The GOP in Derby needs philosophical renewal.
Conservatism is about the defense of the individual’s right to property and one’s ability to mix one’s labor with his land and own the results. It is about preserving freedom from state usurpation and coercion.
These are not the ideals that motivate the GOP in our city.
It is proof of the sad philosophical state of the Derby GOP that I am forced to write about “blight” and a hot-dog cart.
Eugene Driscoll has given us a description of the recent controversy involving our Board of Alderman, our “blight” ordinance, and the now dilapidated Derby property owned by Alderman Stephen Iacuone.
For those interested in the mundane machinations of local bureaucracy one can find the affair spelled out here.
What Mr. Driscoll has spelled out, however, has angered this reader. Citizens of Derby are paying a price for poor leadership that could easily be rectified if the Derby GOP returned to principles of humble government.
Our elected representatives have been spending their time arguing about a “blighted” property one of them owns and a hot-dog cart.
Basic conservative philosophy apparently needs to be restated. One can either make money, or not. Selling hot-dogs is a way one can make money and by doing so one is providing a service to people in a medium of free exchange.
If I own a hot-dog cart it is my right to sell hot-dogs I have prepared.
This is a fundamental part of conservative thinking.
I am not speaking here of the rights of some massive multi-national to engage in unfair “free” trade with China and outsource jobs while enjoying an effective 0% tax rate.
I am speaking here of a small local business owner trying to make a buck. Our “conservatives” are discussing whether or not to fine a business owner for attempting to work for a living.
Would we rather he not run a hot dog cart without deigning to get some bureaucrats permission and instead steal brass plaques?
And what of this blight ordinance, enforced by a former chief of police?
The former chief has said, correctly, that every person whose property is on that list has extenuating circumstances.
Only illness, or poverty, or some other great misfortune would lead someone to let their property become blighted.
Is our best solution to leverage the city’s police power, personified by a former police chief, and charge them $100 a day for their misfortune? Do we truly want to add intimidation, fear, and bankruptcy to their list of troubles?
This is how the city of Derby treats citizens who fall on hard times during the most challenging economy since the Great Depression?
It is clear that it is time for renewal within the Derby GOP. It is time for the party to learn that there are concrete steps it can take to reign in city government, while at the same time seeking to help local enterprises thrive.
The writer is a Derby resident. The views published here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Valley Indy.
OK, ill bite. I dont consider myself under the “belief umbrella” of any one political party. In fact, I was once an Independent, then a Democrat, then a Republican, so you can see how much party politics matter to me. That being said, I have to disagree with a few points, and I will explain why. Lets start with the hot dog vendor. This situation pertains to an individual selling his wares on City Property. Do I think that should be regulated…..absolutely, in the same manner the Health Department regulates his foodstuffs. If retail activities are not regulated on City Property, chaos would ensue, and there is no denying this, no matter what party you are from.
Secondly, on the topic of blight, this statement is absolutely, 0, not true: “Only illness, or poverty, or some other great misfortune would lead someone to let their property become blighted.”
More than 85% of blighted properties are the result of absentee landlords CHOOSING to let their properties fall into a state of disrepair. If there are extenuating circumstances beyond this negligence, the City bends over backwards as was recently proven in the case with the alderman.
Thanks for listening and for giving me the opportunity to give my side.
I enjoyed the article as well as the comment above. Emre makes some very good points.
Mr. Hughes’ comments are insightful. I am humbled he read my thoughts and took the time to respond.
I support the work Mr.Cota and others are doing to help fight blight in Derby.
You can speak for yourself all you want, however, you do not speak for the GOP in Derby.
The GOP had their monthly meeting tonight and you were not there. Were you ever at a GOP Town Committee meeting? If these issues bother you that much, you and others like you can always come to these meetings and express your views and philosophy. If you were at these meetings, your views might carry more weight.
@Tony:
You are absolutely correct that I do not speak for the GOP in Derby. I would have thought that fact blatantly obvious as the point of my article in fact was to criticize the GOP in Derby for lacking understanding. One doesn’t speak for those they criticize usually. In all charity I must point that you display much of the problem with our city’s republican establishment in your post. This is a party that has MUCH to answer for when it comes to failing to stand up for conservative principles, ESPECIALLY when one considers things like our totally failed and completely botched heavy handed down town “redevelopment.” I thought you were supposed to be conservatives, not central economic planners. I also thought it was considered gauche in some conservative circles to use the threat of state authority to rob from one private property owner in order to enrich another. This is commonly referred to as “eminent domain abuse” by those of us “in the know” about conservative philosophy. I have brought up these issues at a meeting by the way, when our Mayor visited St. Jude Church a year or so ago. One goes nowhere speaking up nicely in person, and so one is inspired to pick up the pen as it were.
I am glad you support the work of Mr. Cota to fight “blight” in Derby. However, a simple statement of support for the blight ordinance does not an argument make. Would you care to respond to the arguments I made with some of your own, using perhaps a little civility in the process? Or would you rather just say “I support fighting blight” and let it stand at that. There are rules for logic and civility in political discourse. I would, gently, encourage you to use them. You wouldn’t want to simply confirm me the personal opinion I hold of many of Derby’s elected officials would you?
I am shocked to learn that you believe citizens should not express their political views in print and have them carry weight without first pandering to the town’s “elites” by attending meetings and trying to make friends first. This is news to me Tony, and I think it would be news to most intelligent readers. It is not necessary that I go out to a party meeting to make my voice heard. I quite frankly find such events little more than popularity contests where ideas matter much less than who one knows, and how connected one is. Writing is a far more congenial enterprise to the spread of ideas, assuming of course our interlocutors are interested in actually having a reasoned discourse about the issues at hand. Publishing articles (letters to the editor etc.) about local issues in a local “paper” is a time honored means of making one’s voice heard in a healthy democracy. Your response to reasoned criticism? Apparently to tell a voter in your town to “attend a meeting or shut up,” and be insulting and rude in the process.
With all due respect, I think anyone can see what a waste of time attending a local GOP meeting would be given the state of our party’s leadership if your post is any indication of where you stand.
Tony, I don’t see anywhere where Emre spoke for the Derby GOP. He said that the GOP has their priorities out of whack, but you seem to be attacking someone who should be an ally.
Mr. Akter, with all due respect, your premise seems to be that Derby is run by the Republicans and those Republicans are all Conservative. That premise is flawed.
For starters, the Republicans never had complete control of the local government. The reality is that a mix of Republicans, Democrats and Independents run the town. This has been the case for the last six years.
Many if not most of the Republicans currently in power in Derby were formerly Democrats or Independents.
The Republican Party in Derby, for the most part, is not Conservative. I have a problem naming more than a handful of local Conservatives.
There once was a Conservative alderman who opposed the taking of private property by the local government so that a private developer could profit. Granted, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed this to happen. Nevertheless, that alderman who stood up for individual property rights was voted out of office.
The Conservative philosophy has very little to do with the way Derby is run.
Mr Szewczyk, I think we agree on more than we disagree, but you seem to still take issue with the fact that I have criticized the republicans in town. I apologize if I gave offense, however, I do not see a solid reason to back off any of the claims made in my original article.
@Mr Szewczyk: “Mr. Akter, with all due respect, your premise seems to be that Derby is run by the Republicans and those Republicans are all Conservative. That premise is flawed.”
I do not agree that the premise of my argument was that Derby is “run by the republicans.”
Of course, we do have a Republican mayor, and quite a few republicans in office. My premise was that the city is not as good a place to live and do business as it could be, and it could become better if the republican party adopted a localist conservatism that favored a wide distribution of property ownership and entrepreneurship instead of arguing over a blighted property and fining hot-dog vendors while pursuing one developer to basically own and run our downtown while dictating to us, the taxpayer, what we will get. This has cost us (taxpayers) MILLIONS thus far, and it will only get worse as these sort of top down state dictated developments are rarely successful. The taxpayers of Derby did not need to spend a single cent to get a more just situation downtown that would be superior to what we have today. This I think is easily provable.
Mr. Szewczyk: “For starters, the Republicans never had complete control of the local government. The reality is that a mix of Republicans, Democrats and Independents run the town. This has been the case for the last six years.”
This is always the case in government. And we all know that competence is not the criteria for who gets elected, especially in a small town/city like ours. Lets look at the effects of ignoring conservative principle in our downtown:
When I look at our downtown I see some very historical and beautiful buildings, and some GREAT assets, including a train station and a beautiful green. But I also see a lot of stupid decision making as well. Where the stupidity is, city actions are usually behind them. Consider: our beautiful and well utilized parking garage (please note the sarcasm here).
I see rules banning mixed zoning that could have saved existing buildings along the waterfront by incentivising property owners to keep them up when the economy was strong, but would have been a hedge against a poor economy now, as more people are denied home-ownership and are even choosing to rent due to nature of the housing market.
I see a philosophy on the part of many elected officials that seems to say: “get the riff raff out by any means necessary” and this has led to our city losing a lawsuit over persecuting housing for the poor, and has had the opposite of its intended effect. This abuse was done at the behest of a democratic mayor, and given what we know about democrats and their stances vis a vis our right to property, I am not surprised that the “progressives” in town took such a truly regressive action. But this action was also PROFOUNDLY unconservative as it had its a core an abuse of the city’s power over a private property owner (albeit one in a private public partnership if I have my facts correct). Yet, I have not seen the Republican party or administration repudiate it or argue against it. Instead, they defended the prior administration in court, and when they inevitably lost, proclaimed themselves disappointed in the decision. Could this be partially because of the “fluid” nature of party membership in town, and a certain cronyism that characterizes our political landscape?
Sadly, thanks to the wrecking ball, some our downtown’s assets simply no longer exist. But there are hopeful things down there, especially the new river walk.
You say: “Many if not most of the Republicans currently in power in Derby were formerly Democrats or Independents.”
I reply: I totally agree! Of course they were! It’s the politics of cronyism in a small city. Last names and parentage count. Ideas don’t. And you wonder why I choose to write instead of attending GOP meetings.
You say: “The Republican Party in Derby, for the most part, is not Conservative. I have a problem naming more than a handful of local Conservatives.”
I agree with you here Mr. Szewczyk. But wouldn’t you agree that this is a problem? We need a party that sticks to principle, that can through their public actions and out-reach efforts inform the populace about how we can have a better and more prosperous city. I believe that ideas can help make our town a better place to live, and that some of the ideas I am sharing here could lead to at least a modest improvement in our current situation.
You say: “There once was a Conservative alderman who opposed the taking of private property by the local government so that a private developer could profit. Granted, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed this to happen. Nevertheless, that alderman who stood up for individual property rights was voted out of office.”
Huzzah!! He is a hero. Who is he, and how do I start a campaign to draft him to run again, this time for mayor? I will personally write up a series of articles proving that had we listened to him instead of voting him out, our downtown would be both more beautiful and more prosperous.
You say: “The Conservative philosophy has very little to do with the way Derby is run.”
More’s the pity…
I’ve never seen the words Democrat, Republican and Conservative used so much on topics that have nothing to do with any of the underlying issues that are being addressed here. None of this crap has anything to do with small time local politics! I’m going to switch my affiliation to Independent so if I ever do run for office I don’t have to be corralled into one of these two ridiculous institutions. If you want to debate the issues Mr. Akter thats fine, but it can be done without throwing political buzz words around like “conservative” or “liberal” they really have no place here. If thats what turns you on please get on a blog that deals with the cluster%$#% that is national politics… it seems to be working so well for them.
Civility is good. Participation is good.
If you want to take being constructive to another level:
1) Instead of criticizing city leaders for trying to follow the law regarding street permits, you could first go on a fact-finding mission (perhaps with the help of the Clearly Derby facebook page). When were permits first required (and why)? Can that law be revoked and what would be the consequences? Providing that info is next level kind of stuff.
2) Don’t imply that the city prefers that vendors steal things rather than get proper permits (granted, it’s obviously not serious).
3) Follow through on this statement: “[Clearly] it is time for the party to learn there are concrete steps it can take to reign in city government” with some other examples. The examples you’ve cited are A) That not requiring permits (and getting rid of all the associated staff people who deal with them) will generate booming business downtown (even though the staff deal with other issues that wouldn’t allow their firing); B) Getting rid of the blight ordinance and inspectors would save money (although it would save less than $20k if my memory serves me correctly, not counting any fines it brings in); and perhaps a C) Keeping hands off the redevelopment zone is a good conservative principle.
Thanks to Ken for chiming in on what I suspect is true – that most blight is from absentee landlords instead of primary residence owners.
I am not the most informed regarding downtown redevelopment, but my opinion is redevelopment is the job of private businesses and that far too often the public is expecting the city to handle the affairs of the entire project. Certainly the city can help spur development and redevelopment through grants, paperwork guidance or what-have-you. The limited role government should play is still an important role. Complete hands off would not be advisable in my humble opinion (especially in regards to federal and state grants – if the money is available we should go get it; although it might be another issue whether that money should be available at all).
Thanks for writing in to the Valley Indy, Emre – I know it takes guts!
@Mark,
Thank you so much for your comment. I am humbled you took my piece seriously enough to raise problems you see with it in such a charitable and civil way.
You challenge me to:
“Instead of criticizing city leaders for trying to follow the law regarding street permits, you could first go on a fact-finding mission (perhaps with the help of the Clearly Derby facebook page). When were permits first required (and why)? Can that law be revoked and what would be the consequences? Providing that info is next level kind of stuff.”
I am opposed to requiring permits for street vendors as a matter of principle, and will always be so. I have studied this issue academically, and one permit law is about the same as the other in every municipality. This is one of the core ideas I wanted to get out there by publishing this piece. Why are we putting up so many barriers to people just trying to make a buck? For further reading on this the Institute for Justice has some good materials available.
The “clearly derby” FB page is poorly run and administered, and they don’t even really understand their purpose if you read their mission statement. They are looking for servile questions like “oh dear wonderful city bureaucrat, can you please enlighten me as to why you are spending your time fining hot dog vendors and arguing over blighted property?” With respect, enough is enough. It is my perception that that page is irrelevant as it has only around 60 followers in any event. It is run by those perpetuating the problem. I am not really interested in perpetuating the problem by granting to government the authority to dictate to those engaging in private enterprise, or limiting their creativity in doing so, by granting to government the authority to issue permits like this. What’s next? Getting a permit to plant a garden? Some cities have gone this route. I am here to stand up and say emphatically “NO.”
“Don’t imply that the city prefers that vendors steal things rather than get proper permits (granted, it’s obviously not serious).”
I did not imply that, but I was asking a rhetorical question that was designed to get people thinking. It is obvious that entrepreneurship and employment are the best antidote to hopelessness and theft. Theft will always be with us of course.
Yet we are killing businesses in this state all the time Mark because bureaucrats don’t know their own limits. How about what no less an important figure in American political history than George McGovern had to say about his experience running a business in Connecticut?
http://www.inc.com/magazine/19931201/3809.html?mid=5446
As for most blight being caused by absentee land lords, I am curious about the 85% figure, and notice it is not cited or sourced. That is not to say I disbelieve it, just that I would like it sourced. Conversely, Mr. Cota is quoted in the Valley Indy, in the article I linked, as saying “every property owner on the blight list has extenuating circumstances.”
I took him at his word when responding to the article.
Thank you for raising these issues. It most certainly does take guts. I am home sick today and I have even been the but of crank calls as a result of speaking up. What a strange society. We, on the one hand, decry lack of political engagement and participation. On the other hand, we do everything possible to dis-encourage public discourse and communicate to people: “shut up! The bureaucrats know best!” This despite MOUNTAINS of evidence to the contrary. It is sick and disgusting, but our society is definitely struggling because of our collective loss of civility, morality, and standards, especially when it comes to discussion and debate. Ignorance and stupidity are what characterizes most discourse in our nation, and our city is no exception. We have serious problems. One solution is to elevate the discourse. That has to occur everywhere, and simultaneously, if we are going to make any progress as a city and as a nation.
For proof: look at voter turnout in our last election. Why vote given the current situation, where basically the ballet is filled with names and we can pick a ton of candidates we may or may not even know and who are there not for the content of their ideas or philosophy (which actually DO matter very much). The situation that has been outlined in this comment section is crystal clear. We have elected officials who switch parties simply to stay on boards, an electorate largely uninformed about politics, economics, or social issues (simply look at Mr. Mascolo’s comment in defense of a philosophically uninformed and unreasoned discourse complete with eluded to cuss words for proof of this). We are in serious trouble. Surely we can do better?
And I would say public officials everywhere do good work all the time, but only when they realize that they are there to SERVE the public, not utilize their power in all sorts of ways that lead to serious problems.
Hey again,
It seems you’re referencing not just the GOP, so as I read it the article should be calling on all to follow what you believe. And one comment references the state’s handling of economic development, indicating the issue is bigger than just Derby.
If all (or most) in Derby need to get in line, yet you don’t feel you can bring your concerns to a group who is “part of the problem” (either at a meeting or facebook page), then I’m sorry this article must feel like a last resort….
The Clearly Derby facebook page doesn’t need to have a lot of fans in order to be useful (does becoming a “fan” = utility?). And I do not think bringing the conversation there (besides here) would be a waste of time. I got non-“political” answers back straight from the charter (thanks Ken!) after asking a question.
There has to be more direct asking of the people involved, rather than the standard “opposition” approach which is to talk in a backroom and guess over what the “other side” is doing and why they’re doing it.
As evidenced by comments here, there’s not much of a reason to have separate political parties in Derby (although I don’t think switching occurs to stay on a board, rather to get on a board). You even mentioned about Tony – you agree much more than is at first evident. Most want the same end (a happy and prosperous Derby), and most are doing what they think is best for the city. Parties play more of a role at a state and federal level because there are more issues that divide them at those levels. Locally the division is manufactured more than reality (my thought).
By the way, I think Tony was talking about himself as that true conservative alderman. Just my guess.
Hope you feel better soon!
EMRE, I don’t know who you are or what political party you belong to, but you are articulate and right to the point. I enjoy reading your comments and would only hope that you do decide to run for local office…You can be an asset to the city of DERBY..
Just wow.. this whole conversation bemoans me. I’m out.
Emre, a bit off topic, but are you a registered voter in the City of Derby?
Thanks.
Yes Ken, I am a registered voter in Derby.
Well, I think that you should run for office next election…What do you think?
Thank you….I was hoping that you were…
This is how it starts Emre, you look around and see that things can be managed just a little better than they are and than you speak up.. It takes a lot of guts to speak up in a small town as an unknown or as you say “popular” and that makes all the difference. That is how a leader is born! Party politics or affiliations have no place in this small town, but it doe’s and that is why we are missing opportunities to advance our town. A lot of good people have commented on this thread and are proven leaders like Ken and Tony. I’t is my hope that you join them.