Anthony Bennett, senior pastor of Mount Aery Baptist Church, weighs in on the state takeover of city schools with an enlightening commentary about the disenfranchisement of voters. From Pastor Bennett:
From my faith tradition, there is an often quoted phrase that says “you better use it or lose it.” The point of this phrase was if a person does not use the skills, talents and opportunities given to them by the Creator, then that person might just lose the effectiveness of them or the opportunities that come from them.
I think this phrase appropriately and soberly describes the current state of our privilege to vote for the Bridgeport Board of Education members. As a consequence of years of intentional voter suppression and low voter turnouts, Mayor Finch thought he could take a calculated risk to sacrifice the will of those of us who do vote in Board of Education elections. I believe the primary reason for this move was to gain more influence over the financial and administrative governance of the school district. What was puzzling for me and many persons I have subsequently spoken with is that many of the past Board of Education elections were very political, being heavily influenced by the Democratic Town Committee. Most recently, Mayor Finch and Superintendent Ramos held a 6 – 3 majority regarding many district issues. What is telling for me is not how disruptive the dissenting three board members may have been, but rather how ineffective the majority six board members were in mastering a process that would move their agenda forward. Because of this ineffectiveness, the citizens of Bridgeport must, for now, pay the price of further disenfranchisement. This is a historical and widespread issue. Across this country, particularly in some southern states, voter disenfranchisement was more the norm rather than the exception. As it relates to Bridgeport, while there may be a small percentage of parents who willfully neglect engaging in school district issues, many parents struggle to choose between working to keep their household going and/or attending the myriad of district meetings.
Subsequently, like in many cities across this country, voter turnout for local Board of Education elections, and other activities, has never consistently been high. Mayor Finch, Superintendent Ramos, and Barbara Bellinger consciously or subconsciously were depending upon the historical momentary outcry from a few “extreme” naysayers that would eventually dissipate into whispers of frustrations and apathy.
After the local and statewide decision was made for the State to reconstitute this local board, Mount Aery Baptist Church hosted an informational meeting sponsored by several parent and community groups. Acting Education Commissioner Coleman assured those in attendance that he would be fair and open in how he selected five members to form the new board. After interviewing more than fifty people and conversations with several other people, the initial group of six persons was selected. After public outcry, he then added a seventh who was a Latino parent leader. Coleman thought each person would benefit and/or contribute to the effective governance of the district. From what I have briefly observed, I believe they are genuine people who desire the best for the district. I respect their efforts toward improving the overall, and in particular, financial governance of the board.
What I cannot respect is this process that disrespected parents and community. The rationale given by Mayor Finch for not including broad public participation in the initial conversations with the state was that there was not the time because immediate action was necessary. However, subsequent Connecticut Post reports indicated that discussions had taken place as early as January/February of 2011. Certainly between January and July, some type of communitywide meeting could have been held to at least inform parents and community that this process had begun. I have shared with Mayor Finch that there were those who would have been open to a thoughtful discussion weighing the pros and cons of such a major decision of reconstituting the school board. No doubt something needed to be done, yet I believe within our Bridgeport community, there were ideals, skills, and plans that could have emerged from a synergy of sectors of our community. For a very small select group of persons to make such an impacting decision on behalf of the city residents that had no broad participation reeks of presumption and arrogance. It also flies in the face of a mayor who stood this past November declaring the injustice of disenfranchised voters; voters whose ballots ultimately placed a democrat in the governor’s office.
I applaud the commentaries of retired Judge Carmen Lopez and Glover “Sonny” Gardner who both soberly placed this restructuring process in a cultural and clear context. As a parent, pastor and partner in community leadership, I am reminded that if I do not use my prophetic social justice voice, if I am silent, I might just lose this voice. In that spirit, I need to simply say to the 69,000 plus registered Democrats, Republicans and independents, “WAKE UP!” Use your voice, gifts and talents and vote to make our community better for our children. Because I am a man of faith, I am willing to do my part at reclaiming Bridgeport’s right to vote. Whether or not the state court overturns this present board structure, something must be done. Bridgeport, are you willing to do what it will take to reclaim the vote that has been taken from us? We do still have one consolation, the hopeful privilege of voting in September’s primary as well as in November’s general election. Let us work diligently not to have these privileges taken as the right to vote for our Board of Education elections has been.
Pastor Anthony L. Bennett, D. Min.
Senior Pastor of Mount Aery Baptist Church
73 Frank Street, Bridgeport, CT 06604
Amen!
So Pastor Bennett … why do the African Americans in Bridgeport keep putting these people into office? African Americans in Bridgeport, and by extension the United States, overwhelmingly vote Democratic Party candidates into office. Don’t you vote for the most qualified? There is a choice in Bridgeport for a more suitable, and minority, candidate for mayor than Finch. His name is Rick Torres. Look up his curriculum vitae and read about his road to want to serve all the people of Bridgeport.
Get away from the corrupt, controlling, unethical Bridgeport Democratic Party. Put someone into office who really is interested in the good and welfare of all Bridgeport residents.
Bob, hold up there and slow your roll. You got things wrong, first it is the Town Committee of both parties that place the names of those to vote for. African Americans in Bridgeport vote for those who are nominated. And the Republican Party never puts anyone worth voting for especially Rick Torres with his Tea Party, right-wing views.
And I’ll bet you don’t know of Rick Torres’ background, education and business acumen. And what’s wrong with the Tea Party’s fiscal viewpoint? You’re not talking corporate CEOs like Jeffrey Imelt (who is sucking up to Obama) or Geo. Soros, you’re talking about the working class and the middle class that is getting screwed by the maddening spending for over-the-top entitlements that should not be from the cradle to the grave. Or wars the Republicans got us into with no endgame strategy, or in the case of Bridgeport’s inept administrators, flies and leeches who milk the coffers by raising either taxes, licenses, fees or property values so the mil rates stay the same but the taxed amount goes up.
Bob, please read this article carefully, a couple of times:
www .postroad.com/news/2007/20070215-bridgeport-democratic-town-committee-members.html
Yes there have been a few changes to this roster since Bill Cummings did the research and this article appeared on the CT Post front page above the fold in 2007. However the critical problem remains. How do those who are nominated/endorsed by the DTC to run for an elected office act in the interests of all of the residents of Bridgeport? In my opinion they can’t because they will want to be nominated for the next election. Over 2/3rds of the DTC membership either work for the City or Board of Ed or their immediate families work for the City or Board of Ed. Some are even council persons who routinely vote on budget matters and union contracts rather than recusing themselves because they work for the City. These are perceived if not actual conflicts. My bet is the electorate doesn’t have a clue. This is the root cause that needs a root canal. This a battle for the heart and soul of Bridgeport.
I know who is on the DTC … the same old, same old. I was not asked to stay on the DTC after one term two years ago because they didn’t like my perspectives and honesty. All they do is kowtow to whomever is in charge (either Testa or Stafstrom) so the 70+% who work for Bridgeport can keep their jobs. The change that brought Mario back to his chairmanship was to rid Bridgeport of Stafstrom who was in a position to make millions for his supporters with residential harbor development (read Steel Point) and who was the mayor pro tem for Bridgeport as Finch was his puppet. Now you have Roach trying again for the chairmanship and I watched him drive drunks from his saloon on Ffld Ave to the polls in order that they vote for Grogins. And that’s illegal … nothing was done about that.
Bob, what is illegal about that? Voting under the influence? Giving rides to the polls?
When you ply drunks with free drinks to vote for someone you support and then drive them to the polls, it is illegal, as in against the law …
Amen, Pastor Bennett. There is a man of God who cannot be bought by the corrupt DTC. Unlike Reverends Moales and Stallworth. Pastor Bennett has a large congregation and can influence a lot of people. Thank you, Pastor, for doing the right thing.
Pastor Bennett is correct in thinking all Mr. Finch’s primary motivation was to gain greater financial and administrative control over the city’s education system. Which does not mean it’s for the benefit of the students or their parents. The mayor’s defense of this deliberate disenfranchisement was to say “Democracy doesn’t work …” because many of the parents of Bridgeport schoolchildren are either illegal immigrants or criminals and cannot participate in the electoral process. As 48% of the school system’s student population is Latino more than a few parents took offense to this bigoted and highly insensitive statement.
In a debate with Mary-Jane Foster and Jeff Kohut Mr. Finch defended his record of achievement by claiming several times “I did this!” without offering any concrete proof he had “done” anything. He took claim for having a land disposition agreement put in place for the development of Steel Point. Fair enough, Mr. Mayor. That doesn’t explain why Steel Point is still a weed-choked, garbage-strewn field. Steel Point is a large chunk of prime real estate the city cannot tax. The field and the empty marinas are among the first sights viewed by passengers of the Port Jefferson Ferry.
While I’m on the subject of city-owned real estate, what’s the story with the Black Rock Bank & Trust building? The property has been vacant since Joe “Snake Oil, Anyone?” Celli was unceremoniously thrown out on his ass. A couple of RFPs were floated, there was some interest from at least two developers, and they both backed out. Why is that, Mr. Finch? Is there still some expectation of pay-to-play?
Pastor Bennett,
That was a very eloquent commentary. A very important commentary. People will react to this and hopefully in September, the people will have spoken. Mary-Jane Foster is our best chance of making Bridgeport the gem it was always meant to be and I believe she has the ability to bring all of the neighborhoods together. Let’s face it. We are all in this together and so many of us are so hopeful the best is yet to come under the right leadership. Pastor Bennett–From your lips to G-d’s ears as the saying goes. For the sake of the children and the seniors, Vote Mary-Jane Foster!
Amen. Preach Bennett, Preach!
“We must hang together or hang separately”–Ben Franklin
The only practical choice we’ll have on September 13th is to vote for Mary-Jane Foster. The people of the city of Bridgeport cannot afford another four years of a self-interested Bill Finch. Oz The Great & Terrible in his pasta palace on Madison Avenue bellows “JUMP!” and Little Billy Finch meekly asks “How high?”
Thank you Rev. Bennett, it is so refreshing to see a preacher who practices what he preaches. Many preachers in Bridgeport preach of equality but remain silent on issues that affect the economic and educational issues of their members. What’s worse is by remaining silent they endorse that which is hindering progress. Others become part of the system that suppresses the members and they cheer on the suppressor. This is wrong. I have never joined in these discussions but felt I must or consider myself part of the silent majority.
It is unethical and bordering on criminal to deny the students in Bridgeport a quality education. The citizens deserve more than paved streets at election time. How many books could have been purchased with all the signs that have been erected giving credit to those politicians responsible for the paving of the streets. I counted over 70 signs that were erected. Imagine the cost, manpower and planning that went into those signs. Where did that money come from? And who will pay to take them down?
BRIDGEPORT PLEASE WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!
The Rev. Simon Castillo sold his soul to the devil a long time ago. Right, FD Chaplin?
*** STOP THE HATE, REV. CASTILLO HAS DONE PLENTY FOR THE LATINO COMMUNITY & F/D. ***
As I read Rev. Bennett’s words, “As a parent, pastor and partner in community leadership, I am reminded that if I do not use my prophetic social justice voice, if I am silent, I might just lose this voice.” concerned citizen wrote, “what’s worse is by remaining silent they endorse that which is hindering progress.”
Writer David Bromwich wrote:
I am not comparing Rev. Bennett to Dr. King but I am comparing the danger of “if I am silent.” Where are the other religious leaders of Bridgeport, why are they silent?
Ron, I was in Vietnam (1966-1967). It was a war contrived by John and Allen Dulles against communism’s spread in Asia. The actual fact is the war was an extension of a civil war between the North (Ho Chi Minh) and South (Ngo Dinh Diem). The French, who were the colonists for 150 years, got their collective asses kicked by the Northern factions before partition in 1954. The U.S. got involved as “advisers” in 1958 or so.
The last war of good against evil was WWII. And tens of millions were killed. That war preserved our democracy, forced the start of integration, and put us back on the path to economic stability after the Great Depression.
Rev. King was absolutely correct in his assessment of war, but he didn’t have time to correct the corruption such as we see in Bridgeport.
Ron, what about the people and parents of BPT? Initially 10 parents went to Hartford to protest. Why has the protesting stopped? What is Kohut’s and Torres’ take on all of this? Does the majority of BPT support a State takeover?
The administration of Bill Finch is more than willing to deny the people of the city of Bridgeport the right to protest for rights. We disagreed with his decision to ask the state to take over Bridgeport’s ailing BOE. We demanded a say in the decision and he dismissed us by declaring many of Bridgeport’s parents are illegal immigrants or criminals and couldn’t take part in the democratic process, a right guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. His handlers are so afraid of losing control of City Hall they thought nothing of employing the flimsiest of technicalities to prevent the name of a strong opposition candidate from appearing on the primary ballot. This is the most venal sin of all, denying the people of the city of Bridgeport the right to protest for rights, the right of inclusion in deciding issues that affect all of us.
“Somewhere I read,” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said in his final speech, “that the greatness of America is the right to protest for rights.”
Amen. Tell it, tell it and tell it some more, Pastor Bennett!!!
Rev. Bennett,
If any minister in the city were going to speak up, I knew it would be you. It is a very bold and potentially dangerous path you have taken. But because your power comes from not needing the city for your livelihood as do members of the common Council, the Democratic town committee and some ministers, that puts you in a very powerful position that allows you to make moral judgments that affect political injustices that causes people to vote against what is not in their best interest. I commend you, my brother. I know your fellow alumnus, Dr. Martin Luther King, would be proud to know the University you both attended still produces independent powerful ministers.
*** CAN OIB GET A WITNESS, GOOD GOD! ***
Don Greenberg here borrowing a friend’s comment space. It seems to me all the questions posed by the judge focused on one narrow issue, if there is an abnormality in the consent form whether from an act by the campaign or by accident, death of a slate member, does the registrar have either the authority, the legal right to SAY SOMETHING OR A DUTY, THE LEGAL OBLIGATION to say something to the candidate. I thought the key question by the judge was what if the slate submitted had 972 candidates for the Bd of Ed would the registrar have to or should say something. Specifically with the Foster slate why not say at the outset you have to many bd candidates, why not alert the campaign to her doubts and finally why not inform the campaign there would be no primary for the bd of ed? remember the issue is did the registrar know or most importantly should she have known. Common sense says the Foster campaign should prevail but remember this is America we don’t get justice we get law. Quote from Ward. JUST OFF TO HEAR CLOSING ARGUMENTS.