The Connecticut Post Editorial Board urged voters to support Mayor Bill Finch’s campaign to appoint members to the Board of Education. Most city voters did not agree. A Post editorial characterizes the ballot defeat as a “rebuke” to Finch. Is it a rebuke to Finch, or a rebuke to the ballot question? Editorial follows:
Despite a well-organized, well-funded push by the local political establishment, Bridgeport voters surprised many this week by voting down a plan to amend the city charter. As a result, the local Board of Education will continue to be elected by city residents rather than chosen by the mayor.
It’s hard to view this as anything other than a rebuke to Mayor Bill Finch, who for the past year has made education reform his signature issue. From the disbanding of the elected board last summer to the reforms put in place by Superintendent Paul Vallas, Finch has been a vocal supporter of change, insisting that an appointed school board represented the best chance to help one of the state’s worst-performing districts.
Voters, who stood to have their right to choose their own school board taken away, disagreed. In the end, maybe that’s not so surprising.
What this means going forward is anyone’s guess, but the need for change is unquestionable. This newspaper supported a mayoral-appointed board on the belief that the status quo simply could not stand. Mayoral accountability at least offered a chance at better outcomes for schoolchildren who face unconscionably long odds of success in a system that simply is not up to the task of educating them. If mayoral control were to fail, at least a valid attempt at change would have been made.
If Tuesday’s charter rejection was unexpected, just as noteworthy was the voter turnout. In a presidential election year, tens of thousands of people made their way to the polls, far surpassing the numbers who come out in off-year elections when school board members are chosen. This year’s special election in September, to replace the state-appointed board, drew a paltry 5 percent turnout.
This week’s interest level–more than 20,000 voters weighed in on the issue–is precisely what the schools need every time out.
Parents and other residents simply must take the time to get to know the candidates for Board of Education and make their way to the polls and ensure their voices are heard. Anything less is, as we said when supporting the appointed board, disenfranchising the young people of Bridgeport.
Voters in this city have spoken, and they elected to retain their right to choose their own school board. Now it is essential that they use it.
This is a CYA editorial! Cover Your Ass!!!
Hey Adam,
I hope you can cover that bet for the Arena that you have guaranteed for zoning.
Grin. What Arena bet?
The Arena through the city is trying to get a text amendment through that will enable the Arena to erect a huge digital billboard on the outside of the Arena. They are now using the Marquee to be an outside digital board that does not just advertise coming events. The Arena wants to be a billboard company. The Arena got knocked down last month, with a severely flawed and unfinished application. This is spot zoning at its worst and a shakedown by this administration on this issue and the Ferry Company ponying up $14k like the Arena did!
Paging the Fourth Estate (CT Post) to do some investigation.
Call Lamar, Barrett Outdoor and attorney John Kennelly (Barb’s son) for a comment.
To the Post Editorial Board: The problem you have is neither you nor your reporters ever took the time to investigate what’s been going on with the BOE.
1. You didn’t know under Bill Finch’s 5 years in office he never, not once, increased the school budget by $1.00 even in the year he illegally disbanded the elected board.
2. The mayor never insisted an audit be done of the BOE.
3. With 6 of the BOE members being Democrats he certainly held sway over these 6 as evidenced by their voting to disband themselves. This group of 6 Democrats could have had the voting majority on any issue that came before them.
4. Let’s take New Haven that has a fully appointed BOE and Hartford that has an elected BOE. The test scores are about the same no big difference. You never checked that information.
5. You stated “If mayoral control were to fail, at least a valid attempt at change would have been made.” That’s pure and utter bullshit, this experiment would have hurt the kids.
6. No one including the mayor and Paul Vallas and the past two supers have changed courses to keep the kids who are not going to college in school.
To the Post, you are based in this community but you don’t know squat about Bridgeport. You are too busy kissing ass in the suburbs, pure and simple.
Hey CT POST,
What happened to the Rob Russo BoE audit?
Dear CT Post Editorial Board (and OIB readers),
Andy Fardy and I visited with MariAn Gail Brown and Keila Torres more than two years ago on fiscal matters in the City. Assignments and duties have changed at the Post. Linda Connor Lambeck continues to keep her eye and pen on educational matters in the region. That continuity builds accuracy and judgement in reporting.
For the remainder of City issues the CT Post juggles reporting assignments so no one has the responsibility to follow the City Council meetings, Council Committee meetings or City finances. Have you asked the Mayor whether the June 30, 2012 City Budget showed a surplus or deficit? Did you know he posted a full year finance report for June 2012 for the first time in this City in over 20 years? Did you find the warning on the report interesting? (Did you remember in August 2011 at HCC the Mayor was able to tell us the 2010-11 budget had closed with a surplus around $150,000 when in reality ECS and Library funds would reduce that figure to a negative and deficit?)
Have you ever contemplated just what is going on in City finances by asking for the past five years of Management letters from the external auditors and the City responses to these, especially to issues of internal controls? Why did the City quietly remove the position of internal auditor a few years ago and continue to report such position in annual budget narratives until this past year?
When you support 9 more appointments for the Mayor as a responsibility, were you aware of his failing record of keeping appointed citizens in current terms on Boards and Commissions, evaluating them regularly before term expiry and avoiding any vacancies? If you were evaluating his performance, you would see he is currently failing in that regard, at least as reported on the City web site where fewer than 25% of such offices are currently filled with citizen volunteers serving an unexpired term.
And as for accountability, do you know the Charter calls for a public hearing each year on the Capital Budget as well as the Operating Budget? When was the last one held? Where would a member go on the City web site to see the Charter-ordered monthly financial report that is delivered over the past three years late or not at all 50% of the time? And where are any reports available to the Budget & Appropriations Committee or to the taxpayers on Capital Accounts on a regular basis?
When was the last time the Mayor reviewed the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report at a public hearing where interactive Q&A can take place? Good citizen contact would result. Voters can become more educated. The Mayor could be accountable as a civics teacher for fiscal governance reform that is so needed in this City. But the last Charter Reform group was too busy with the Mayor’s task “about educational governance reform” to bother looking into such matters!
If the schools have been failing the kids despite spending over $240 Million of operating budget with 80% coming from the State as well as $70 Million or more of Grants funding, and more to come according to Superintendent Vallas, is there a possibility the City operating budget and financial activity needs some “fiscal governance reform?” (And we could then look at the Capital Projects for the schools funded almost 90% by the State at this time, right?)
Investigative reporting? Time will tell.
Unexpected? That is a joke and it definitely is a CYA moment. The only ones who did not expect the charter change to be rejected were those who eat pasta at Testo’s and those who eat tea and crumpets at Connecticut Post editorial board meetings.
The Post reminds me of Fox news trying to explain why they were right all along about Romney being a sure winner, the voters just didn’t know what they were doing by electing Obama. I guess according to the Connecticut Rag, the same tenet applies to Bridgeport voters.
The voters have spoken, a large chunk of them, and they voted no. Even though there were yes signs all over the city; even though there were yes people all over the city precincts during election day. Like I said before, the people working the precincts say a lot about the question. When I went to Black Rock school at 6:25 am to cast my ballot I was greeted by some loud-mouthed uncivilized people shouting vote yes yes yes!!! Then I saw John Marshall Lee (not knowing that was him until after the election, when I saw his picture on OIB I was like wow that’s the guy I saw this morning). He was very civilized unlike the yes people. I and my friend went to go vote he was a first-time voter and he even said to me I would never vote for the yes question you see the people who are for it??? That right there made me think a lot of people seeing these loudmouth yes people at the polls and were offended by their bad behavior!!!!!!!!! You want to push your yes agenda so much then get some civilized people at the polls next time!!!
Lennie, we are still waiting for the Black Rock number; you know, for president and senate and 4th district!!!
“Despite a well-organized, well-funded push by the local political establishment …”
Is the Connecticut Post saying UI, Bridgeport Hospital, Bloomberg … are “the local political establishment?” You think this is just a slip from the Connecticut Post?
I could not let this get buried in the OIB archive. It simply calls for a response:
From: /ballot-question-defeated-voters-retain-power-to-elect-school-board-members-city-dems-sweep-seats/#comment-51182
Joel Gonzalez // Nov 8, 2012 at 2:45 am
Again Godiva2011 you are taking things out of context. We are talking about the YES organization here. donj feels that it was the administration who hired the people working at the polls. I work for the City of Bridgeport (15 years) not Bill Finch. The mayor was the one who revealed he was adopted. All I wrote was in context with the topic and wording Lennie used. If it bothered the mayor so much, why haven’t I gotten my $500 back? You think you know the facts. But the fact is you just recently joined OIB and haven’t noticed the OIB archive to read what was posted before, during, and after the Bastardic period. If you bother to do so, you will read I had already withdrawn my name from the Sheriff spot, two days before. Yes, George Estrada did allow Residents for a Better Bridgeport to send out a mailing piece in support of the Yes initiative. It reads George Estrada, Vice President, University of Bridgeport. I left the “Vice” out in my comment above the same way George left out the fact that it’s Vice President of the Maintenance division at UB. If you knew Mary-Jane Foster, you’d know she doesn’t think like you or would quickly judge like you do. Not once have I ever heard Mary-Jane Foster use her position at UB when expressing her personal opinion and that includes her comment on OIB when she came out against the YES initiative. She didn’t sign it Mary-Jane Foster, President or Vice President, University of Bridgeport. Here is what Mary-Jane thinks of me and that’s what matters most:
August 27,2011
Dear Joel,
I have just learned of your very generous contribution to my campaign. Thank you for your faith and support. You have been as loyal a friend as anyone and I deeply appreciate it.
May god bless you and yours–
Mary–Jane
Now Godiva2011, there is nothing you can say or do to change this. It’s been about a year since I contributed the same amount to Finch. The check hasn’t been returned and I sure as hell never got a thank-you note. I got one from Mary-Jane Foster a week after the contribution. You think they appreciate you?
The political establishment supporting the charter change included allies of the mayor and the business community. The mayor’s control of the “political establishment” represented by the town committee was always suspect–no big deal, that’s nothing new and Mayor Finch has done fine by balancing off groups no matter how often elements get grumpy about it.
I suppose average leaders in the black, brown and white communities -people who actually live in Bridgeport–don’t count as members of the political establishment if they can’t make five-figure contributions to advertise a charter change against democratically elected government. Better to let people in the suburbs tell you how to govern yourself, darlings: You are not responsible enough.
The mayor got his ears pinned back on an issue. Stuff happens. He has to figure out how his administration works with an elected body of the people–you know, do what a mayor is supposed to do.
I have sympathy with Mayor Finch for trying to manage the city–a lot. But he was wrong here and people pushing the charter reform were wrong.
Either you believe in democratically elected governments, no matter how bad they get sometimes, or you don’t. I believe in them. Covering Bridgeport politics in the 1980s convinced me. People were as bigoted, disagreeable, dishonest, partisan, selfish and wrong as you could get sometimes. They figured out how to make it work–eventually.
And that’s just what they will have to do with the Board of Education. It will be a better town for it–a lot better than having people from someplace else come in and say “Eww! You’re disgusting and shouldn’t be allowed to make your own decisions.”
I got to stop. I’m starting to sound like a goddamn liberal.
Mayor Bill Finch’s decision to take the voting rights of the taxpayers of Bridgeport was cold, calculating, deliberate and intentional. It was “calculating” because he got the newly elected Governor Malloy to help him. It was “deliberate” because Finch got six Board Of Education members to say they were “dysfunctional” and they could not perform their duties. It was “intentional” because Governor Malloy, the six BOE members who refused to perform their duties and Mayor Finch all knew their action would take the VOTING RIGHTS of Bridgeport residents to VOTE for who they believe were the best persons to lead the BOE. It was “cold” because Mayor Finch already has the power to improve the school system because the VOTES ALWAYS were in favor of whatever Mayor Finch wanted, there was always a 6 to 3 winning vote for Mayor Finch so Mayor Finch always had control of the BOE. But what makes Mayor Finch’s decision cold, calculating, deliberate and intentional is the fact Finch has NO understanding of the black community and their history and fight for their RIGHT TO VOTE. To me he showed he didn’t give a damn about blacks’ right to vote.
Finch’s losing statement “As President Barack Obama stated, ‘The strongest democracies flourish from frequent and lively debate, but they endure when people of every background and belief find a way to set aside smaller differences in service of a greater purpose,'” goes to show he still doesn’t get it.
Mayor Finch is not living up to his JFK or Obama quotes. In the latter case, since when have “frequent and lively debates” involving the Mayor’s office been part of the Bridgeport environment?
Take a look at the way scheduled meetings on the Mayor’s schedule are not posted daily on the Home page, are moved at the last moment with no electronic notice to an interested public, but perhaps are posted 12 hours before on the bulletin board of the City Clerk office without notice of the postponement date or time? (See Pension A meeting for Tuesday October 23, scheduled in January 2012 but changed on October 22 with a memo at Noon to the City Clerk’s office!)
Small meetings, big gatherings, castrated public reporting systems, failure to honor Charter requirements and ordinance rules for years at a time. Civil discussion, timely and regular City information and lively debate is not currently part of civic governance. Time will tell.
Lennie, where are the ‘Like’ buttons?
*** The Post, like Romney, is out of touch with the “real” needs of the people. They’re seeing things only in black & white and not recognizing there is in fact a gray area that matters. The fact that lots more voters came out due to the presidential election helped big time, maybe the X-factor in the actual win against the vote “yes” supporters. Now that the Finch power & money grab move failed, it’s time for the elected board to step up to the plate and do the right thing, not so much for their personal egos or grandstanding for the usual BOE public that attends the meetings, but for the betterment of the schools, staff, parents, community and above all the kids! Because voters can really hold the board members accountable for their failures unlike the Mayor if it were an appointed board. The first thing the board should do is find money to have a real transparent financial audit done sometime next year to get a better understanding on the Bpt Schools System spending! *** TIME FOR ACTION ***
They can start with giving this man his job back:
www .ctpost.com/news/article/Fired-Bridgeport-principal-wins-126-000-court-4021432.php
*** CT Post was wrong in their gambled decision to choose an appointed board over an elected board and let’s hope the elected board proves it! ***