Lately, the Norwalk Democratic Town Committee has been making news for its rather unorthodox way of putting together a slate of candidates. The Hour has been publishing the internal salvos, chiefly Bobby Burgess whining about District B, yet there’s been a glaring absence of any sign of life amongst Democratic candidates for Mayor let alone council candidates. You’d think that some would be out there pimping themselves, and that fellow Dems would be out there rallying enthusiasm or something. But here’s what DTC chair has to say about the 35 select few that populate the DTC:
Many NDTC members do absolutely nothing and they know who they are – leaving other members to carry to the entire load.
This line came from an email that Gail Wall sent in response to concerns raised about some internal party issues. The issues are the picayine stuff of campaigns, who is doing what, who isn’t doing what and why isn’t stuff getting done in a timely fashion. Boring really, until we get to this line:
We, collective – Galen, Stu, Walter and others have tried to recruit “trustworthy” individuals to assist – however the response is the same “don’t have time!”
Instead of complaining, where are those that are willing to step forward to assist OR pay for a service ?
Ah well, there’s that sparkling gem of discontent weaved in its cloak of defensiveness. People have time to volunteer for things that they believe in. People have time to donate in causes they believe in. But many Dems have grown disenchanted with the leadership of the DTC, precisely because of their off-putting “trustworthy” litmus tests. But the bigger joke here is that the people in charge of recruitment, are the carpetbaggers to the Norwalk Democratic party, so who are they to decide who is “trustworthy” enough when they can’t even identify who long standing Democrats in Norwalk are. For full irony, Republican Mayor Moccia has a better handle on the who’s who in Democratic politics than they do precisely because he’s been involved in Norwalk for a long long time.
As an example, Galen Wells is busy trying to get a District B Democratic resident, Fay Bowman, to run for an at-large district council seat, out of a District E nomination. The reason? They can’t find any Democrat in E to run. This would be news to the former Dems who ran successfully. Wells probably couldn’t name who they were, staring with Betsy Bain, Mike Coffey and Bill Wrenn. Over in District D, the Democrats aren’t faring any better with reports that they are having trouble finding candidates to run in district. Anna Duleep is planning to run at-large.
Over in Republican town committee, things aren’t much better. Candidates are in short supply in District C, where party leaders desperately want Nick Kydes off the ticket. The issue apparently is that Kydes is boasting that he can knock of Moccia in a Republican primary for Mayor. All the talk is making the grapevine buzz.
Meanwhile, part of the Republican strategy is to pick off disaffected Dems. While they are busy talking to disaffected Dems, the party stalwarts are not at all happy. This is also fueling talk of staging district primaries.
Then there’s the logistical problems by reaching out to more moderate positions. A chief problem for Republicans is what to do about Working Families Party endorsements that the disaffected Dems bring with them. Add to that, some current Republicans would earn the endorsement based on their municipal voting records. Then there’s the whole political philosophy thing, much of the WFP platform is an anathema to Republicans who don’t favor the union-friendly platform positions that the WFP endorses.
The challenge the Republicans are facing, with dwindling registrations, is how to integrate the more liberal moderate people into party politics while maintaining peace within the conservative wing. Nationally, the Republican party has largely failed at that balance. Locally, the Norwalk Republicans have shown more inclusiveness going as far back as integrating the former Independent Party members, but the reality of making it work is proving to be more difficult. But give credit to the Norwalk Republicans, the people wrestling with these issues on the RTC have held elected office because they ran and won races in earlier years. The DTC leadership lacks that perspective. And the unaffiliated voter still outnumber both parties in Norwalk.
Wasnt gail wall a republican until she ran last year ? maybe she is going to run again. how about bringing back bruce kimmel.
If there is only one good reason why the Dems can’t get candidates is that they require all to swear allegiance to the failed policies of Alex Knopp as their litmus test.
I thought Alex was a tad capricious and in need of emotional or interpersonal help, BUT I thought he was good for the City’s progress. Moccia, on the other hand, is a human being at the end of the day. He is approachable and someone we can actually talk to.
My question is: Do we really need to like our leaders? Would you vote for some you like, but is not great for the city, or do you need to like the person in order to vote for him or her?
Knopp circumvented the City Charter and the Council, which during his first term was 100% Democratic, whenever he wanted to. Proof? Check out the contracts for the Oyster Festival, if you can find them and the minutes of the Council during his administration.
Micromanagement was also the method du jour during his tenure. When the City didn’t immediately jump to attention when he wanted to form a Health District with New Canaan, he adjourned the meeting and walked out in a snit.
He also wasted alot of people’s time by convening all these blue ribbon panels about different subjects, like Youth Services and other stuff, but when the recommendation came in, he ignored it. It gave people the illusion that they had some say, but the decision had already been made.
One good thing was that he started was the Mayor’s Neighborhood meetings, , but the real work started getting done after he left office.
The group has resulted in numerous neighborhood associations across the City and residents talking to other residents.
I think I would rather have someone who worked with the Council in office rather than someone who just did whatever they wanted.
#3 – Funny question you evoke, “Should we like our leaders?” I think this is the only thing we can substantiate in an evaluation regarding the mayor’s position. A mayor cannot truly run the city because anyone can be voted into that position regardless of his/her limited education and/or experience. Generally, the mayor needs to be an excellent politician who knows when to smile and how to gladhand. Nothing more is needed for the job. When our mayor loses sight of that, we are entering in an area where the mayor is micromanaging others who have the expertise and/or credentials and were hired to do specific jobs.
I think this post stinks a little. There are thousands of Dems in Norwalk, and I presume they registered that way because they believe in something other than the NDTC. Yet the vast majority sits on the sidelines wringing their hands and demanding that the party (aka someone else) do something to solve their problems.
Well do you want to lead or be led? If the NDTC is run by a small minority of scheming evildoers (as is often suggested on this blog), where are the poor disenfranchised masses in the equation? Shouldn’t they be attending meetings, building a base of votes, and taking over? Shouldn’t this majority be in charge by now? For how many years now the folks for whom this blog endlessly cheerleads (Bondi, Coffey, et. al.) can’t seem to muster the votes to prevail in party matters.
How about for one week you write about how ineffective and clumsy this supposed silent majority is in wresting control from the clueless insiders’ club that you so often portray? If current leadership is as dumb as you say, it should have been easy to unseat all of them years ago…
Anonymous: Let’s see, the current crop of the NDTC don’t publish district meetings publicly, as in on their web site (a complaint in the internal email) nor do they publish the DTC meeting, nor do they promote Democratic party activities with the exception of District B which has grasped that you have to be inclusive and reach out, kudos to the Geakes and Burgess for making that happen.
Coffey actually took the former leadership to the state party because of meeting violations, and won each time, and the current DTC leadership has ignored remedying the situation. They are still in violation, District C hasn’t met publicly for nearly a year, which just means that once again they, according to party rules, don’t exist.
But why focus on my humble opinion? The thousands of registered Democrats in Norwalk have spoken clearly thus far — they have collectively said, they have no money and they have no time to give to the Norwalk Democratic Party, and that’s in the words of Chairwoman Gail Wall!
This blog contributes to our difficulty in getting good people to run for office with your constant anonymous character assassinations. You could greatly contribute to the political scene by requring that commentators identify themselves.
Democrat: Registration of commenters is coming. However, I’ll point out that neither newspaper requires registration for their comments, and other towns seemingly have blogs with anonymous commenters yet have vibrant party politics. See Stamford for an example.
Not buying it:
Firstly, you’ve dodged the challenge: explain why it is that these apparently unpopular people are so hard to unseat by the “thousands” of Dems who want things to be different?
In fact, there is information for attending district meetings on the Dems website. And contact information for about 50 different people as well.
Party activities are noticed to registered Dems, as are voting materials. Annual pasta dinner? Rowayton brunch? Though I think you might be saying that you want more events and activities… can’t tell…
Coffey wanted to throw out the caucus results last time he went to State, but State decided not to do it. But I guess that’s a win in your book because they identified some procedural issues. Of course he lost the vote because he couldn’t muster just 30 or 40 people to vote for him at the caucus (in a city of tens of thousands of registered Dems)… but if that’s a win…
And District C doesn’t meet? Is that the same district that never met all the while Fred Bondi was a registered Dem in the District? Couldn’t the fantastically popular Fred round up a few breathing bodies to show up at meetings? Enough people to take over the District committee (I mean, what does that take – like 10 people?)
Answer my question: why are the Dems you champion so strongly completely incapable of defeating this tiny and inept minority?
anonymous: You must be incapable of clicking. Please click on the calendar of the norwalkdems.com site and tell me about those meetings that are posted again.
I don’t think Coffey went to Hartford to throw out a caucus vote, since I attended the hearing, I can say with accuracy that the DTC has adopted rules that the State Party has said should be changed to keep within the guidelines of the state party rules.
Not such a hard thing to do if the party really wanted to be open and transparent.
His work there led him to a spot with the National Party and he now consults on election enforcement and rules for them. Not a bad gig for someone after all.
Fred Bondi was not chair of District C, it was Kevin Poruban, and it is the chair who cancels the meetings and doesn’t notice them properly and fails to hold them and record minutes.
Lastly, you keep trying to say this about getting rid of –in your words — tiny and inept minority. Not so. I’m a champion of open and transparent policy, and this blog is a forum for those who seek to discuss why it isn’t happening in whatever food group they travel in.
“Democrat” has taken his postings here to once again compel people to go to meetings that aren’t publicly announced and try to break into the DTC club.
Why?
If you want to run for office, there are two other parties that seem to be a little more welcoming than the Dems (who, unfortunately, aren’t all as inclusive as Mr. and Mrs. Geake). And there are always independent runs.
#8 and #10 . . . Please tell us the last time the DTC chose an outsider to fill a seat on the Common Council or BOE that had been vacated. Please don’t insult our intelligence by telling us it’s because not enough angry Dems show up to meetings. How about just admitting that the DTC has become an insider’s club?
#13-Try Gail Wall and Anna Duleep in 2007, and then Gail went on to become party chair. She is one of 3 former Republicans on the DTC Executive Board.
Well then, I guess we’ll all just disrgard Midaglia Rivas and Amy Jimenez on the Board of Ed.
By the way, just in case I missed it, given that you are the party of truth and justice, aren’t you also the party that supported Bruce Morris to hold a General Assembly seat and a full-time job with the school department?
“For full irony, Republican Mayor Moccia has a better handle on the who’s who in Democratic politics”
This is because he’s been dealing with too many of them behind our backs. Good riddance to Mike
Coffey and Fred Bondi.
a few more good riddances and the dumb dems won’t hsve snyome left.
Still not buying it.
I’d still like to hear your explanation as to why poor victims like Fred and Mike (your patron saints of political victimhood) can’t make headway along with their vast mythical legions of “good” Democrats against the evildoer insiders when it comes to party business. Clearly it’s not their ineffectiveness in organizing. Clearly.
On your meeting notice canard, have you clicked here? http://www.norwalkrtc.org/events/
I don’t hear you claiming that NRTC meetings are secret. It’s so simple to find the meetings (copious phone, email, contact forms on both sites) unless you’re wishing for a certain outcome and only choose to find (or invent) problems. So nice job conveniently ignoring all of the other info and contacts plainly available on the NDTC and NRTC websites.
[I also note that, unlike the NDTC, the NRTC doesn't appear to post their bylaws online for any and all to see. Does this mean they are a more-evil secret society?]
Finally, you should find a good source for refreshing your memory on Coffey’s complaint. Hey! Here’s a good source!!!
http://www.yourct.com/new/2008/01/norwalk-state-party-practically-calls-for-galen-wells-resignation/
Read it (the factual part, not your commentary), and you’ll see that, while the panel finds certain things “troubling”, “curious”, etc., they ultimately conclude (verbatim):
“For these reasons, the panel unanimously denies the complaint and allows the results of the caucus to stand.”
But you’re saying the complainant didn’t request that the caucus be invalidated and that he “won”? The panel seemed to indicate something else, unless you believe the words “unanimously denies” are subject to interpretation. Sheesh!
As is often the case, your position appears to be predetermined, and unyielding to logic or facts…
anonymous #18: Not only can I click I can read. And your obsession with changing the subject is pathetic, well, the attempt at is the pathetic part. The RTC has over 100 members, their next meeting which is a convention is posted, but hey why not bang our some more drivel to prove my point that being inclusive and listening to valid criticism is something beyond the grasp of DTC defenders. And oh by the way, there’s only one reason those by-laws appear on the DTC site, I bet you don’t know why. I do and I’m ROTFLMAO over it.
Pathetic – I’m changing the subject?
I made three comments:
- The first is a critique and a question;
- The second is a repeat of the unanswered question, followed by a reply to specific points you raised;
- The third is yet another repeat of the unanswered question, followed by more replies to more specific points you raised.
Do you say I’m “changing the subject” because there is a comment, set off in brackets, about bylaws?
You freely dispense critical opinion, and then hide behind “this blog is a forum” when in fact it is not a simple forum: it is an opinion blog with an agenda, and gates that you control.
I didn’t post the story and I didn’t choose the topic; I commented on your story – and the topic you chose – and asked a question. You control the editorial direction here, and it frequently focuses on the NDTC and your ongoing hit list.
It’s a “forum” until someone challenges your position, and then their posts are “drivel” because they are unable to “grasp” your incontrovertible brilliance.
So back to my unanswered question: if Democrats at large are as dissatisfied as you say (and have been saying for 3+ years now) with certain members of the NDTC, why do these people remain at the reins? Where is the effective opposition? Where is the majority that you seem to imply is out there? Why are your heroes incapable of mounting a coup with the help of this majority? I just thought it would be interesting to hear the other side of your position: i.e., what it might imply about the opposition to the current NDTC.
On your other point:
You may be ROTFLYAO, but I know for a fact that the reason the rules are on the website is so that people can read them, and they’ve been there for at least 4+ years.
Is the big joke (the “one reason”) that you posted the rules on some earlier version of the site before you were let go by Wells when she became chair of the NDTC?
Spill – what’s so funny?
anonymous 20: Yep keep on twisting in the wind, anyone can click and read. And oh what irony Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous that you can’t even be bothered to post under a handle let alone under your own name. Please, put you ranting to a name and then maybe I’ll respect anything you have to say, for now you are just making shit up and hiding behind the cloak of anonymity. My amusement at this childish diatribe continues, but then it would. I have the facts and documents to prove pretty much everything I post. Do you?
Turffie, having to register to post here cannot come soon enough!
Secondhand Rose, that would result in the rapid demise of this blog.
Funny, only the people who hide behind “Anonymous” seem to think so.
Reading the posts on this thread, is it any wonder nothing gets accomplished.
Is it not simple and unsophisticated to just join the mob and lay fault. Certainly there is enough blame to go around but is not the challenge to work TOGETHER to find solutions.
Yes, things are in bad shape and yes some must go however, is it not, of the greatest importance, to focus on solutions, paths and folks that will help us come together and use all that energy to get moving foward on the paths to solutions?
Once the dust settles, will we have leadership that can take the helm and be responsive and responsible to the crew?
Discussion is fantastic and Turf is to be commended for providing this forum for everyone to be heard. Turf is our modern day Ben Franklin of Norwalk, providing a forum for community discussion that is so vital to every facet of our daily lives. Turf your already down in the archives of history, for sure.
There are on occasion significant biased posts and that is sad but it is to be taken at face value, worthless, accept as an indication , to us all, how much work must be done.
There are plenty of folks eligible and want, even anxious to serve their community. One look at a thread on this blog or any local daily and those intelligent folks with alot to offer ask themselves why in the heck would I want to get involved in this quagmire?
For those folks, ask yourselves, how do you think it reached this level of desimation?
How do we fix what we know isnt working right?
Do we really expect the boken machine to fix itself?
What is important, for everyone to remember is personal and biased attacks, well its really dated and conterproductive.
Its not acceptable anymore, not any form of bigotry directed at anyone.
In reality it has the tendency to exclude valuable input from individuals that have so much to offer.
When individuals with much to contribute do stand up to serve their community, they oftentimes, are attacked and excluded for questioning the staus quo. That hurts us all and is not confluent in a democracy.
Some may be out for purely the entertainment and attention. But if you look close you can see some, working very hard to get it right.
Lets all get it right, we dont have to all hold hands and sing melodies in unison but we do have to have compassion for eachothers own individual struggles and learn to have open minds and ears.
What choices do we have?
We can continue to let things deterioate, along with property values and argue with eachother, which some interests are betting heavily on,
or,
we can actually pay attention, keep ourselves informed , stay actively involved in our community in constructive, postive ways whether it be making time to attend a meeting or helping your neighbor, our responsibilty doesn’t end at the ballot box, thats where it begins.
So easy to just walk in and cast our votes, that is extremely important but there is more to doing our part, than by just casting our ballots.
We must all do something, volunteer our time, it is needed and the most precious gift we can give ourselves, our children and granchildren, sour neighbor, our community, our nation.
We are not just purely recorders and observers of history, we are making history and are responsible for our own destiny.
Its our world, our nation, our community, our time.
From the seed of understanding, respect blossoms.
So enlighten us then, as to what you yourself are doing to “do your part”.
And I’m sure it will come as a huge shock to you, but the majority of bloggers here already are volunteering their time to the community in various capacities, whether it be as members of city government, appointed commissioners, community organizers, or neighborhood organization members – just to name a few.
In response, no Rose, I am, in the know, I am your neighbor, working right beside you. School is out and perhaps their our new followers that can be inspired, perhaps folks like us, Rose, that have been dissappointed, by efforts expended, can be reinspired. Lets get with the program here. There is alot of energy that we have to harness and focus.
“I am, in the know, I am your neighbor, working right beside you.”
Uh-huh. Riiiiiight.
And your name is Legion. (eye roll)
So in other words, you’re not doing anything at all.
So much for your accountability then. If I were you, I’d cease and desist with your bleating about how everyone else should “do their part”. It’s obvious you talk the talk, but you don’t walk the walk – or you wouldn’t be afraid to enlighten everyone else.
Rose, Rose, Rose. Please. You make posting here on this blog seem open to a deserving few who choose handles of catchy song titles from the seventies and attack others for posting their opinions. You chastise other posters for lack of accountability and yet don’t post your own name. You also hide behind a cynic’s cloak which is odd for someone who purports to be making a difference in her little corner of the world. How so? If you work with others in the workplace or even volunteer your time to promote the common good, surely you must be aware of the essential give and take formula for compromise. With so much disdain for others, how can you possibly get things done? By the way, #25 has said nothing to evoke such strong defensive feelings from you as a fellow poster. Subjectively speaking, you might want to take a break from this blog, Rose.
What on earth makes you think Rose isn’t my own name? LMAO!
Hmmm.
“You make…”
“You chastise…”
“You hide…”
You make assumptions, #30. And we all know what happens when we ASS-U-ME, don’t we?
Sorry to disappoint you but I have no plans to “take a break from this blog”. If you don’t like what I post, that’s too bad for you. Last time I checked, this was still America and I’m still entitled to air my opinion whenever and wherever I wish.
Don’t read it if it bothers you so much.
Of course, you might want to take your own advice and take a break from this blog yourself, “Blog Reader”.
Rose, there you go again! So predictable! That ass-u-me is so old, Rose. Really. I used to know a woman who would use that phrase, sort of like a mantra. She was an odd person, reclusive, and she didn’t brush her teeth regularly. Anyway, these are not assumptions. These are observations of reading your posts months after months. There is no talking to you, Rose. You are an entity unto yourself.
Well, with respect to Secondhand Hosebeast’s opinion, there’s a well-known saying that I like to use when deciding whether my time is worth wasting responding to her ilk: “Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one.”
How do we go from debating the relative inclusiveness of the city’s two dominant political parties (sorry WFP) and debating whether it’s more beneficial to participate in local party politcs or to actually participate in the community and immediately start attacking one another?
Where’s Rodney King (or Rodney Allen Rippy for that matter) when you someone to encourage people to get along?
It’s so tiring reading those other anonymous’s griping. They give anonymous’s a bad name.
Hmm: Option 1: participate in local party politics, or Option 2: actually participate in the community and immediately start attacking one another? Can you elaborate, #34? Option 2 isn’t making much sense.
Save it, #36. It’s not worth it. I find this process fascinating… sort of like road rage where people flip the bird behind a car window but would never do so face to face. I also find it fascinating that many people do not understand that many posters here have name recognition and high profiles, and are committed to making Norwalk a better place. The reason for anonymity is not very complicated; mostly, I see it as a desire to maintain a level playing field. I totally understand your point re: option 2 at the inferential level, in the last post. It’s amazing how your opinion gets twisted into these tight little corners, isn’t it? Anyway… are you the one Turf had the issue with? If so, what was your original point in that regard? Can you possibly restate where it was that you think the translation went sour?
I have no problem with posting anonymously. The loudmouths who complain about hiding behind it can’t even see the hypocrisy in their statements (must be Republicans, LOL).
I looked up “Secondhand Rose” in the phone book and couldn’t find her. Whomever she really is also posts anonymously.
I think that #34′s point is that there is a group on this site (although not all posters) who talk about their community involvement while simultaneously attacking one another– that dichotomy doesn’t jive well with their same disdain for participating in party politics.
Maybe the real option is that we can either work to advance a particular political club (and work for the glory of its leaders) or work to help our community at large, regardless of which set of politicians benefit from our efforts.
Even if I gave you my full name you wouldn’t be able to find me in the phone book; I have a non-published number. But hey, don’t let me ruin your fun. You can look me up until the cows come home.
#38, I commend you for what should have put this whole “we need registration and no anonymouses” discussion to bed (though I’m sure it won’t). To have “Anonymous” called out by “Secondhand Rose” and “turfgrrl” should have struck everyone as odd.
And if the site institutes registration, what will that solve? I create a new Gmail account with a phony name and nonsense address, register here using that email account, and say my name is Mickey Mouse. Voila! I’m not anonymous anymore!
Are the administrators going to ask for two forms of ID at the website’s door, or a valid credit card for registration?
Turfgirl should do away with the whole “anonymous” thing. It’s ridiculous trying to follow the gist of a conversation when there’s 6 or 7 “anonymous” posters all making comments. Add to that the people (like me, above, hee hee) who post with a comment where the screen name should be, and someone trying to follow the discussion has a difficult time trying to figure out who’s answering what question or responding to whose comment. I don’t care about the registration bit; just do away with the “anonymous” stuff. What’s so difficult about using a screen name, anyway? You’ll still be anonymous, but the discussion will be easier to follow for all of us.
I would imagine the postings would drop off considerably if Turfgrrl institutes a registration process. When I first started posting on this blog, I was all like “I’m going to create a really cool handle so everyone knows who I am,” sort of like having a bumper sticker on your car that lets everyone know your position.
Then I started creating different clever handles to deal with the various threads I wanted to engage in. Soon, I dropped any pretense at maintaining even one handle because it was pointless.
The people who are focused on identities rather than the dialogue have got it wrong. The point is that this is a safe place to express an opinion, and not have to fear any backlash from the naysayers, political flunkies, and just plain old crackpots who lurk here, whether they post or not.
I could care less whether I’m talking to Anonymous, anon, anonymouse, et al, ad nauseum.
When I’m not covertly directly my campaign to be Norwalk’s First Blight Czar (I think the epulets on the uniform’s shoulders would make my waist look narrow), I always post with my real name.
BIG ANNOUNCEMENT:
Upon further reflection, I now confess that everything I’ve ever posted here is wrong and I am a bad person.
OK we forgive you now please go away
Sorry, but #45 was actually me! Because I am deliciously EVIL! Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Are you sure you’re not SHR and you’re just bipolar?
Excellent question #48! Excuse us while we consider a response!
If this is the caliber of what passes for discussion from posters like 43 through 49, then I think Turfgirl has a valid point in requiring us to register. At the very least it will remove these posters with the middle-school mentality. And if they stop posting simply because they have to register, then it’s obvious they weren’t here to talk about the issues of the day to begin with.