The new face on the campaign trail knocked on a door to make a political pitch. Instead, he ended up participating in a seminar on how politics really works in New Haven and the black community.
The impromptu seminar took place on Thompson Street the other day as challenger Moses Nelson canvassed in Newhallville’s 21st Ward. Nelson (pictured) is mounting a challenge in next Tuesday’s Democratic primary against a City Hall-backed incumbent alderwoman, Katrina Jones. (Click here for a previous story on the candidates.)
Stephen Soares came out on his porch.
“They only come around when they want to get elected,” Soares began, referring to candidates for public office.
Nelson assured Soares (pictured) that if he wins the Democratic primary, his face will be a common sight in the neighborhood.
Just then another resident of the Thompson Street house arrived home. “Who asked you to run?” Edwin Muhammad challenged Nelson, in a friendly but firm voice.
“No one from the city asked me to run,” Nelson replied. “Actually, a lot of people from my community asked me to run.”
“The reason why [I ask] is that the mayor is going to get involved in this,” Muhammad (pictured) continued. “He wants aldermen who are going to back whatever he wants to do, so he hand-picks them.”
Soares piped in, “How does he back them? By giving them money?”
“He controls them,” Muhammad replied. “Plantation politics.” He was referring to an argument that has existed in Newhallville and Dixwell and the Hill since the urban renewal era. Should voters in lower-income, black or Hispanic wards support politicians backed by City Hall and party leaders able to dispense sidewalks or jobs or other favors? Or does that establish a subservient relationship to power? Should voters instead mount independent campaigns with the potential of challenging city political leaders on broader issues of economic development, patronage and favoritism, government contracting, public education policy, distribution of public services, and political inclusion? Ward 21 in particular has had many aldermanic battles with that theme, with candidates like the late Chuck Allen, Willie Greene, and Ron Gattison.
From the sidewalk, Moses Nelson offered Soares his version of Local Politics 101.
“The mayor already controls the city and all of its departments,” the candidate said. “The Board of Aldermen is supposed to be the one body he doesn’t control, and it’s supposed to provide a check for him so he doesn’t have too much power. That hasn’t happened the last ten years he’s been in office.”
“That the aldermen hasn’t gone with him?” Soares asked, still a bit confused.
“No, that they haven’t provided a check for him,” Nelson said. “He’s been able to pretty much move along any policy or procedure he’s wanted over the majority of his terms in office.”
Muhammad reiterated, “What’s happened is that he’s been controlling the Board of Aldermen by hand-picking who he wants.”
Soares challenged Nelson: “How do we know you’re not going to be his puppy dog?”
Nelson assured his potential constituents that he would be his own man.
How Much To Question?
So it went on an afternoon canvas — when Nelson found people home. At well over half the houses, no one answered Nelson’s bell ring or crisp knock. One constituent opened her door only to tell Nelson she doesn’t vote. (A Jehovah’s Witness, he presumed.) At another house a man almost snarled, “I make my own decisions” about voting, which apparently precluded speaking to an actual candidate.
Nelson, who works as a case manager in a mental health agency, said he considers neighborhood violence and the lack of youth program services the ward’s biggest issues. “And they go hand in hand,” he said.
His opponent, incumbent Alderwoman Jones (pictured), said in an interview Tuesday night that the ward’s top issues are jobs and the need for job training. (She declined to have a reporter accompany her door to door in the ward.)
The two took different positions on a series of issues — some of which hearkened back to the issue of aldermanic independence of City Hall.
The two were asked whether the Board of Aldermen should more closely scrutinize line-item spending and policies of the Board of Education, which constitutes about half of the total city budget.
“Absolutely,” Nelson said. “We need to have that purview of what they’re doing. The Board of Ed is like a perfect storm — the lack of involvement of the Board of Aldermen, and the ability of the mayor to appoint the board and the superintendent. There needs to be more checks and balances and more oversight.”
Jones, who works for the Board of Ed coordinating a college prep program, said aldermanic oversight would be misplaced.
“Do we really have any say? Because it’s federal money,” she argued.
When told that some of the school budget comes from local property taxes, Jones added, “I did ask questions about how much of the budget comes from the federal government, the state and the city, but I never got a clear answer. That doesn’t mean I’m going to stop asking.”
She said because she is a Board of Ed employee, she recuses herself from votes related to education issues and doesn’t delve into those issues.
The question that generated the most outrage for Nelson concerned raises for 41 non-union mayoral appointees. These generated controversy when they quietly went into effect July 1 without notice to the aldermen or the public — after months of public debate and negotiations over layoffs and givebacks for other city workers. Administration officials said this group of employees had already gone years without raises; what angered some aldermen more was the process rather than many of the raises themselves.
Nelson (pictured chatting with Brandon Beard) said he would “absolutely not” have supported those raises.
“I can’t support a raise at the same time that layoffs are happening. To me, that’s unconscionable. There was an alderman who said, ‘We have to look out for our people.’ I would say that ‘our people’ are the ones who were laid off months before. These people are the mayor’s people. Those raises moved them from upper class to borderline wealth[y]. We always say we can’t hire teenagers for summer jobs, but these raises cost $111,000.” That was a reference to the new pay for several top aides, including mayoral Chief of Staff Sean Matteson, Chief Administrative Officer Rob Smuts, and economic development chief Kelly Murphy.
Jones said she also opposed the raises; she was gentler in her criticism, noting that some people were due a raise. “I think it was very poor timing [coming after layoffs],” she said.
On crime, Nelson said the city has abandoned community policing. He said he’s talked to many people — “taxpaying, working-class people who I don’t think have ever been in trouble” — who have a negative view of the police based on their own experiences. “The overall sentiment [in favor of the NHPD] is pretty low. I was told by Chief [James] Lewis that walking the beat doesn’t lower crime. That’s one of the reasons we don’t have community policing — because the police don’t think it reduces crime.”
Jones was more ambivalent.
“I really can’t say yes or no whether community policing still exists. I don’t see many police out on the beat in my community, but I know if I need to get in touch with someone [in the NHPD] if there is an issue, there is not a problem,” Jones said.
“I haven’t had many complaints about lack of police in the area. I see many more patrol cars [than cops on a walking beat]. It’s evolved. There used to be a lot more money for community policing but [now] there is a lack of funding.”
As Nelson continued his canvassing stroll down Thompson Street, he encountered a young woman with a toddler near Shelton Avenue. She hailed him with a hearty, “Hey, future alderman!” Laurena Joyner (pictured, with her son, Antoine) has volunteered for Nelson’s campaign.
Katrina Jones, who said she’s been out canvassing for the past three months, is counting on Joyner being wrong.
"I was told by Chief [James] Lewis that walking the beat doesn't lower crime. That's one of the reasons we don't have community policing -- because the police don't think it reduces crime."
He's absolutely right, too. But, walking a beat isn't community policing. Community policing is being responsive to citizens & being part of the community. (For instance, appointing Reddish, who lives in New Hallville, is certainly community policing)
We can have community policing without wasting police resources on walking beats that simply encourage criminals to avoid the person in blue. In an age of limited resources, I'm glad the police are able to get somewhere quickly & efficiently.