Mayor John DeStefano was finally asked the question on everyone’s mind when he showed up for the one and only debate of this year’s mayoral race. He chose not to answer the question. But he did reveal startling news: He’s not the only New Havener running for governor these days. We all are.
The question was posed at the outset of the debate by moderator Clifton Graves, Jr., of the NAACP. (Click here for a story covering the issues raised at the debate.) “Why should the citizens of New Haven vote for you,” Graves asked, “when at best you might be a part-time mayor for the next year, and at worst” step down as mayor in the second year?
Graves was referring to the fact that DeStefano is simultaneously running for mayor and governor. Actually, he’s spending the bulk of his time traveling the state running for governor. That election takes place in 2006. He’ll be spending most of 2006 on that campaign. If he wins, he’d step down for the second year of his two-year term.
“There is a job that needs to be done,” DeStefano “replied.” “There is a job that needs to be done creating more jobs in Connecticut.”
He continued that litany of jobs that need to be done, like reducing property taxes and improving school readiness among pre-kindergarten children.
“It’s important to bring voice” to those issues, he concluded. And who better than the mayor a city to bring that voice?
“It’s an opportunity to have our voice be heard” statewide, DeStefano said. “It’s not just me who’s running for governor. It’s all that we’ve done together.”
So New Haven’s running for governor. But DeStefano ended there, and didn’t respond to Graves’ question about why he’d seek another term if he’s already running around the state all week and hopes to serve only half the term.
(He did address that question a while back in an Independent interview. He said that visiting towns like Marlborough makes him a better mayor. Click here to read that interview.)
Not Guilty as Charged
One of DeStefano’s opponents, Leslie Harper Blatteau of the Guilty Party, addressed the question in her opening remarks.
“As we work to live up to our potential,” she said of New Haven, “the last thing we need is an absentee mayor, more concerned with his campaign for governor than the very city that pays his salary.”
Blatteau is the third person to run for mayor on the Guilty Party line. The first candidate, Bill Saunders, cross-dressed in the first campaign, in 2001, which was cast as a satirical piece of political theater. That made sense, since the Guilty Party doesn’t have the money or party machinery — let alone a ballot line (Blatteau’s a write-in candidate) — to actually try to win. Yet Blatteau has presented a serious face on this year’s ticket. She has tried to present a thoughtful critique of government in a year in which DeStefano has been able to avoid a real campaign. Despite growing dissatisfaction in town over the course of city government, none of the mayoral hopefuls who actually want the job and could potentially win it — such as state Sen. Martin Looney or former city development chief Henry Fernandez — chose to take DeStefano on.
Blatteau didn’t even wear a dress to the debate. She wore a no-nonsense black jacket, a gold skirt, and black high-heeled shoes. She didn’t make jokes. She was passionate — at times practically fulminating as she blurted out a stream of outrage at the DeStefano administration.
Her opening statement made the case that New Haven would have heard repeatedly, on TV, in campaign flyers, in the newspapers, if a better-funded challenge had emerged this year, or if the Green Party had returned to running more than symbolic campaigns with candidates who canvassed neighborhoods and developed a consistent citywide platform. Here’s what Blatteau said:
“… For over a decade, New Haven citizens have been paralyzed by the single-party politics of the Democratic machine…
“The quality of life of all of New Haven’s residents must improve. There is a housing crisis in our city. There are not enough affordable apartments where working people can live safely. In an article in the New London Day, John DeStefano celebrated the luxury apartment boom in our city’s downtown, bragging about escalating rents of $3,000 and more. I believe a mayor should ensure realistic housing opportunities in all our cities’ neighborhoods.
“I believe there is a correlation between skyrocketing rents and the recent crime spree plaguing certain parts of the city. As families stress over making ends meet, young people feel that pressure as well, sending some down a less than desirable path.
“But how do we discourage negative behaviors without positive ones to take their place? We must invest more in after-school programs and summer jobs. Children have an enormous zest for life. We must build on their strengths as we create programs to better serve them.
“New Haven is an exciting urban center, with a relatively small population. Shouldn’t our city’s leaders have a full understanding of the needs of each segment of the community?
“I fear we are moving in the wrong direction. Under John DeStefano’s watch, city property taxes have increased four years in a row, and the city’s bond rating was recently reduced. The city must create more incentive-based programs to reward taxpayers and companies who share our common vision. In this vision, I see potential. As we work to live up to our potential, the last thing we need is an absentee mayor, more concerned with his campaign for governor than the very city that pays his salary. We as a city must expect more!”
I'm no fan of DeStefano, or the one-party state; however, I don't see how "bragging about escalating rents of $3,000 and more" is a bad thing for New Haven. In case no one has noticed, New Haven has a huge number of "affordable" housing units in the numerous public housing projects, in various states of decay and renewal, throughout the city. In addition the corruption of the New Haven Housing Authority is well known, as the frequent scandals involving graft, cronyism, financial mismangement are well documented. Does New Haven really need more of the same; is public corruption good for the public housing tenants, the taxpayers, or the city in general? Furthermore, New Haven is seen as a dumping ground for poor people. The surrounding towns basically ignore their responsibilty to develop affordable housing schemes, and New Haven has done more than its share in accomodating people with few or no financial resources. Also, a percentage of the rental units, in the newly redeveloped Ninth Square, are subsidized, and there is also a supportive housing development on State St., downtown.
As someone who was displaced, from San Francisco, a truly unaffordable place, I moved to New Haven because housing is cheap, for an urban area.
As far as the connection between "skyrocketing rents and the recent crime spree plaguing certain parts of the city". I don't see the logic? Rents in high-crime areas normally go down, along with property values, as no one wants to live in a dangerous environment. Why do I get the feeling though that there is always an implied threat that if I don't financially support other peoples anti-social brats, that I deserved to be assaulted by the little criminals, or their violence is somehow justified? If one can't provide the basics for one's kids - don't expect your neighbors to pay for the offspring of your unprotected sexual escapades.