It’s been a rough news cycle for the candidates for Hampden County District Attorney, as one crucial election day—the Sept. 14 primary, which will narrow the crowded Democratic field to one—fast approaches.
The drama was kicked off by a less-than-flattering description of Springfield, made by Stephen Spelman, one of the Democrats vying for the job. At a late August candidates’ forum, Spelman, a veteran who’s spent time in Iraq, said of the city, “People feel as though they are living in a war zone. The tough law and order strategies that we used in Iraq, a society under extraordinary stress, will work here in Springfield and other places in Hampden County that are not under that kind of stress.”
Spelman’s rivals were quick to express their righteous indignation over his comments, accusing him of speaking disrespectfully of the city and, in the case of state Sen. Stephen Buoniconit, even calling for an apology. Spelman held firm, however, saying, “People say parts of Springfield aren’t a war zone. I disagree.”
Spelman, perhaps, might have employed a little more political nuance in his choice of words (he did later temper his comments, adding, “There are places that are great, there are places that are not. The places that are not are poisoned by guns and drugs.”). But talk to enough residents of some of the city’s rougher neighborhoods—places where burned-out buildings dominate blocks, where late-night gun shots are not uncommon and parents hesitate to let their kids play outside—and you’ll likely hear his sentiments echoed. Perhaps more worrisome is Spelman’s call for militaristic strategies in law enforcement—although, again, for residents of those beleaguered neighborhoods, that might sound like a pretty good idea.
As the dust around Spelman finally began to settle, fellow Democratic candidate Michael Kogut was the next to find himself up against the ropes, courtesy of blogger Tom Devine, a long-time observer of Springfield politics. In a Sept. 1 post, titled “Kogut’s Dark Past,” Devine excoriates Kogut for his role in the Gerry Daniele fiasco of 1996. Daniele was the one-time Springfield city auditor who lost his job after being accused of sexual harassment by two city employees, Kathy Kelly and Joanne Reilly. In the end, Daniele was cleared of the charges by the Mass. Commission Against Discrimination, which described the case against the auditor as “totally lacking in merit.” Daniele subsequently sued the city and won a settlement. He’s since passed away.
Of Kogut—who at the time served as then-Mayor Mike Albano’s city solicitor, a job the City Council eventually pushed him out of—Devine writes: “When justice was at stake, Kogut did nothing and an innocent man was made to suffer. Just imagine what it must have been like for Danielle to have had to go home and tell his wife and family that he not only had been fired from his city job, but had been accused of sexual harassment. Of course this was all over the media as well.”
Then, earlier this week, it was presumed frontrunner Buoniconti’s turn in the unflattering spotlight—courtesy of an article in the Springfield Republican by reporter Jack Flynn. Flynn reports that, in addition to serving in the state Senate (an $80,000-a-year gig), Buoniconti has worked since 2006 as an attorney for the Hampden County Regional Retirement System, “[d]espite limited experience in pension law.” And, Flynn found, Buoniconti failed to properly report more than $100,000 he earned over that period in required state ethics reports. By law, that income should have been listed on Buoniconti’s reports as coming from a taxpayer-funded public agency; instead, it was reported as income earned in the private sector.
“In an interview this week, Buoniconti said his legal skills, not political connections, won him the pension board job,” Flynn wrote.
“Explaining why he never mentioned the post on his ethics forms, the three-term senator said he was relying on a verbal opinion from the Ethics Commission. ‘My understanding was that I didn’t have to disclose …. not if you’re an independent contractor and it’s not a state agency,’” the article continued.
In other DA-race news, MassLive.com’s Greg Saulmon earlier this week offered up some intriguing information about crime in the communities in which the candidates live. Using FBI data, Saulmon reported the crime rates in five of the six candidates’ hometowns (the FBI report did not contain data for West Springfield, where Buoniconti lives).
The differences among the communities were striking: In Springfield—home to Kogut—the violent crime rate was 12.55 per 1,000 residents; on the other end of the spectrum, Longmeadow—home to Democrat James Goodhines—the rate was a mere .39 per 1,000. Springfield also led the list in property crimes—48.5 per 1,000 residents—while Democrat Brett Vottero’s Wilbraham was at the bottom, with 13.26 property crimes per 1,000 residents.
The article did not sit well with some readers, who read more into Saulmon’s straight-forward reportage than was actually there. “This is ridiculous,” one exasperated reader posted in response. “You can’t assign resonsibility [sic] to candidates for their hometown crime rate any more than you can assign any of them responsibility for Springfield’s crime rate.”
In fact, nowhere in the article does Saulmon assign responsibility to the candidates, or even offer any analysis of what the numbers might mean politically. The article, he wrote, was inspired by a reader’s request for the data; such questions, he wrote in response to a reader’s comment, “often provide a good entry point for looking at the issues facing our communities.” Indeed, once readers get past their thin-skinned reactions, the information could be the starting point for some interesting conversations about how a prosecutor’s personal proximity to crime might affect the perspective he brings to the job.
