The Hispanic vote, if there is such a block, could be split three ways. Carlos Avilla is likely the front runner in this group having received Coston’s endorsement and picking up some organization support. Carlos is a nice guy but seems to want to please everybody and will therefore please nobody at all.

In the Jersey St. debate he quoted President Kennedy’s speech about not asking what your country can do for you, and thirty minutes later proceeded to pander to a single mother by telling her what he and the city could do for her. Which is it Carlos?

His economic policy is no different than Trenton’s failed approach for the last 20 years. He has shown bad economic judgment in several choices of videos to feature on his web site. None of his guest speakers have prescribed sensible approaches to urban revitalization. My fear about Carlos is that while he says he’ll seek out good ideas, he won’t recognize them when they’re right in front of him.

Evelyn Deleon, as I’ve written before, seems a nice and earnest person but simply has a difficult time expressing herself and staying on point. This was evident both in the first candidate debate on Jersey St., then on LA Parker’s radio debate and in her posting on reinventtrenton.com. Deliberations in City Council must be held with both clear thinking and clear speech. Evelyn doesn’t meet this qualification.

Juan Martinez was on the wrong side of the failed Leewood Development project that would have destroyed the character of South Trenton long after the incumbent politicians withdrew their support. Juan’s ideas about economic development are rooted in the 70s making him the dangerous choice for the South Ward.

George Muschal just doesn’t seem to have his head in the game. He doesn’t come across as the kind of innovative thinker we need on Council. His low point was when he expressed his displeasure over my questioning him about the city budget. He didn’t appear to have any awareness about the budget and questioned the veracity of my assertions about it. I can’t abide this kind of ignorance about the most important issue in our city.

Now for the tough part.

Pat Stewart is well known to me and is a person whom I respect. I’ve discussed the city and its revitalization many times with Pat and find that her views are basically sound. Pat would be a safe choice for the South Ward Council seat. She understands the workings of city government and would be a vote of reason.

However Stewart has failed to do two things critical for a councilperson in 2010. She has not posted a web site. A simple web presence is an important way to communicate a candidate’s views and to maintain transparency. Furthermore she’s failed to communicate a vibrant vision for Trenton.  We need vision from the South Ward as it’s quite possible we won’t get it from the other wards or city hall. I won’t be disappointed with having Pat on Council but I can’t endorse her.

This brings me to my endorsement of Paul Harris. I know more people who’ve been rubbed the wrong way by Paul than support him so I definitely feel like I’m out on a limb with my support. However, I have talked with Paul about his views and have come to believe that we share a basic philosophy.

• Trentonians are responsible for fixing their own fiscal mess.
• We can be a great city and can be Mercer County’s downtown.
• Residential development is the path to revitalization and the city has no business holding on to vacant property.
• Crime fighting should be part of a broader economic development strategy.

Paul is bright, earnest and energetic. He’s ambitious and quite frankly I think that’s what bothers folks. Paul will need to temper this but I am sure the ambition to make Trenton great again is what’s needed in government. His vision is for us to be a “shining city on the hill” not a last resort for the people with no choices. He will welcome new residents with disposable income rather than reject them out of jealousy.

The politicians who ramble on about how much they will do for you aren’t the kind of councilpersons we need now. We need someone who understands Council, the budget and the big picture on revitalization. We don’t need another social worker on Council rather we need to understand that Trenton must compete in a competitive world. We need thoughtful people who can think for themselves. We need a person who is using the web effectively to communicate with his constituents. We need energy directed at the right things, not candidates that are wedded to the social programs that have dominated urban politics throughout Trenton’s decline.

Paul Harris has the endorsement and support of ReinventTrenton.com.

]]> http://livingonthenet.com/wordpress/the-south-ward-council-election-is-no-time-for-politics-of-the-past/feed 7 http://livingonthenet.com/wordpress/trentons-south-ward-needs-stronger-candidates http://livingonthenet.com/wordpress/trentons-south-ward-needs-stronger-candidates#comments Thu, 10 Sep 2009 02:20:41 +0000 admin http://livingonthenet.com/wordpress/?p=46

Political representation of Trenton’s South Ward was snatched from the hands of Trenton’s political machine three years ago by a smart and energetic Baptist minister.  Reverend Coston was well educated, well read and well …. basically a decent guy.

Coston did much to initiate the Ward’s political renaissance through his efforts in organizing opposition to two ill-considered government funded housing projects in 2004.  HUD’s Hope VI would have replaced the old Kearny homes project with another one and Leewood Village would have bulldozed 8 blocks of the South Ward in order to make room for subsidized fake colonial townhouses.  Coston became president of the Lamberton Historic District Committee (LHDC) which hosted meetings that regularly drew 300 residents to the protests.

I bring up this bit of South Ward history to point to both what’s needed and what’s lacking in the crop of candidates hoping to fill Coston’s now vacated council spot.

First, organizing the LHDC was like herding cats.  You couldn’t just count on a group of like minded friends.  We need a candidate who can at least talk to different constituencies.  I’m not convinced any of the current candidates can do that.

Second, we need a candidate with the mental wherewithal to think through complex issues.  They need to know how to force the administration to use the budget, not just for survival, but for revitalization. So far, none of the candidates have demonstrated an ability to do that.  None of them having written platform pieces that show depth in thinking.

Third, we need a candidate that moves the level of community communication forward.  Coston’s southtrenton.com web site was widely read across the city and made Coston the leading voice amongst all 7 council people.  However useful Coston’s site was though, it was reflective of a bare minimum when compared to council people in other cities.  As a group, this year’s South Ward candidates are ahead of web efforts from the last election cycle.  Yet, none of this year’s sites approach Coston’s for depth and breadth of content.

The citizens of the South Ward have set the bar high for themselves and the rest of us hope they can repeat their wisdom from three years ago.

The first South Ward debate (sponsored by the Jersey St. Civic Association) is over now and we’ve had our first chance to compare the candidates across a good set of questions from the public.  Here are my initial thoughts though I’m not quite prepared to endorse any one candidate.  I’m waiting (not too much longer) for them to publish position papers.

Paul Harris

Web Site: http://paulharrisjr.net/

Paul appears to have a good command of many of the details involved in running the city.  He’s earnest sounding and was the best spoken of the 5 candidates at last night’s debate.

However, while Paul laments the looming structural deficit and suggests several approaches for spreading the suffering around, he doesn’t get close to suggesting a permanent way out of this mess.  The other knock on Paul is that many of his tactical thoughts appear to be wishful thinking.  My specific complaint is that he hasn’t so far laid out a high level vision and measurable goals.  Paul also seems a bit caught up in the race.  He’s young and maybe I can’t blame him.

Carlos Avila

Web Site: http://carlosavila2010.com/

Carlos is a polished young man and did a good job of expressing a high level set of ideals. He also has Rev. Coston’s backing which does mean something to me. He recognizes the need to attract middle and high income residents to Trenton, which is something that the other candidates didn’t grasp at all (Ms. Stewart grasps it she just didn’t say it clearly).

My knock on Carlos is that he is a bit duplicitous. In one moment he “Asks not what Trenton can for you” and in the next he’s spelling out his agenda to support a single mother in the audience who felt that government owed her something. You can only have it one way. Carlos seems more social worker than pragmatic Trenton turnaround man. He didn’t have any thoughts on righting Trenton’s ship, but then neither did the others.

Pat Stewart

Web Site: http://www.stewartforcouncil.com/ (not yet functioning)

I know Pat best of any of the candidates and first knew from her participation in LHDC and opposing Leewood. Since then she’s the only one of the South Ward candidates that I see in a broad range of civic activities.  Pat was a regular at our Urban Studies group which really should have been required for all council members and candidates.

Pat didn’t come across very strongly in the debate though.  And though she most closely aligned with my thinking on revitalization, she didn’t express it in an appealing way.

George Muschal

Web Site: http://muschal.nhpress.net/ (minimal content)

Mr. Muschal is a retired police officer who believes there is rampant corruption in the department. If this is the case then the best public service he could provide is in an oversight role reporting to the Mayor and police director.

However, for city council we should prefer to have a candidate that is more aware of the functions of our city. When I asked him about the budget and set up the question by referencing current budget numbers, he seemed offended that I would suggest he have an opinion and an approach to dealing with the budget issue. What a terrible attitude. He apparently is not aware of the approximate size of the city’s budget (he questioned the veracity of my figures) even though the city’s high level budget is widely distributed. It also proves that he’s never read this blog. I shouldn’t be too hurt, he’s probably not read any of the other numerous and thoughtful Trenton blogs either.

Evelyn Deleon

Web Site: ????

Evelyn relishes her role in sticking up for people in the neighborhood. I remember her taking that attitude in the fight against Leewood. She correctly believed that Latino and older residents were being taken advantage of by Leewood, with the implicit support of the administration. She seems a nice woman.

The problem is I just can’t understand her. It’s not just a language thing as her thoughts seem a bit jumbled as well. Furthermore, out of the 8-10 questions asked last night she might have directly answered 3 of them. Ms. Deleon seemed to wander around in her comments always coming back to “being a committee person” and “going to city council to complain”. It’s great having this kind of advocate but perhaps not in city council

Juan Martinez

Web Site: ????

Juan didn’t show up at the debate. One thing I do know about him though was that back during the Leewood controversy he was a paid hack for the developer. But before I go on I should remember that if you can’t anything good about someone, don’t say anything at all.

South Ward election observers gathered for post debate beers were underwhelmed with the candidates. Their attitudes would have been lifted if their real concerns about the candidates’ viability had been addressed:

• How our candidates think about the big issues of the day (Leewood, the Water Works sale, RCAs and the budget crisis) is important.
• Were their comments angry rhetoric? Re-tread platitudes?
• Do they have a command of the data?
• Do they have an end goal for the city in mind?
• Was there a notion of strategy in their approach towards revitalization?
• Were they consistent in their approach to governing?

None of the five candidates knocked it out of the park at the Sept. 8 debate. However, Mr. Avilla and Mr. Harris seemed to best demonstrate an even keeled approach towards discussing the questions asked.