Yale Daily News

Updated: Monday, November 23, 2009 8:42 p.m.

A A A

Aldermanic candidates hire consultants

Contributing Reporter
Published Monday, November 2, 2009

This election year, for the first time, four New Haven aldermanic candidates have hired political consultants to help them with their campaigns, a move that may significantly change the tenor of New Haven’s aldermanic campaigns, experts on local politics said in interviews over the last week.
According to campaign finance records, at least four aldermanic candidates ­— including incumbents Allen Brison of Ward 10 and Elizabeth McCormack of Ward 24, as well as candidates Lisa Hopkins of Ward 22 and Claudette Robinson-Thorpe of Ward 28 — hired consultants this year. The records show...

#1 By EastRockRes 7:12a.m. on November 2, 2009

I'm almost positive that this type of disgusting behavior is not new at all in New Havens ward politics.
Ward 9, Democratic newcomer Elizabeth Addinizio vrs. the Green Partys' Vic Edgerton

#2 By Streever 7:50a.m. on November 2, 2009

I wonder if Sochie Nnaemeka was as dedicated to her other races. She moved to ward 10 one week ago with 3 other Brison staffers. They all live in the same house.

#3 By David 10:44a.m. on November 2, 2009

It's very clear who contacts these "consultants" -- the unions who back these candidates and foot the bill for the services. A simple look at campaign finance reports confirms this. YDN comes so close to getting the actual story.

#4 By anon242 11:56a.m. on November 2, 2009

This article is holding back from its real message and punch. As it is written, it's not clear what the actual story is.

Having said that: These kids, certainly not fully-grown professional political campaigners, took over the role of full-time, and I imagine more than full-time campaign staffers. They didn't single-handledly win (in the case of Ward 28)their candidates their elections. They built around them what seemed a substantial network of volunteers from different interest groups. They seemed to authentically believe in what they were campaigning for. They made a choice and went all they had for it. What is wrong with them supporting ultra-progressive pro-union politics? Assuming they got paid $1650 for 10 weeks of work (just made up those 10 weeks for rounding purposes), they got $165 per week. Barely making rent. Should they have completely sacrificed themselves and accepted no money?

And let's face it, unions are in all their right to support political candidates that will further their agenda for working class people. Why do people act so outraged when they do? They are just like an interest group, they are NOT a branch of government. They are a STRONG group.

#5 By Kevin Garnett 5:42p.m. on November 2, 2009

To anon242 - the unions are furthering the agenda of folks who do not reside in these wards. They further their own selfish interests, they further better contracts for themselves, They do not inform the public of what they are submitting and proposing.
The University has to lay bare all of these submissions and requests of the union. These assembled and concocted groups storm out of Phellps gate in rage and keep secret to the locals of their intentions

Add Comment

You are not logged in. We do allow posting without registration, but we encourage you to register or log in to enjoy full access to our comments features!