Elicker, Harp Clash On Corruption

by Thomas Breen | Sep 5, 2019 11:36 pm

(58) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author

Posted to: Politics, Campaign 2019

Mayor Toni Harp and challenger Justin Elicker pitched radically different visions of clean government and clean elections — and of New Haven’s need for change — in a passionate final face-off before their Democratic Party primary. The occasion was a debate before a capacity crowd Thursday night at Co-Op High School’s theater on Crown Street downtown. Harp and Elicker are slated to face off in the Democratic mayoral primary this coming Tuesday, Sept. 10. The theater’s 350 seats were already full by the time the debate, which was co-sponsored by The Democracy Fund, the New Haven Independent, and La Voz Hispana, started just after 7 p.m. According to Co-Op theater staff, a second fire marshal had to be called in order to ensure that at least 400 eager onlookers could fit safely into the high school theater. Time and time again over the course of the hour-plus event, Harp, a former city alder and state senator who has been a fixture of New Haven politics for the past three decades, forcefully rebuffed Elicker’s accusations that her administration has wasted public funds on fruitless legal battles and bad hires and that her campaign has cozied up to deep-pocketed special interests. She argued that, instead, her administration has prioritized the welfare of the city’s primarily black and brown working-class neighborhoods through targeted public safety and youth engagement initiatives like YouthStat. She said she has fired employees immediately upon learning that they were acting unethically. And she said that her campaign has accepted high-dollar developer contributions not because of a prejudice towards the rich, but because the current public financing laws discriminate against the poor. She credited New Haven under her leadership with embodying the best of this country’s ideals, of unity and diversity and economic opportunity, and called on city residents to rally together to keep those ideals alive. She repeatedly depicted Elicker as the candidate of the wealthy and privileged, and her administration as a defender of the poor and working class. Elicker, a former East Rock/Cedar Hill alder, nonprofit leader, and 2013 mayoral runner-up, reinforced his campaign-long argument that he would clean up City Hall and prioritize ethical government. He argued that his campaign’s participation in the Democracy Fund’s municipal public financing program, which caps individual contributions at $390 a piece and prohibits special-interest donations, and his neighborhood-spanning door-knocking campaign have been testaments to his democratic commitments. He asked New Haveners looking to transition into a new generation of leadership, a new generation of politics, to cast a vote for him. “Stacked Against Poor People” The starkest division of the night came in response to a question about the Democracy Fund, in which Elicker is participating and Harp is not. Participants agree to cap individual contributions at $390 (rather than $1,000) and forswear special-interest contributions in return for receiving public dollars. An Independent reader named Anna Barry wrote in the question, saying that she is a progressive Democrat who believes in public financing, and appreciates the work that Harp did as a state senator to create the clean election laws. What would get Harp, who has criticized the structure of the program in the past, to participate? In this campaign, Harp, who can accept individual contributions as high as $1,000 a piece, has received many donations from developers with a history of landing lucrative construction contracts with the city. Harp responded that the Fund’s rules favor candidates who cater to wealthier donors. Because it takes a lot of contributions to qualify for matching money, candidates need donors who can write $390 checks rather than poorer constituents. “It takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to run for mayor,” Harp said. “And yes, you might be able to get the $30 donations, but the higher donations that come at $350, in certain neighborhoods, particularly in those neighborhoods that I represent, it would be almost impossible to get enough money to run. “So only very wealthy people from wealthy neighborhoods can run,” she said. “Like my opponent.” She said the municipal program should be changed to work more like the state clean election program, which she said allows candidates raise money at a certain rate and then receive benefits, as opposed to capping those donations at a certain dollar amount. “If you have a system that really rewards people at the higher end,” she said, “$350, that’s a lot for the people that I have traditionally represented. Yes, I can get the $30, but not the $350. People who come from the more privileged neighborhoods, they can get that. I think that the current system is stacked against poor people who want to run for mayor.” Elicker vehemently disagreed. “I’m so disappointed in what the mayor just said,” he said. “The mayor has accepted thousand dollar donations from so many contractors that get millions of dollars in contracts from the city.” The mayor has accepted more than $1,000 from the fire chief, he said, and $1,000 from the superintendent. Seventy percent of financial contributions to his campaign, meanwhile, have come from city residents, he said. “This is not about dividing us, or saying that it’s a rich or poor thing. This is about good governance.” “It’s time that we change the direction of this city,” he added, “and fund campaigns by the people and not contractors.” “More Ethical Leadership In This City” New Haven Register reporter Mary O’Leary asked the two candidates if they plan to beef up the city’s Code of Ethics to cover not just city employees, but all board and commission members, too. “Yes,” Elicker said. “I think that we need to do so much more on the ethical side in New Haven.” He said that he would implement a lobby and disclosure form that would require lobbyists who donated to political campaigns to disclose their political spending before getting work with the city. He said the city needs to have an “open checkbook policy, so every check the city puts out is on the web.” That way residents can scrutinize all financial matters, and not learn about mishaps or misspending only through the newspaper or Freedom of Information Act requests. He pointed to the Escape Teen Center project and the city’s Youth Department as currently the subject of an FBI subpoena. “It’s time that we have more transparency in government and more ethical leadership in this city.” Harp pushed back. Under her leadership, the city’s pension boards implemented new standards and codes of ethics. Anyone in City Hall who has a concern about ethics can always go to the Board of Ethics, she said, which hears out complaints about potential conflicts of interest. Then she accused her opponent of slandering the good names of all city employees by repeatedly slinging corruption accusations. “We hear from Justin Elicker that the Harp administration is corrupt,” she said. “Think about what that means for everybody who works for the City of New Haven.” A Department of Public Works staffer named Edwin Martinez recently rescued a baby left alone while his mom was inadvertently locked in the basement of their home, she said. “He’s not corrupt or unethical.” Elicker took back up the mic to respond. “Nobody is claiming that Edwin Martinez is corrupt,” he said. Instead, he pointed back to never-completed plans for the Escape Teen Center, for which contracts went to a friend of a city official now on leave and which the FBI is now scrutinizing. “What We’ve Done Together” In their impassioned closing statements to voters, Elicker and Harp doubled down on what they had been pitching all night: a transition to a new style, a new generation, a new era of government, or a re-commitment to the unity, diversity, and working-class advocacy and representation of the Democratic Party at its best of the past few decades. Elicker, standing and taking a step from the table on Co-Op’s stage where he and Harp had sat all night, told a story about his child beginning school — as a metaphor for generational change he promises to bring to New Haven. “Natalie and I dropped off Molly on Tuesday, and saw her onto the bus for her first day in kindergarten. It actually was a lot more emotional than I was expecting it to be. “She was really afraid to get on the bus. She’s four years old, she’s a young kindergartner. To see her waving as the bus drove away, it was a transition to a new stage in her life, a stage where she was growing and moving beyond. It was difficult for all three of us, but we knew it was the right thing. “And New Haven is at a moment where we’re ready for a new stage, a new type of government and leadership that is more accessible and more responsive, that invests and ensures that everyone in New Haven, no matter their political connections or backgrounds, have the opportunities to thrive. “We’ve had a long history in New Haven, and I respect and admire the history of Mayor Harp and her work here. I think its time for us all to get on the bus and go to a new phase in our lives. “Where, even though it may be difficult and we’re taking a risk and it may be a little bit emotional, it’s time that we look forward and take a step into the future and grow together. And i hope you agree with me and join me in voting for our team on Tuesday.” Harp’s closing statement depicted a thriving city in which diverse groups of people have worked together to bring positive change, success on which she promised to build in a fourth term: “So New Haven is a place where everyone can be somebody, where everyone has a voice in our government. And my administration has given room and a place for everyone to participate. “We decided together that we wanted to improve education, that we wanted to make sure that our young people would graduate from high school. When I became mayor, our high school graduation rate was 68 percent. It’s now 80 percent. “We wanted to make sure that our young people had an opportunity to actually grow up. There was a time in New Haven when so many of our young kids were being gunned down. We worked hard to get together to make sure that we wrapped services around our young people and gave them life, really, and an opportunity to move forward in their lives. “These things are not easy things to do. They’re things that we’ve done together. “We’ve decided together that New Haveners needed to have good paying jobs. So we worked with our friends at New Haven Rising. Dave Johnson for two years went door to door to door to talk about how important it is for people in New Haven, in our most challenged neighborhoods, to have a good way to take care of themselves. To have a good job at Yale. To have a good job somewhere in our community. And we got Yale to come up with resources to provide training and to provide jobs. “That’s what we’ve done together. We have moved New Haven forward. “There is still more work to do. But i want to work with each and every one of you. I want to use your ideas. I want to work with you to make them materialized so that all of the people in New Haven can benefit from them, and we can together move New Haven forward.” Click on the Facebook Live video below to watch the full debate.

Share this story with others.

Post a Comment

Commenting has closed for this entry

Comments

posted by: alex on September 5, 2019 11:45pm Mayor Harp decisively won the debate. Her answers on building intergenerational wealth and on “America being more like New Haven,” while not the focus of this article, took the house down, twice. Her answers not only shook the room and stirred the crowd, they even surprised and shook Elicker. While he has run an effective campaign, the Mayor took charge tonight and secured a decisive victory.

posted by: Stop the Madness on September 6, 2019 12:23am @Alex Bwahahaha nah her lies just allowed her paid entourage to make noise! The questions were fluffed for her! I saw some great questions posted on the NHI that were not asked that could have shook the room quite differently. But the final say will be at the polls! Voters are not blind, dumb or deaf to the craziness that is going on at City Hall! Cracks me up how she stood up tall and proud and said she fired people who are winning cases in court! Our tax $ going down the drain because of these awful decisions! Why is it that she couldn’t get enough small donations from New Haven? Lol 😂 I’ll tell you what I think because she hasn’t earned the confidence of New Haven!

posted by: NeoHavener on September 6, 2019 12:23am This is sadly a lost mayoral election cycle. Neither of these two candidates should be our mayor, and we need to take a deep, serious look in the mirror after this disaster of a primary. We’ve been fully divided between Management (Elicker) & Machine (Harp), with all of the citywide racial & socioeconomic divisions from 2013 looking like a lock to repeat themselves. The biggest question is where our grassroots leaders are. UNITE HERE has now wasted 8 years since an inspiring push to get working people in office in 2011, showing the profound limitations of a single union so thoroughly dominating local left electoral politics in a company town. Other unions like NHFT, SEIU 1199, & AFSCME are totally unorganized and invisible. Community organizers & social justice leaders don’t seem at all interested in electoral office. Organizations like Working Families Party that are interested in electoral politics seem to be fixated with the state level & totally detached from New Haven. We’re stuck in an impasse between Management & Machine, neighborhoods deeply segregated by race & class, and the collective Stockholm Syndrome far too many residents of the city show towards Yale’s neo-feudal governance. Given the what we’re up against in this historical moment, how in the world could people be so confused about the need to push for visionary, grassroots, progressive leadership? And yet here we are, with everyone reverting to defend their class & race interests as Yale & its concentration of global capital power make us all cower in confusion & division once again. Vote no confidence in either of these candidates. New Haven deserves so much better, if our grassroots leaders actually ever had the courage to run.

posted by: New Haven Nuisance Money corrupts our politics and our politicians absolutely. It is the height of hypocrisy and dangerous for the working families of our city for Mayor Harp to claim that her taking of multi-thousand dollar contributions from developers and lobbyists from California to Wall Street somehow allows her to better represent the interests of New Haveners. I applaud Mr. Elicker for going the much more difficult route of operating his campaign financed by small individual donations from the people of our city and under the tight restrictions of the New Haven Democracy Fund’s public financing system. There is near universal agreement that our politicians represent the interests of their donors over and above their voters. Luckily, we have a candidate who is funded almost exclusively by the people of New Haven, Mr. Justin Elicker for Mayor.

posted by: Kids_First on September 6, 2019 1:19am Thank you Elicker for representing the community of New Haveners not blinded by identity politics in this regime of political zealots. Harp has done enough to get numbers with no real value. 80% graduate…. But how many that go to college are actually ready for the college experience??? Taking big dollars from folks she supported in hiring or even hired herself…and then blaming her need to go for the big dollars because of her race is a Trump move… And to suggest she won the debate with her “look at what I did” rhetoric. I’m WITH Gary Highsmith. I’m #TeamElicker

posted by: The Cause on September 6, 2019 1:43am Harp Wins!!!! She schooled Elicker because the facts were in her corner.

Elicker was a nothing Burger, He stands for nothing and presented nothing.

When asked about the Airport he was for it but against-It !!! (Like in Horse feathers)

I listen to see what knew ideas he had, I did not hear it. He did not explain how he would lower taxes, cut crime, teach kids better.

Mayor Harp laid out a continuing plan. Education accomplishments is slowly going up, Gun crime and all crime is going down. children under 18 are safer than ever in New Haven because of her youth programs. The pension funding ratio is going up! She is turning New Haven into a destination and growing neighborhoods. Its becoming a Fun enjoyable City to live in.

She realized she made some bad hires and terminated them immediately. I believe in the next term she will make no mistakes, she learns from the past and improves the future ... Which is Bright. Vote to Re Elect Mayor Harp!!!!!!

posted by: CityYankee on September 6, 2019 5:30am Look closely at the pictures of the audience and you will see all the City employees and other hangers-on. Posturing and lying do not make a “debate”. NH needs a change from the business as usual that is destroying us. No one should be in office long- it is too dangerous.

Look at New Haven—— Vote for change. Vote smart. Vote for what is best for our city. Vote your conscience.

posted by: Checking on September 6, 2019 6:49am Elicker did not impress. He lacks accomplishment. He thinks all the answers come through attacking and trying to shake down Yale, which is witless. It is an unmovable force, so you must work with the university, not against it. A wise person would see that.

posted by: Jill_the_Pill on September 6, 2019 8:23am >>> ” in certain neighborhoods, particularly in those neighborhoods that I represent,” Aren’t mayors supposed to “represent” all the neighborhoods?

posted by: deathandtaxes on September 6, 2019 8:29am Attending this forum was really disheartening. I must have been sitting next to The Cause and his pals in the balcony, who would loudly jeer and make nonsensical comments whenever Elicker spoke. During the middle of the event, five or six people wearing neon green shirts and hardhats came in with Harp signs; as far as I could tell, they weren’t paying attention to what was being said, but would just wave their sign and cheer loudly when Harp spoke.

posted by: Conscience on September 6, 2019 8:38am Part One

A political debate is not like a sports competition, but it should be. Sports have clearly defined rules and penalties for participation. Referees call out the offender and name the foul. Consistent rule breaking can result in officials expelling the offender from the game. Instant replay can provide viewers with conclusive evidence of the action in dispute, and the officials will uphold or reverse their decision. Grievous offenses can result in short-term suspensions or even lifetime bans. A political debate has no such standards, but if last night’s debate (the one that Alex claimed Toni won) were done with strict rules, the Mayor would have likely been disqualified from the game. Imagine if a contestant decided to leave the court to attack people in the stands. Actually, Ron Artest and friends did this at a Pacers-Piston basketball game widely broadcast on television and replayed around the world.

Harp did this when she cited the firing of a staffer who has defeated the Harp administration in every judicial ruling to date regarding Mrs. Jefferson’s service as a city employee. While the debate was not about Nicole Jefferson, Harp brought her into the debate. We will find out soon who breached ethics in this one. There was no mention of the 300 children (and counting) with high levels of lead paint in their young bodies. This condition is afflicting the poor and innocent because of the recalcitrance of this Mayor, and her willingness to use public funds to fight private battles. There was no mention that Harp boycotted school board meetings until she had the majority needed to hire the least qualified candidate. Carol Birks is burning down the school district while Toni Harp is doing the same with city services. The evidence is out there along with her chief advisor and out-on administrative-leave Youth Services Director. The sad thing about all this is that Harp had the game on her home court with homegrown fans that see the instant replay of her tran

posted by: Conscience on September 6, 2019 8:41am Part Two

Mike Tyson can never claim that he never bit off Holyfield’s ear because we can always go to the videotape for confirmation. Toni might claim that crime is down but the people living in poor neighborhoods know better. Her use of Youth Stat numbers is suspect because they come from the same guy whom the FBI is investigating for allegedly deceptive practices and misappropriation of public funds. Murders might be down because of poor marksmanship, because shootings and stabbings are up. It is not as if the thugs are not trying.

Her 80 percent graduation rate is a joke, and even if our schools were graduating kids that have mastered the work expected of a high school graduate, this has nothing to do with her. She has never taught one kid in the public schools, knows little or nothing about the sweet science of teaching, and has worked with the superintendent to create poor working conditions for educators. There is ample evidence that the Mayor does not even believe in public education. Her support of charters, including an all boys school run by a felonious preacher, is legendary and documented. What is clear in all of this is that some citizens in our city do not care if the Mayor commits fouls and breaks the rule because she is playing for their team or tribe. I can only hope that enough people do care about the future of our communities. And, Alex, she lost. A simple fact check will show this.

posted by: Conscience on September 6, 2019 8:43am @ Moving and Cause. Could you please state the facts you speak of?

posted by: alex on September 6, 2019 8:52am Conscience, once again you’re grasping for straws, perhaps because the mayor embarrassed you personally with one of her best answers, calling you out. Perhaps you should address that elephant in the room first before casting stones. The most obvious sign that the Mayor won is Elicker supporters complaining about “the rules” (Elicker actually went over time far more often than the mayor, with no consequences) and even complaining that the Mayor has passionate supporters who saw she was winning and were cheering her on. The complaining, whining, etc., is a clear indication of the mayor’s victory. So was the cheering. Elicker was set aback by the mayor’s passion, and was unable to recover all night. [Paul: Note. I was holding the stopwatch. Both candidates did a great job of keeping to and respecting time limits. Both occasionally went a few seconds over to finish a point, which I thought was fine. I’ve moderated more debates than I can count; this may have been the best case I’ve seen of candidates doing that.]

posted by: alex on September 6, 2019 8:53am Jill the Pill, the mayor corrected herself and used the phrase “neighborhoods I traditionally represent.” As short hand goes I thought it was appropriate

posted by: Checking on September 6, 2019 9:11am @Conscience After stating you are ignoring UCR facts, you launch into a series of opinions and then close with a demand for a fact check. I have fact checked and you have not given any.

posted by: mohovs on September 6, 2019 9:17am raising taxes 11% is not the direction I want to go. What gets rewarded, gets repeated. Plan for more tax increases everyone

posted by: deathandtaxes on September 6, 2019 9:28am @Checking You must have been sitting where I was last night. I must have missed a post - what fact checking did you do? You pronounced Elicker’s comments as “witless” and that a “wise person” would see that. Those are pronouncements, and I think you have it reversed - witless audience members not seeing the wisdom of Elicker’s points, and mindlessly cheering whatever talking points Harp prepared.

posted by: citoyen on September 6, 2019 9:50am So—apparently not content to make this election about race, the Harp campaign is now wanting to make it about class. And in an utterly illogical way. Harp said “her campaign has accepted high-dollar developer contributions not because of a prejudice towards the rich, but because the current public financing laws discriminate against the poor.” What? Anyone can donate to a Democracy Fund candidate, and in any small amount. She said “the Fund’s rules favor candidates who cater to wealthier donors.” What? She says this when it is _she_ who accepts donations up to $1,000 whereas her opponent can accept only up to $390? She said that with the Democracy Fund “only very wealthy people from wealthy neighborhoods can run.” What? Is not _she_ a wealthy person from a wealthy neighborhood? She said “the municipal program should be changed to work more like the state clean election program.” What? Well then, what has _she_ done, in six years as mayor, to try to change it? Toni Harp trying to campaign on the upper class card is ludicrous. Justin Elicker is not campaigning on race and class, he is campaigning on good government—or the lack thereof. Harp has served her time, and, especially during the last few years, not well. It is emphatically time for a change in city leadership.

posted by: Elmmy on September 6, 2019 10:18am America should be more like New Haven? What? The rest of Connecticut can’t be “like New Haven”. Forget about the entire country. Who would pay for it? That would be completely unsustainable. How about New Haven being sustainable, business friendly, innovative, transparent, responsible, etc… Anyone who believes Harp’s claim that New Haven is a model to be followed have not traveled enough.

posted by: Stop the Madness on September 6, 2019 10:19am @jill the pill EXACTLY



We need a Mayor who signs up for all New Haven!

It baffles me that Harp feels by attacking affluent neighborhoods she is the perfect candidate! PLEASE where does she live? Cheap shots and loud chairs doesn’t define a win to me. It sounds like desperation is making her make some really bad moves. But keep them coming it only supports the cause to boot her out of here. @alex she kept throwing shots at certain neighborhoods please don’t try to dumb it down, it was just a true testament to what she represents and it’s definitely not New Haven as a whole.

posted by: The Cause on September 6, 2019 10:28am Dear Conscience, Personally I play Chess not Checkers, and yes every time the Mayor put the her opponent in Chex I cheered.

I was not in the balcony but studiously sitting in the lower rows of the auditorium. I was actually seated around several city employees who first hand know programs and policy. They claim the opponent should be fact checked because he was way off base. Facts since the Mayor came to office, The Pension Funds decision matrix moved from the closed office to full disclosure and debate at the pension meetings. Her and the other trustees have invest a lot of time in debating the ARC which is effected by employee and employer contribution and the return of investments of the fund. She agreed to lower the expected return so that the city would have to contribute more. Do to this the funding ration is heading north and the bond rating is heading north. This is a good thing for Tax payors. Our most precious possession in the city is our Youth. Toni Harp is two M words to New Haven, Mayor and Mother. She loves all children. Period. When she came to office children were getting gunned down in the city. She has started a program Called Youth Stats. This program Identifies children at risk and mentors them to stay on course, away from harm. She is the author of this program and is gaining national attention. School Graduation, she said it, check with the BOE, HS Grad ratio has gone from 65% to 80% under her reign. For the record I am a Proud Italian American, I live in the Cove and love New Haven. I know the Mayor’s first concern is our children, so if there is a program you want in your neighborhood you should reach out to your Alders. The Mayor is all ears! Vote Harp !!!!!!!

posted by: Christian Bruckhart on September 6, 2019 10:33am Alex, honest question: are you a paid Harp supporter or campaign volunteer? Your comments are so frequent and universally one sided that you sound like it’s one or the other. I don’t care either way, but I’m curious about the vociferously unwavering support by a Yale law grad from Madison.

posted by: Noteworthy on September 6, 2019 10:51am Class and Race Notes: 1. Harp’s answers to questions setting up class and race as the only reason to vote for her is disgusting. 2. Her gobblygook answer on public financing was a joke. She refused to answer the question. She has no defense. She takes from the rich, wears designer clothes and shuttles around the city by an armed chauffeur. 3. Her administration is corrupt. 4. Bad hires? She fires them. Jason Bartlett fired yet? Those she “rightly” fires, sue us and get hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions. What’s right about that? 5. This “debate” is a poor substitute to what WTNH offered - an opportunity Harp vehemently opposed. Lol. No wonder given this charade.

posted by: alex on September 6, 2019 10:51am Christian, if you’re such a good detective (nice work on where I went to school!), maybe you can figure it out. But why does it matter? Of course those who support the mayor wish to volunteer for her. That’s what we do in a democracy. Is that wrong? I’ll tell you one thing, I’ve never been paid! Wish I was!! But helping the mayor is its own reward.

posted by: Checking on September 6, 2019 10:51am “Justin Elicker is not campaigning on race and class, he is campaigning on good government” Did he pander by answering a question only in Spanish last night? Thought I heard that. Also, it is funny that the person most offend by a slip of the tongue regarding neighborhoods doesn’t live in the city.

posted by: mrschramm on September 6, 2019 11:02am Sadly I was not able to watch the debate live, but thanks to NHI, I will be able to watch after work. This comment thread is very representative of attitudes in CT writ large: the situation is hopeless, the candidates are feckless, the vote will be pointless. Compare our mayoral primary to the Democratic gubernatorial primary in 2018. It seems a good thing to me that we have so many people engaged in the electoral process and that we have a choice between two qualified, capable candidates. The gubernatorial primary could not claim either of those points. Change is in the air and Elicker may just have the votes to beat Mayor Harp in this primary - he has mine. Deserved or not, the stench of corruption seems too embedded in the Harp Administration. The school bus route changes - another Birks blunder, thank you Mayor Harp - may have been a tipping point. We will see next Tuesday.

posted by: Checking on September 6, 2019 11:03am @deathandtaxes Here’s a fact check for you. A private university does not have to pay taxes on academic buildings… ANYWHERE IN THE U.S. So to make a campaign point of a university solve all the ills of a city that habitually overspends is asinine… and witless… and obvious.

posted by: newhavenlives on September 6, 2019 11:21am Christian- Are you as bothered by the frequent and rabidly Elicker favorable comments from: Gary Stewart

Noteworthy

Conscience

T. Paine

Bill Saunders Guess not. Btw, Elicker’s response in Spanish was cringeworthy. Pander much?

posted by: New Haven Urbanism A couple things stand out to me about last night’s debate. 1) Harp tried to make a point that the Democracy Fund represents an advantage over conventional campaign financing and Elicker’s use of that Fund contributed to Harp’s decision to pursue conventional financing. This is false. The Democracy Fund was created precisely for the purpose of providing an alternative to conventional campaign financing, which is prone to corruption. Elicker’s campaign has been funded primarily by small donations from New Haven residents and matching public funds. Harp’s campaign has been financed primarily by large contributions from suburban municipal employees and contractors. Harp’s attempt to spin these facts was bizarre. 2) Harp correctly stated that public policy ought to focus on both affordable homeownership opportunities and affordable rental housing. I agree. It was frustrating, however, for Harp to ruin this talking point by taking the opportunity to also condescendingly refer to Elicker’s homeownership in a way that implied he was trying to prevent other people from building intergenerational wealth. Here are some facts: In 2015, Harp downsized from a 10,000 square foot single family house next to the Yale Golf Coarse into a 3,000 square foot single family house in another area of Westville. The 10,000 square foot house was sold for $900,000 to a big bank based in West Palm Beach, Florida in 2017. That house is now owned by a New York real estate investment firm specializing in rentals. The Harp family makes it money by investing in hundreds of rental units in New Haven. These facts contribute to one of New Haven’s biggest problems - local property dispossession. It’s great that Harp talks about local homeownership, but I wish her own actions backed up all that talk. Meanwhile, Elicker lives in a 1,000 square foot attic apartment in a three-family house. I’m not excited to vote for either candidate, but Harp’s misleading remarks were not appealing.

posted by: alex on September 6, 2019 12:35pm Urbanism, 1) The purpose of the Democracy Fund and its effects are two different things. Public financing in CT needs reform. Even at the state level, which is better, just as an example, the instructions and rules for getting the financing are available only in English. Mayor Harp is absolutely right—she couldn’t run the kind of campaign she needs to run, in the neighborhoods she needs to turn out, with the current state of the fund. 2) Those are selective facts too. You state the value of Mayor Harp’s homes from years ago—but did you state how much was owed on them? How much equity she had? When they were first purchased? For how much? Etc. but even if she’s rich… The key to her answer and its staying power was her point about INTERGENERATIONAL wealth. The mayor’s father was a Pullman porter, her mother was a janitor. She rose to become a professional, a Senator, a homeowner. That story and her experience informs her policies on issues like homeownership. That’s real, not misleading, and not a negative. The mayor’s critique of Elicker for focusing too much on “affordable rentals” at the expense of everything else was therefore not only prescient, but it highlighted one of her relative strengths against her opponent. It very well may be that her experience is the difference on that issue. There’s nothing misleading about pointing that out at all.

posted by: Jill_the_Pill on September 6, 2019 12:37pm >>> ” doesn’t live in the city.” The West Hartford and Avon lawyers who threw Toni’s $1000-per-person fundraiser don’t either.

(https://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/harp_reelection_fundriaser_donors/) Putting in my two-cents doesn’t even come close!

posted by: New Haven Nuisance Great points all around, New Haven Urbanism.

posted by: Dennis Serf on September 6, 2019 1:09pm On a lighter note, I captured on video the two candidates as they left the debate. Let’s just say they have a contrast in styles. https://www.facebook.com/SerfilippiForAlder-675305186265543/ Dennis Serfilippi

posted by: Stop the Madness on September 6, 2019 1:19pm @The Cause

Graduation rates are definitely up but why???? When City Hall ties the BOE hands that’s what happens the numbers look amazing! However should those numbers really look that great? @Newhavenlives

Cringe worthy yo who to the crowd that was saying Elicker will join the White Supremacy Groups. It sure wasn’t cringe worthy to the many calls I made to Spanish speaking voters who feel left behind by this current Administration. Now you got a taste on how Spanish speakers and learners feel. Time for change I can smell it in the air VOTE ELICKER

posted by: deathandtaxes on September 6, 2019 1:28pm @Checking



You wrote: Here’s a fact check for you. A private university does not have to pay taxes on academic buildings… ANYWHERE IN THE U.S. So to make a campaign point of a university solve all the ills of a city that habitually overspends is asinine… and witless… and obvious. Elicker didn’t say anything about taxing Yale - he said Yale could be pressed to do more. What fact did you check again now? Harp said the same thing, though she claims she already did it. As a tax-paying, 30+ years resident of New Haven with a child in the NHPS, you don’t need to state the obvious to me, but let me emphasis your point about A CITY THAT HABITUALLY OVERSPENDS - UNDER TONI HARP!

posted by: deathandtaxes on September 6, 2019 1:31pm @newhavenlives You know what was cringeworthy? Harp’s supporters in the balcony mocking and laughing at La Voz Hispana’s Carlo Resto every time he asked a question. It made me think I was at a Trump rally.

posted by: citoyen on September 6, 2019 1:38pm No question—Justin speaking Spanish is an appeal for Latino/Latina votes. He has been reaching out to Fair Haven, Dixwell, Newhallville, and the Hill, places beyond those in his supposed “base.” Has Toni Harp been seen campaigning on the eastern shore? In East Rock? Westville? It seems one candidate wants to be mayor of all the city, and the other wants to be mayor of “those neighborhoods that I represent.” (A telling remark, regardless of whether she later may have tried to change it.) Usually, in an election campaign, if one side feels confident enough of its base to be reaching out to other voters, while another side is doing anything possible to try to keep shoring up its own base (giving away free air conditioners, staging a political groundbreaking), the first side is feeling strength and the other is feeling weakness.

posted by: BFLY on September 6, 2019 1:41pm @ The Cause You stated “Our most precious possession in the city is our Youth. Toni Harp is two M words to New Haven, Mayor and Mother. She loves all children. Period.” Then why are there homeless youth with no ESCAPE program, or 300 cases of lead? Reality contradict your statement. Or is it fake news? Either way Sept 10th wil lm be here soon TEAM ELICKER

posted by: Bill Saunders on September 6, 2019 1:42pm New Haven Lives, Not only am I proud to make your list, I will also give the Mayor props for co-opting my Campaign Slogan in her closing remarks…it was an unusual collaboration! As Little Miss Mess-Up once said in the 2001:

‘New Haven, so small even you can be somebody!”

posted by: BFLY on September 6, 2019 1:47pm @ Alex

Ah, Living in Madison! Looks like some of the Yale union members supporting her, but not able to cast a vote.

posted by: Conscience on September 6, 2019 2:09pm Alex, I hope that one day I can have a zealous ally like you. I also hope that you will separate emotionally from this administration and look at how they have deployed resources, misused statistics, abandoned neighborhoods like Newhallville, and refused to admit mistakes. You deflect my evidence by insinuating that you know who I am. I do not know you nor what you look like. The only thing that matters to me is the soundness and veracity of your positions and you are too emotionally attached to Harp to see her flaws. In the meantime if you want to know who I am: I am Spartacus. You good?

posted by: newhavenlives on September 6, 2019 2:11pm “That house is now owned by a New York real estate investment firm specializing in rentals. The Harp family makes it money by investing in hundreds of rental units in New Haven. These facts contribute to one of New Haven’s biggest problems - local property dispossession. “ Say what now?!? You do know there is a need for rental housing in the world right?

posted by: alex on September 6, 2019 2:55pm Sorry Elicker supporters, no, I live and work in New Haven! Like most Harp supporters. Travel out of your bubble and you will meet more!

posted by: 06511 on September 6, 2019 3:09pm As someone who is heavily involved in New Haven Public Schools, I have little time for those who are trying to paper over the deep and sometimes disturbing problems at NHPS with the ‘eighty percent graduation rate’ statistic. If folks truly understood what is being inflicted upon some students in some schools it would be a scandal, and it comes back to leadership (just look at how Hillhouse has been treated over recent years). I’m not a super-partisan and there is plenty that Mayor Harp has done for this city that I appreciate, but ‘mother to New Haven?’ Come on now. The city’s leadership has utterly failed to support the students (and those teachers who care deeply about their craft and work their asses off) who will serve as the next generation and the future of our city.

posted by: The Cause on September 6, 2019 3:11pm Dear BFLY, I know Mayor Harp and Elicker is no Mayor Harp! The only Fake news is the distorted Fact Elicker spews out. I grew up in Fair Haven in the 50’s and 60’s During that time we were told by our teachers not to chew paint. Thank God my mother was a great cook so I did not. I believe the actual use of lead painted curtailed in the late 60’s not late 70’s as reported. Latex and Oil Base took over. As I recall back then I do not remember May Harp going around with a paint brush painting lead though out New Haven. Since the late 60’s we had Lee, Delieto, Guida Louge Daniels and Distefano. Do they get a pass. At least it is being addressed by The Harp Administrations. As far as the Homeless, why don’t all you suburban towns stop having your police drive your homeless to the New Haven Green and help pay for the care of the less fortunate. Our New Haven taxes go up so Woodbridge , Orange , Branford, Guilford Madison get a free ride. COUNTY TAX TIME Vote Harp !!!!!

posted by: Pardee on September 6, 2019 3:46pm @The Cause You use “M"s to describe Harp’s relationships with children. I prefer “C"s. Cold & Callus.

I was volunteering at a school in Fair Haven. Grades Pre-K thru 3rd were celebrating their math skills by participating in timed activities using STEM materials. The mayor was invited to be part of this. In she walked with her driver. Harp said nothing to the children but immediately walked over to a post and folded her hands. And there-she-stood until her 15 minutes of hell was over. No going around to the children greeting them, asking questions, praising them for their hard work. She just stood there. What saved the situation was her driver who did what one would expect a mayor to do. He went from table to table saying hello to the children, talking to them and being friendly. Harp loves kids. Right… You say that the City is safer for youth. Talk to the families of the young children who have been shot or grazed by bullets this year. Their families are not feeling so safe. Harp loves children so much she brought in her Delta sister to run the schools. Birks is writing checks to consultants for $4999, just under the limit that requires scrutiny. Yet, teachers are asking their colleagues if they can borrow 50 sheets of paper because they have used their monthly allotment. How sad is this? Again, not seeing the love. Harp pushed Birks to cut costs. She did that by saving 100’s of thousands of dollars slashing in half the number of bus stops. The day before school opened hundreds of families had no idea how their children would get to school. No thought went in students’ safety or the hardship this ill thought out plan would place upon working families. Young children were now supposed to cross busy streets, walk past liquor stores and long stretches of commercial property. I talked to a Cove family whose young child was asked to walk down S End Rd which has NO sidewalks and is the site of several fatal accidents. Strange way of showing love..

posted by: Noteworthy on September 6, 2019 4:06pm Harp Notes: 1. It’s laughable that Harp lives in Westville in a 3000 sq foot house while claiming to represent other neighborhoods. 2. Even by upper Westville standards, this is one of the largest homes. Mine for instance, a few blocks away, is 1800 sq feet. 3. Her former 10,000 sq foot mansion on Conrad was foreclosed as was her country estate in Bethany. Wendell Harp had borrowed heavily against it. Post foreclosure, it was on the market for $900k, reduced to $500k and closed in May this year at auction for $403k. It’s currently vacant and an eyesore. 4. The mansion never had a certificate of occupancy, was not built per the the permit pulled at City Hall either.

posted by: New Haven Urbanism newhavenlives, I agree there is a demand for rental housing. How should that demand be met? By a small group of institutionally-backed professional real estate investors with enormous portfolios of hundreds of rental units? Like Mandy, Pike, and the Harp family’s Renaissance Management Company who concentrate the rental income of hundreds of New Haven families into the hands of a few real estate investors? Or should that rental demand be supplied by a large number of small individual homeowners of two- and three-family properties? I would prefer that rental income be dispersed equitably to many homeowners throughout the city, rather than concentrated into the hands of a few professional landlords who control large amounts of property in the city. I wish New Haven had more owner-occupants of three-family houses, like Elicker, and fewer big landlords like Harp’s real estate company. Alex, Harp is correct that competing in mayoral campaigns requires lots of money. Furthermore, she is correct that many lower-income households cannot contribute lots of money to political campaigns. Lastly, she is right that those households can contribute small donations to her campaign. I would buy Harp’s critique of the Democracy Fund if she collected more small donations from individual New Haven residents than Elicker. If Harp had lots of small local donations, but still felt like she needed to accept contributions from city contractors, then I would say that her critique was spot on. Here’s the problem though: Elicker has collected more small individual donations from New Haven residents than Harp. If Harp had 1,000 $5 donations from New Haven residents and Elicker had only 500 $10 donations from local residents, than Harp would have a point. In reality, Elicker has gotten more local donations than Harp. You prefer that Harp’s campaign be financed by the suburbs over Elicker’s campaign be financed by New Haven residents?

posted by: The Cause on September 6, 2019 4:34pm The Pardee is Over, I don’t know if she did or did not acknowledge the children, maybe she was ill and did not want to make the kids sick. I have seen her with children of all races and she lights up around them. Also if you live on South end Road I would assume you own a car. Parents need to take some responsibility. One thing I do know is that there would be no way I would put my Kindergarten child on a school bus. I agree the school budget is too high that is why the Mayor formed a Debt reduction committee. Tell the teacher who had to borrow 50 sheets of paper to go to Staples not Starbucks… I am sighing off, If you are commenting in the Independent I respect you for being a concern citizen. May God’s Wisdom influence us all…….. and remember Fight for The Cause :)

posted by: Conversation by Fallacy on September 6, 2019 5:25pm @The Cause

In reference to your comments about a teacher going to Staples instead of Starbucks, I find that sort of comment abhorrent if I am clearly reading your intention. If this city wishes to obtain a high quality of educator in the future, our general sentiment should be towards the elimination of out-of-pocket expenses for teachers and not to disparaging them for their coffee preferences. And on your car comment, you seem to utterly disregard the fact that while an individual may have a vehicle, they may not have the luxury to be available to drive their child to school. I support my city’s taxes in part that children have access to public education safely regardless of any other citizen’s perceived notion of parental responsibility.

On the point of the Democracy Fund, I find Ms. Harp’s stance last night curious. In my research, I see no instances before where she ever addressed considerable concerns in its existence. In 2013, she was noted as saying that the Democracy Fund could lead to interminable “sore losers” running indefinitely but, by 2016, she states ““I think it’s important that it exists, and it has certainly made our elections more vibrant over the years. While I served in the State Senate, I was an advocate for the legislation that eventually led to the Citizen’s Election Program.” (see: https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2016/02/18/democracy-fund-harp-look-to-future/ ) In 2015, she opted out of the Democracy Fund due to objections at the time that a primary candidate loser could not then go on to receive Democracy Funds during the general election as independents or third party candidates (https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Campaign-finance-reform-for-Bridgeport-6458612.php). I find this sudden shift to opposition to the Fund troubling. Ms. Harp, in her attempts to bridge the great inequality divide in our city, should have made it known long before last night that she felt the Fund elevated the affluent at the expense of the less fortunate.

posted by: Hieronymous on September 6, 2019 5:50pm Mayor Harp has plenty to be proud of and may have made a number of strong arguments at the debate (I wasn’t there), but the three reported here are ridiculous. The idea that public financing benefits wealthy candidates (and that Harp would have trouble getting $350 donations when she has no trouble getting $1000 donations) is just jaw-droppingly inane, as several others have pointed out. So is the idea that criticism of her “administration” extends to city employees she has nothing to do with, like Edwin Martinez (whose union, if I’m not mistaken, has just endorsed Elicker). (Edwin Martinez is part of the Harp Administration in the same way Natalie Elicker is part of the Trump Administration. Sense a theme?) And, as New Haven Urbanism points out, Harp’s claim about “representing” our poorer neighborhoods is misleading, at best. The real problem with these statements is not just that they’re stupid, it’s that she is not. These were not off-the-cuff gaffs but quite evidently pre-planned appeals to voters. This suggests to me that Mayor Harp (or perhaps more accurately her increasingly desperate campaign team) does not respect our intelligence and is willing to win by pandering and slandering rather than having a true debate on the merits (even though she could conceivably win that debate!). I voted for Mayor Harp in the past two elections, and I don’t particularly relish voting for a relatively experienced white guy over a very experienced black woman. But it is clear to me that Elicker has more integrity as a candidate and is more likely to govern with integrity as well. Barring something extraordinary in the next few days, he has my vote.

posted by: alex on September 7, 2019 3:45pm Hieronymous, Mayor Harp’s point is pretty simple, it being harder to get many times more $350 donations than a smaller number of $1000 donations. It seems laughable to me that a $1000 donation is seen as “corruption” but, for example, a group of $350 donations are not. That to me seems like bias. The mayor’s point about city employees - like many good points she made - were based in experience. Experience of city employees being upset about the mailers they were receiving from the Elicker campaign. Even supporters of Elicker don’t support every attack he has launched in this campaign with mailers. His mailers are his trip to China—a landfill in China—except that it costs more taxpayer dollars ($60k vs $50k).

posted by: Greg-Morehead What happened to the “When they go low we go high” Mayor? rofl I can see someone taking jabs at a person when they don’t have any skeletons in their closet. But all of the issues and cases that the Mayor (and I’m saying the “Mayor” because she is the head of the city) has had in the past AND that are pending in which the City lost, I would be walking on eggshells. lol You might say well, Justin was/is going low with the Mayor?? You call telling the truth going “LOW”?? Please reply to me 1 lie that Justin has ever stated about the Mayor or what the City is doing? I’ll wait…...Nothing that he’s said has been untrue, but he’s been stating the facts…. The Mayor was grasping for straws when she talked about Natalie(Justins wife) and also tried to say that they were affiliated with Trump… Come on….. And to everyone that stated that the Mayor won the debate by the temperature of the crowd or the cheers, come on, grow up! Thats how Harp got into office the first time, because of her name… And for all of my African American brothers and sisters who are voting for her because of the color of her skin, when will you mature and not be that shallow? You keep voting for someone because of the color of their skin, you’ll keep going around the mulberry bush and these same people will keep throwing you crumbs to keep you at bay so that you can keep voting them back in office…. #staywoke We need a person in office who will take charge and not allow the city to be run by people under the Mayor, BUT the Mayor himself… I will ALWAYS say this….. With Destefano, alot of people didn’t like him or felt their way about him, I get that… Heck, I didn’t agree with alot of things that he did, but one thing that I did agree with and had to respect him for, he stood flat footed and told it like it was…. He didn’t flip flop or go back and forth with you on things….Not like the current administration….smh

posted by: Thomas Alfred Paine on September 7, 2019 6:08pm Any great political debate should be a fair exchange and defense of the candidates’ ideas, proposals and policies. It should be an intellectual exercise, a sophisticated session for public analysis of each candidate’s position on the important issues.

A great debate is not meant to be a pep rally. Cheers and jeers usually occasionally break out from supporters of the candidates, but they never should be offensive or mean spirited.

Instead of focusing on who scored the best zinger in a debate, the focus should be place on the substance and veracity of what was said.

Harp scored some points with her crowd, which resulted in them declaring her the winner. Elicker scored a few too. But what was the substance and truthfulness of what Harp said? What was the substance and accurancy of Elicker’s remarks?

Harp defended her record with a mixture of fact, fiction, illogic and personal attacks. Harp has several accomplishments, but the tax increase, the scandals, the school crisis, & other issues have hurt her. Deflecting from those issues by defending tax increases, minimizing corruption, and exacerbating race and class divisions won’t help.

Her answer about public financing simply did not make sense.

Elicker presented his plans and policies in answering the questions without resorting to bitter personal attacks. Criticizing Harp’s record factually is not a personal attack. When Harp went low, Elicker refused to go to that level.

People should watch the debate again and listen closely to what was said, without considering boos or cheers from either side. Examine what was said by each person, and how it was said. Note the tone & the tenor. Analyze with your brain & not your emotion to determine who is right and best for New Haven.

Appealing to your base to get applause does not equate ethical, transparent, compassionate & visionary leadership. Stacking a room with your supporters does not equate popular support across the city. The loudest voices will be heard on election day.

posted by: Hartman13 on September 8, 2019 6:54pm I hope there’s a bake sale at the polls. So disappointed at the last election… no Toll House cookies anywhere.

posted by: Bill Saunders on September 9, 2019 12:13am Hartmann, I wouldn’t eat anything half-baked by pollsters on Election Day!

If you are hungry, ask for a stale donut—there are always a few ‘leftovers’ from the morning staff. Maybe even a Krueller!