posted by: Nath on March 14, 2012  7:17am

Interesting! Walking through the green almost every day, I don’t recall having seen that many people around the camp in January and February!  Ah! New Haven Spring!

posted by: HhE on March 14, 2012  7:22am

For “As other occupier set about fortifying a newly consolidated central compound, Matthew Osborne quietly continued working on an art installation he’s calling “Unknown Artist, Unjuried Show.”

He wrapped a coaxial cable around a tree and carefully arranged scraps of paper and other found objects.

Osborne said he doesn’t intend to stay and be arrested. He did say he’s leaving his artwork behind.” read “Leave trash on The Green for other people to pick up.”

In the last month or two, ONH has lost so much of their ground and point.  At one time, they had helped shift the national and local dialog. Now they are effectively shifting it back.  Time to go.

posted by: William Kurtz on March 14, 2012  7:36am

Like many people, I am broadly sympathetic to the Occupy movement and its efforts to call attention to many of the systemic economic problems in the western world, even while I don’t agree with some of their specific methods and suggestions. But there’s value in getting people talking, and they have certainly started a conversation, although that conversation unfortunately centers more on the nature of their activity, or inactivity, than their specific goals, which seem only to have been articulated in the past week by those who have been identified several times as ‘non-camping’ members of the group, who mainly occupy the space in front of the TV cameras.

For what it’s worth, here’s a modest proposal for the future of the Occupy movement in New Haven: allow the group one ‘permanent’ structure on the Green, with a limited footprint. A booth, information kiosk, tent, or something similar that can be ‘occupied’ 24 hours a day–similar to those anti-nuclear protestors outside the White House. This would maintain the symbolic presence, avoid the need for the PR nightmare of a forcible eviction, and reinforce the city’s admirable commitment to peaceable protest.

posted by: streever on March 14, 2012  10:49am

I think Kurtz makes a great proposal.

The green is a space used by a lot of groups and individuals. The goal of Occupy is to raise awareness and create conversations—I think a way that allows the city to use the green and maintains a presence on the green is a good solution.

Would anyone from Occupy comment on Kurtz’s proposal?

posted by: EarlyBird on March 14, 2012  11:15am

Great suggestion, William Kurtz. Another option may be to occupy an empty retail space as part of the Project Storefronts initiative being run by the City.

posted by: Patty R on March 14, 2012  11:56am

For five months the occupiers have not published a single five page paper proposing a simple plan of action; That would make one page every month people.

Go run for office, go support those who run for office and who can come up with a basis plan of action! Or go get jobs. Anything but for heaven sake get off the green and stop trashing the grass making this town look like a slum.

Totally disgusted!

posted by: anonymous on March 14, 2012  12:10pm

Kurtz’s idea is already possible, I believe. You are allowed to set up a protest kiosk or sign board on the Green as long as you are there standing with it. Anything otherwise would be a restriction of free speech. The concern of the City has been about the use of permanent structures.

posted by: nh104 on March 14, 2012  2:41pm

The question on having a structure or not on the green is solely at the discretion of the proprietors.

Yes, over the years there have been some exceptions like the stage, the tree, and the 1907 fountain. But there have been far more things that have been removed or not built at all. Like the flying Santa in the 80’s for example. Since the proprietors have the final word on a structure and if they want it on their property or not, just as you do at home.

posted by: Walt on March 14, 2012  4:39pm


Are you saying the Proprietors of the Common Ground vetoed the flying Santa and his reindeer which used to soar over the Green in the Christmas season?

As I had bought a new 80 - foot- long Santa set in the ‘50’s (the original papiermache set had succumbed to the winter weather after a few years use)  I occasionally had wondered what had happened to this one-time favorite of New Haven area kids..

I had assumed deterioration   of Downtown and the disappearance of Malley’s and Macy’s and other important retailers who had financed the displays was the cause, but maybe   the then-stodgy Proprietors really shot them down as you hint.

Certainly they would have never allowed the current mess on the Green!

What’s the story?  Anyone?

posted by: nh104 on March 15, 2012  12:55am


I doubt the proprietors put the flying Santa to rest.

From what I recall reading (i will note the article if i can find it again) about the flying Santa…one year the proprietors thought the looks of the Santa could have been better so Santa was replaced with a nicer looking version. Nothing bad, just about quality.

If i’m mistaken, i apologize, not trying to mislead.

posted by: GoodNatured on March 15, 2012  9:22am

Mark this as another endorsement of William Kurtz’ very reasonable suggestion.  An “Occupy” booth on the Green could be a meaningful and useful symbolic continuation of Occupy NH *and* Occupy WS.

It would also be an important step in forging alliances—now and through the summer—with the rest of us 99%ers (who are sympathetic but also want to give the grass a chance to recover, and don’t want to see Occupy end in a rancorous confrontation).

posted by: Walt on March 15, 2012  5:33pm


No apology needed.  Just curious.