Search This Blog

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

WHERE ARE THE LOCAL POLITICAL OPERATIONS ?

The more I see, the more the "political operations" in Hartford continue to surprise me. The Republican Party in Hartford is dead and has been in steady decline for years. Many reasons can be thrown around to deflect the blame, but pure and simple, it comes down to a lack of leadership. Any leadership that might be claimed by the Republicans on a local level is held by those with outdated, antiquated ideas that have harmed the party on all levels.

It doesn't have to be that way. One of the reasons the Republican Party in Hartford has seen its demise is because they fail to embrace new ideas and put any effort into education and outreach to rebuild the party. OK, enough on the dead Republican Party.

What really bothers me though is the current state of the Democratic Party in Hartford, specifically the Democratic Town Committee. In case no one has noticed, the "endorsed" Town Committee candidates took a beating yesterday. In the 1st District Ken Green has won re-election(if he survives a recount and holds his 3 vote lead).Green was the incumbent but also was the challenger for his seat since the Town Committee gave his nomination to Matt Ritter.

In the 7th District, incumbent Doug McCrory won his seat back after the 7th District Town Committee attempted to orchestrate his ouster. The 7th District nominated rJo Winch to run in the 7th, the 7th District Town Committee has a large number of Winch family members seated as members. McCrory handily beat Winch to regain his seat.

In the 4th District, challenger Angel Morales came within 9 votes of de-throning incumbent Kelvin Roldan. A recount will be held to determine the winner in that race.

In the 6th District, Hector Robles had a challenge from Alyssa Peterson. Even though Peterson really did not run much of a campaign and didn't qualify for public funding, she still obtained about a third of the vote.

In the Fonfara/Vargas Senate race, Vargas had a respectable showing until the Wethersfield votes were figured in. Fonfara had a much better showing in Wethersfield than he did in his hometown of Hartford.

The part that bothers me though is that all of the endorsed candidates were pretty much on their own. Where were the Town Committee operations. Where were the phone banks for the "endorsed slate"? Where were the signs to vote for the "endorsed Democrats, vote Row A".

I was surprised when I drove through Windsor Center last week and saw a huge banner on a building across from the Town Hall. "WINDSOR DEMOCRATIC HEADQUARTERS" with just about every endorsed candidates signs in the windows. Windsor has about a quarter of Hartford's population, and Hartford probably has more registered Democratic voters than Windsor has total residents.

I'm not aware of any "Hartford Democratic Headquarters", no phone banks, not even a spot fro residents to drop in and get information about the races. Why not? If Windsor can do it along with many other smaller towns, why can't Connecticut's capitol city?

If you attended Town Committee meetings or listened to Hartford's so called political leaders, you would think the rooms were filled with James Carville's or Karl Rove's. Nothing seems further from the truth. Imagine what could happen if all the talk was actually put into action.

I think a lot of the dysfunction is by design though. If voters were educated and actually got involved, that might present a challenge to those that have become fat and happy with their political stature. Many Town Committee seats, both Republican and Democrat, are hardly ever challenged. If you look at the names on the Town Committee's, it probably hasn't changed much in the last ten or fifteen years. If it changes, in many cases the last names remain the same, only the first names change as families retain their "dynasty" hold and make sure the family names carry on in Hartford history.

The town committee's are the first step in getting the best candidates to run for office. As long as the twon committee's are a mess, our selection process for public officials will remain a mess.

It is time we start looking for the best possible candidates and the best people to represent us on the Town Committee's. Until then, nothing will change.

Saturday, August 7, 2010

ANOTHER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION WIN AGAINST CITY OF HARTFORD



I didn't think I would get to use that picture again after Rosie was terminated by Mayor Segarra on July 9, 2010.It's too bad Hartford Corporation Counsel John Rose won't be around any longer to spar with at FOI hearings.

Today I received another proposed Final Decision from the FOI Commission regarding a complaint I had filed against Councilman Calixto Torres and Rosie. The complaint was filed in September of 2009, heard on January 29, 2010 and finally decided on August 4, 2010 and will go before the full commission on August 23, 2010.

FOI complaints definitely aren't a speedy process, but it is what it is. With a very small staff at FOI, it is a cumbersome process that was made even worse by John Rose and the Perez Administration. I guess when you are running a criminal operation, it makes sense to stall any information you give out that might be damaging.

Rather than recap the entire complaint, you can read the hearing officers report and proposed decision below. Essentially it was over financial reports that I had requested and the City's policy that all FOI requests be funneled through Rosie to make sure they controlled the information being given out.

The hearing officer determined that the policy violated the FOI law and ruled that the policy be "declared null and void".

Although I am hopeful that with Rosie gone the City will now begin to obey the FOI laws, but after trying to obtain the Robles' IAD report, I'm not sure.

The Hearing Officers report is below:

Foi Decision Rose-Torres 1-29-10

Friday, August 6, 2010

MATT RITTER TAKES A HIT...BUT IS HE THE ONLY ONE DESERVING?

I guess all is fair when you decide to enter the dirty, in the gutter game of politics.

An article posted on Courant.com tonight detailed allegations that Hartford Councilperson Matt Ritter received an endorsement from a group called "Voices of Women of Color". click here to read the full story It seems that the same group received payments directly from Ritter's campaign for "consultant" work.

Although I agree that there should be some sort of disclosure to keep everything in the open, but why is Ritter being singled out? Maybe as the perceived front runner it might be an easy shot to take by an opponent trying to regain some ground three days before a primary. Maybe it was a shot taken by another group that wasn't given a "consultant" fee and wants their piece of the CEP pie.

Whether Ritter is right or wrong is up to voters to decide on Tuesday. The problem seems to even more widespread amongst others on the Democratic endorsed Row A. It seems that Ritter might not be the only one wheeling and dealing for endorsements.

Although most people have never heard of the "Voices of Women of Color" (sorry Janice)they do have influence door to door in Ritter's campaign area.

One group that most people have heard of though is Connecticut's "Working Families Party". Their strength is based more in Hartford with the election of Urania Petit as the WFP Registrar of Voters in Hartford, and two Council seats went to the WFP in the last council election. Potentially they may become more of a force to be reckoned with statewide in elections.

If Ritter is being criticized for his lack of candor in his endorsements, it pales in comparison to his fellow Row A Democrats.

According to August 3, 2010 financial campaign filings, three Democratic candidates have paid amounts much larger than Ritters payment to people endorsing them. According to the filings, the largest payment was made by FONFARA 2010 to "Working Families Grassroots Strategies, INC." in the amount of $7,800. Fonfara is listed on the Working Families website as one of their endorsed candidates.

Another individual running for the legislature in the district that abuts Ritter's is Windsor's Leo Canty. Canty is also listed on the Working Families website as one of their endorsed candidates. Canty's campaign made a payment of $5,850 to the Working Families "Grassroots Strategies, Inc" on July 15,2010.

Democratic Row A endorsed candidate for Secretary of State, Denise Merrill apparently also realizes the value of the WFP endorsement. Merrill's campaign paid $3714.69 to the Working Families "Grassroots Strategies, Inc." on August 2, 2010.

That's enough digging for tonight, but it seems pretty clear that Matt Ritter hasn't reinvented the wheel when it comes to "obtaining" endorsements.

And in the interest of full disclosure, it's important to say I have not received any "consultant" fees from the Ritter campaign, we could talk though Matt, you have the number

All of these filings can be viewed on-line at ct.gov/seec and then use "e-cris search" to find a candidate by name

Thursday, August 5, 2010

CHIEF ROBERTS' DEAL DONE


It became official yesterday, Mayor Segarra wants Chief Daryl Roberts to stick around, and the Chief has agreed. Although the Chief had apparently hoped for a longer term, Mayor Segarra could only assure Roberts tenure until the end of his current Mayoral term, December 31, 2011.

By Hartford's Charter, the Chief as well as other Department heads serve at the will of the current Mayor, and a new Mayor taking office January 1, 2012 would be free to retain Roberts or appoint a new Chief. Thanks to Steve Goode for the actual copy, I still don't think Sarah likes me.

The formal agreement is below:
Chief Roberts Contract

MORE GOOD OL' HARTFORD POLITICS

Another one from Hartford's bizarre political operations.

According to Jeff Cohen's blog,click here for Jeff's blog, and Councilwoman rJo Winch's facebook page, if you should happen to receive any nude videos of the Councilwoman, they are untrue.



I don't even know what to say at this point, no witty punchline could do this revelation justice.

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

I REALLY WANT TO USE A BAD WORD HERE BUT I WON'T...THE US NAVY IS BUYING RUSSIAN HELICOPTERS, BYPASSING SIKORSKY?

My first inclination was to say "what the .....?". I read the attached story on the Courant's website and just had to re-read it, click here to read it for yourself. Apparently the US Navy is bypassing Sikorsky Aircraft, a Connecticut based company. The helicopters for use in Afghanistan, will be purchased from a Russian company.

The explanation from the Navy is that pilots in Afghanistan are familiar with the Russian helicopters, used there in the 1980's. The Navy spokesperson claims that it could take "2 to 5 years" to train new pilots. Here goes another "what the ......?"

What about the machinists at Sikorsky and the small businesses that rely on Sikorsky to survive by building these aircraft? How long will it take to retrain them when they lose their jobs and the small businesses shut down?

Maybe it is time to start worrying about American workers and their jobs, rather than the difficulty of retraining Afghan pilots. So much for that "economic recovery", unless of course you are based in Russia.