the earth like everyone else? I guess it’s Innocent Until Proven Black. Did I say that? Yes, I did. And until we address the REAL issues behind this matter, we’ll be damned to making broad-brushing, uninformed comments on pages such as this. To some people, “Criminal” is the new “Black.”

posted by: William Kurtz on February 19, 2009 10:51am

This decision is a good one and I hope many other cities in the state and the nation follow suit.

I don’t have much to add beyond what Alycia, Steve Ross, In The Trenches and others have already said, but . . .

Tom—the disenfranchisement of people who have served time for a felony is a shameful feature of ‘democracy’ in some states. There are rational arguments for denying convicted felons some rights and liberties, but the right to vote is not among the things that should be denied. A better question that “should we now allow felons to vote?” is “who can we disenfranchise next?”

Once we start empowering the government to deny people the right to vote, we move ever-so-slightly closer to the big brother-esque, right-wing totalitarian state so many of the commenters here seem to fear.

posted by: Ned on February 19, 2009 11:10am

Seems like the next step is to stop penalizing student aid recipients that have “drug” convictions; then move on and get rid of the federal and state “drug free workplace” acts…

posted by: David on February 19, 2009 11:55am

A win for justice. A felony conviction should not mean a life sentence to unemployment. Congratulations New Haven.

posted by: kamb on February 20, 2009 8:02am

Whoopie! So, you dealt drugs for 10 years and shot a man? Awe, its okay. Heres the keys and access to peoples files and peoles personal information . . . now shut the light off when you finish cleaning.

New Haven is a joke. DeStefano puts more energy into illegal aliens who dont pay taxes, and ex-felons who terrorize us. Soon the city will be 90 percent owned by Yale and the other 20 will be Illegals and Felons.

posted by: LastStraw on February 20, 2009 6:41pm

“Heres the keys and access to peoples files and peoles personal information . . .”

Amen.

Maybe we should’ve campaigned for major retailers like WalMart and Home Depot to ban their “boxes”. I have no problem with an ex-con helping me load lumber into my car, or helping me design a kitchen, or working the night crew stocking shelves. I’m just a little weary that people who have a proven propensity towards crime may have the type of access Kamb speaks of.

posted by: CDaniel on February 22, 2009 1:49am

I would like to leave my opinion.

I am a convicted felon. In 1999 I was convicted possession of narcotics, but that wasn’t the first time I was in the criminal justice system. I pretty much spent from 1995-2002 on probation, in court, outpatient rehabs, and an AIC program. I was a drain on society, my family, and my “real” friends-the ones who were telling me that I was killing myself.

In 2002, I spent 6 weeks in jail; the first time I spent ANY lenth of time in jail. I told my family Not to bail me out. I had reached my bottom, and knew that I needed to be there and for the first time admitted honestly that I had a problem with drugs and alcohol. When I got out of jail I voluntarily (for the first and hopefully last time voluntarily) went to an inpatient rehab facility, and was sent for 6 months (by the courts) to an outpatient rehab; I chose to remain there a year. I joined a 12 step fellowship of which I am still a member and volunteer. I made restitution and amends to the people I hurt (even for the things I wasn’t arrested for). I got help for my psychiatric issues and got a job coach to help re-integrate me back into employability. Here’s where the story gets interesting (sometimes not in a good way).

Because I have a criminal record, it can be very frustrating on a good day to find a job. There aren’t a lot of good days. I have told the truth on all employment applications. Sometimes I get a benign “we’re sorry, but we have a blanket policy regarding hiring someone with a record”. Once I was escorted out of a building by security because I checked “yes” in the criminal question box and the receptionist reading the application freaked out (I was wearing corporate casual; security apologized to me and said she was a bit of a flake). I have discovered over the last 7 years (still clean since April 2002) that some people LOVE a success story, as long as they don’t have to hire them or be their co-workers; others would like to change the constitution to make permanent dis-enfranchisement of felons permanent.

Right now I work in a corporately-owned restaurant. I worked my way up from part-time to a full time trainer. I was offered a management position with a doubling in salary (AND HEALTH INSURANCE) because of my hard work that was rescinded because I have a record. I was then told that I was hired “in error”; that the restaurant didn’t perform a background check, but because I told the truth on my application I wouldn’t be fired, but my salary would never get higher that 10.50 an hour, and that I would never be eligible for a management position. I still have no insurance through my employer. I DO, however, earn enough eligible for insurance paid for by the taxpayers of Connecticut (title 19). My medications for depression total 600 dollars a month, not including Dr’s visits.

I guess one of the point I am getting to is this (past my bedtime; beginning to ramble). I applaud the City of New Haven for removing the box. If someone like me who made a mess of his early adult life but did the legwork to get better, they should be considered equally for a position. If that is not to be the case, then ALL rehabilitation options offered by the State of Connecticut Department of Corrections should be suspended, and all felons should be quarantined in one of the midwest square states in work camps.

I said the last part in jest of course. Just give someone who’s done the work to change their life a fair shake. I’m not talking about someone off the prison bus yesterday. Removing the box is a first step.

PS: For those who HAVE done the legwork to change their lives, apply for a pardon from the state. Your record is wiped clean. Getting student loans, joining the military, and better jobs are much easier as a result. Plus, if you HAVE done the work to change yourself (and can prove it), obtaining a pardon is the final step into full re-integration into society.

Plus, after a pardon, a person can LEGALLY check that he has NOT been convicted of a crime. FYI.

posted by: Edward_H on February 22, 2009 6:00pm

This will not change a thing. For every application a felon fills out there are 5 to 10 better qualified applicants who have somehow managed to avoid jail time.

How many City Hall staffers make an effort to hire felons and ex-cons to do work around their own homes and families?

posted by: Ed on February 22, 2009 7:24pm

Given the fact that 90% of ex-cons are repeat offenders, the chances of them commiting more crime are very high. In a year, I’d love to see how many criminals that were given jobs stole from the companies that hired them.
The city of New Haven is attempting to destroy its tax base and the lives of its citizens.
I for one will not hire an ex-felon and I’ll perform an extensive background check upon everyone that applies for a job and anyone with a record will not be hired.
Should the City want to take me to task, let them.

New Haven Independent

New Haven Independent Login Form