Both Springfield and Hartford face mayoral races this fall. As a new Hartford resident, I have little clue what’s going on in my new city, but I’ll be doing some catching up at the blog Real Hartford, which documented a mayoral candidates’ forum in May, as well as IonHartford, which did the same from a slightly different perspective. (Ah! Perspective! That elusive temptress.)
Further digging reveals that blogs CT News Junkie and Liveable Hartford also added their two cents to the mix.
This is almost overwhelming for me, coming from Springfield, to see so much alternative media coverage of a single candidates’ forum so well in advance of the election itself. It’s almost like there’s enough alternative stuff out there to establish a Hartford Independent Media Forum or something. It’s as though a new city blogger can show up and just join in the fray somehow, and engage in a few online conversations already underway, without sweating over feeling like the only such independent writer-who’s-also-a-resident dealing with the ups and downs city life brings.
For a sample of Hartford’s issues, author Kerri of Real Hartford summarizes the first question at the May forum, which challenged the candidates to describe their vision for the city:
Minnie Gonzalez, who seemed very unprepared and at a loss for words most of the evening, said that she would like to see a “better and safer Hartford.” For her, this would include “safer schools and safer parks.”? [Side note: IonHartford views Gonzalez as trying to dilute the Latino vote from the incumbent.]
Frank Barrows, in one of the many nostalgic speeches given by candidates, spoke of a time when Hartford was a wealthy city. He said that “you have to know the past of the city” and that the “only way we gonna have a future in this city [?is if we] reduce crime rate and perception of crime.” ?
Stan McCauley, the Republican, in one of the many self-described politically incorrect statements he would make, claimed that his “vision shouldn’t be that much different from [that of the] people sitting in [this] room,” and that the mayor would “need to listen to people in Hartford.” In another act of bravery, he explained how right now, those in power are listening to the suburbs’ vision for the city, but are ignoring what Hartford residents envision for it.
Rev. Patrice Smith preached. I have never quite seen someone so possessed with spirit as I did when she spoke. ?Smith’s vision for Hartford involved peace and God. She was primarily concerned with violence in the city, and said, “I’m not afraid to go anywhere. We talk a big game, [but] we’re not using our money in the right place.”
Raul De Jesus was the first candidate to actually stand up and get animated. Like Smith, he may not be the most qualified, but he had unquestionable enthusiasm for the position. He gave information on his background, growing up poor in Charter Oak Terrace. He said that what we need in Hartford is not for cops to solve the problems for us. Instead, he was advocating for community policing.
Predictably, [incumbent] Eddie Perez ?said that originally he “wanted the job because [he] had the qualification for the job.” ?[H]e bragged about how he “saw construction of 2100 housing units” since becoming mayor.
Art Feltman countered this with some statistics. Maybe it was the hard evidence that earned him a devoted committee of hecklers. He suggested that while there have been more new housing units, there have also been a high number of foreclosures during the same period—a number that essentially cancels out the one Perez was talking about. As for vision, Feltman said he’d like to see Hartford as “an exciting ?comeback city.”
The final candidate to speak on the question of vision was I. Charles Mathews, who said that he’d “rather talk about a shared vision” than of his personal vision. He mentioned how this would “need to include all voices, all neighborhoods.” In what one hopes is not just talk, he said that there is a need for “honesty in government.”
Liveable Hartford weighs in with this:
First, the audience embodied both what’s right with Hartford and what’s wrong. What’s right: it was a diverse group, a mix of ages and ethnicities and incomes; it was a cadre of residents who care enough to become engaged in the political process. What’s wrong: how many of them walked across the street from their comfy job at City Hall at the mayor’s behest? Many in the audience were downright obnoxious, an especially large number of Perez supporters, in particular.
Second, the candidates also embodied both what’s right with Hartford and what’s wrong: What’s right: the strong mayor has attracted a large crowd of challengers, which represents a cross-section of Hartford’s diversity: male, female, black, white, Latino, gay, and even ? Republican. What’s wrong: most of the candidates are woefully unqualified for the position.
Full video of the May debate is available online, especially so that viewers might admire the moderating skills of the Hartford Courant’s Tom Condon—and get a sense of the candidates, of course.
Recent news available on Perez’s site tells of his having secured the Hartford Democratic Party’s endorsement for mayor, although some have also questioned whether this endorsement will mean very much, given the likely alienation within the party itself that Perez may have (inadvertently) fostered during his tenure, which included a transition to a strong-mayor system.
In Springfield, mayoral candidate and city councilor Domenic Sarno’s Web site reveals that he has plenty of door-to-door visits in his schedule this summer, while incumbent Charles Ryan’s site appears to need some updating since the last election.
The Republican’s Peter Goonan reported earlier this month that seven people were considering running for mayor of Springfield, and anyone else interested in taking out papers must do so by this coming Friday, July 27. From the article:
To qualify for the ballot, a mayoral candidate must turn in at least 500 valid signatures of registered voters. ?If three or more people run for mayor, a preliminary election would be needed to reduce the field to two finalists.
Other residents taking out papers for mayor are William L. Person, of 27 Saab Ct.; Jeffery P. Donnelly, of 107 West Alvord St.; James J. Duquette, of 91 Mulberry St.; David S. Parkhurst, of 251 Norfolk St.; and Michael K. Jones, whose address was unconfirmed.
Hopefully, there will be some range of alternative media to cover any candidates’ forum for Springfield, if indeed such a forum can be pulled together. Hartford’s took place at the public library, but I’m not certain at this point who arranged it;
This is to say nothing (or little, anyway) of the many-tentacled Springfield City Council race, which so far has racked up potentially 21 candidates, including Karen Powell and John Lysak, who both announced recently, and Clodovaldo Concepcion, who apparently also submitted the necessary 200 signatures. If more than 18 of the potential candidates do the same, qualifying them for the race, then a City Council preliminary election will need to be held.
Considering the skimpy mainstream coverage thus far of the long lists of potential candidates not just for mayor and City Council, but also for the School Committee, it’s time for alternative and citizen media to step to the ready-and-waiting plate. No more resting on your heels hoping the Valley Advocate will be there to counter the voice in the Republican’s editorials: you have to write your own, and post them to your new blog, which you will begin now if you haven’t already.
