Ward Representation now the law of Springfield's land

Ward representation was passed by Springfield's voters today by an overwhelming 74% Although I believed ward rep would win a majority of votes, I am truly stunned by the level of support. I've been casting my mind around for another candidate or issue in the recent past that won by the same 3 to 1 ratio, but so far have been unable to think of one.

A few thoughts tonight: Eight by ward and five at-large for city council is not the version of ward representation preferred by most of those advocates who really studied this issue, but was instead a pragmatic decision made by City Councilor Jose Tosado (tonight's top vote-getter). It was not easy for those of us in Arise, Oiste, most other plaintiffs in the voting rights lawsuit and other activists to decide to put our weight behind Tosado's version. Hell, he wasn't even in office when we started this campaign. But we did it and I believe ward representation will, as Nick Camerota says, bring an end to politics as usual in this city.

Ward representation received more votes than any single mayoral, city council or school committee candidate-- almost 3,000 votes more. This was also the case in the 1997 election. Of course we worked hard to turn people out, but our hard work cannot take full responsibility for this. A 74% margin represents something deeply true in its urges toward democracy.

Yet at the same time, except for the huge upset of our incumbent Mayor Ryan by challenger Dom Sarno, every single incumbent on the city council and school committee was re-elected. People may want democracy and change, but mostly they don't know how to get it. I know that today, I voted for exactly two city council candidates, and neither was an incumbent. If you're in an at-large system, and you're trying to get a non-incumbent elected, you have to bullet-vote.

This kind of entrenchment of the incumbents is just one effect of an at-large system, now, thankfully, dead. But we still have a lot to learn about how to use ward representation so that we can all really benefit..

--- One last thought for tonight: we Arise folks met up at the Caribbean Club with Vera O'Connor to await poll results. Oiste, Out Now and Neighbor to Neighbor folks joined us, as well as Nick C (who designed our ad in the Springfield Republican) and E. Henry Twiggs, Chair of the City Democratic Committee. What a motley crew we made! From bowlers and overcoats to jeans and sneakers, we looked like the city I know and love. These folks are just the best, and I love them..

Thanks-- but paper gets the date wrong.

The Springfield Republican had a pro-ward representation editorial today which, I hope, will play a part in pressuring legislators to keep pushing the home rule legislation through ward rep can go on this November's ballot. But the editorial got the deadline date wrong! The editorial said the deadline was October 19. It is NOT the 19th, it is the 2nd! This misinformation is counter-productive to the real sense of urgency citizens and legislators need to be feeling right now. TUESDAY! TUESDAY! TUESDAY! Even a core Arise member left a message on my phone tonight saying, "Well, at least we've got till the 19th." I think/hope the paper will correct this tomorrow.

We had a ward representation meeting tonight. If the question gets on the November 6 ballot, we certainly know what we have to do-- it's old-fashioned grassroots work. Arise, Oiste and the NAACP have organized on fair city council and school committee elections for so many years, we've laid a lot of groundwork.

But we still just don't know.

We decided tonight that we will have a press conference Tuesday, October 2nd, noon, on the steps of City Hall, either:
to celebrate Springfield's opportunity to vote in ward representation
or
to castigate those elected officials who waited until the eleventh hour to act, when the eleventh hour was already too late.

Racism comes full circle in Springfield,MA

Poor Mayor Ryan.

I doubt he had any idea that today, when he announced the city was ready to begin diversity training of its employees, that eight of those employees would be announcing a racial discrimination lawsuit at nearly the same time!

Irony of ironies, the fellow he announced would be doing the training, Tom Belton, was one of the eight (plus attorney Devin Moriarty) standing on the steps of City Hall as they talked about decades of being passed over for promotions, not receiving raises, and being subjected to insensitive remarks by white co-workers.

Mayor Ryan is still trying to handle the fallout from the February resignation of his Chief of Staff Michelle Webber. Webber resigned after Rep. Cheryl Rivera went public with accusations of racism against Webber, accusations that Webber denied at the same time she apologized to anyone she might have offended.

Of course discrimination at City Hall didn't start with Mayor Ryan, and it looks like it won't end with him, either.

I remember a former city councilor of color telling me I just had no idea what it was really like for people of color during the Albano administration, and why that councilor was choosing to support former state representative Paul Caron for mayor instead.

And lest we forget, this is Ryan's second go-around as mayor of Springfield. In his first term, Ryan called in the National Guard to make mass arrests at a peaceful demonstration of African-Americans at Court Square. They were there to protest the arrests of African-Americans who had been clubbing at the Octagon Lounge. One of those arrested is our current State Rep Ben Swan.

Ryan also ushered in the "Strong Mayor, All At-Large City Council and School Committee" election system which has resulted in only six people of color being elected to city council in forty-five years.

In another irony, Rep. Rivera's accusations against Michelle Webber in Ryan's second time in office were part of the trial affidavits we submitted in our federal lawsuit against the City of Springfield to challenge Springfield's all at-large voting system-- Arise for Social Justice, Oiste, the NE Chapter of the NAACP and a number of individual plaintiffs.

A binding question to change to an "8 ward,5 at-large" system will finally be on the ballot this November.

Thus we come almost full circle.

I know that as a group, we white people don't understand how much our well-being is bound to the well-being of people of color. Social injustice skews our reality like a funhouse mirror. But we can change. I see it all the time.

Right now we need to support the eight courageous people who today said: Enough is enough.

Ward Representation moves closer to the Springfield ballot

The Home Rule legislation which will allow a question on ward representation to be placed on this November's ballot has passed the House of Representatives and is scheduled for a hearing tomorrow in the Senate's Rules Committee, according to Candace Lopes, aide to Sen. Stephen Buoniconti, when I spoke to her yesterday.

The legislation will have plenty of time to pass the full Senate to make it on our city's November's ballot.

When the City Council finally passed an 8 & 5 version of ward representation last October, it was with the threat of our-- Arise, the NAACP and Oiste's-- federal lawsuit going to trial in just a few months.

I watched the proceedings on community access TV with a great cynicism. I knew that it was the lawsuit that had finally forced the City Council's hand, that they'd begun to see ward representation as an irresistible force. Even then they passed as weak a version as they could get away with, and didn't even pass it outright -- they voted to put the question on November's ballot. Ten years ago our coalition worked the streets and collected enough signatures to get the 8 & 3 version of ward representation on the ballot, and it won 58% of the vote! It did not become law because one-third of all the registered voters would have had to vote for it-- and not that many turned out for the whole election.

Not once during the evening's proceeding was there even a mention of the twelve solid years of community organizing that had gotten us to this point-- and of course the council did not call themselves out on their twelve years of foot-dragging, broken promises and outright lies. There were a few councilors along the way who were exceptions-- but they were never in the majority. (Oh-- and Tim Rooke, who never once lied about his opposition to ward representation.)

Our lawsuit was stayed by Judge Ponser pending the outcome of the Home Rule legislation and the November vote. I want to stop and say a heartfelt thanks here to the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Goodwin Proctor, who took on our lawsuit pro bono and who have been passionately committed and intelligent in their work with us. They mined the collective memory of community organizers to compile many lifetimes of racial injustice, police brutality, economic discrimination and thwarted expectations. Much of this was never heard in trial.

Twelve years of organizing-- petitioning, two lawsuits, lobbying the councilors, building community support-- has now come down to a binding vote for eight ward councilors and five at large for the City Council, and four ward reps and two at large for the School Committee (with the mayor as the deciding vote).

We, the plaintiffs, have to decide whether we will actively support the question. At this point we are not of one mind. We have to talk to each other. We're tired, bitter, feeling betrayed. And yet.

The Arise board of directors met last night and while we postponed an official vote until we know for sure that people will get to vote on ward rep in November, my sense is that we will throw ourselves into rebuilding a coalition and getting this law passed. This time, it only has to pass by a majority.

One built-in shortcoming of our lawsuit is that it has focused the public's attention on the racial inequity of the current at-large system, to the exclusion of all the other excellent reasons we need ward representation. I'm going to write more about them in another post. But I have to say, one more time, for the record:
Forty-six years of an at large system
Five Blacks and one Latino elected
in a city now a majority of color.
Enough is enough..