Where do we place the blame? Was it politics, high taxes, economics, a better deal elsewhere, not enough skilled labor, the unions? Whatever forced their closings, these once-thriving manufacturing plants have left an imprint upon our fine city.

It wasn’t just a loss of taxes as the factories closed that hurt Bridgeport but a loss to our sense of community. This city once had a large manufacturing sector. Jobs were plentiful and times were good. Many factories operated three shifts, and factory workers worked overtime.

The economy had a bright outlook — not like the grim outlook that we face today. Many laborers here were machinists. That is all they did for a living. They were skilled professionals and in great demand by companies. Numerous products were made here, from automobiles to soap. Then gradually, but surely, we lost the manufacturing plants one by one.

The factories started closing and jobs began to disappear, causing our economy to falter. All this history certainly has contributed to our city’s current economic situation. The changes may have been gradual, but the impact left its mark.

Many of these buildings still stand today as evidence of days gone forever. Many are boarded up, or the main gates are chained up. These places stand in ruins like those of a former war zone. Who could ever imagine companies such as General Electric, Bridgeport Brass, Carpenter Steel, Remington Arms, Remington Rand, Overland Fabrics and Underwood would one day close their doors?

This wasn’t something people thought about as they reported to work on a daily basis. No one expected the manufacturing downturn. But eventually the good times were gone and the local economy took an unrepairable hit.

While we talk about today’s bleak economy, we also should ask — Why did we allow this abandonment? Perhaps some of it could have been prevented by using better business practices and ethics. But now it’s too late for the factories of the past. They are gone forever and never again will our city be known for its manufacturing. All that is left are the old buildings and lots of memories of days gone by.

Write to Richard Sattanni is a freelance writer and novelist who lives in Bridgeport. Write to him at rsauthor00@gmail.com

Is that really what human emotions come down to? A simple trend? Perhaps it’s broader than that.

There are different kinds of music. Some types, such as Brittany Spears and other pop artists, are manipulated by marketing machines. Other types of music are more grassroots, mellow and untouched by commercialism, such as the Grateful Dead or music generated at festivals such as the Gathering of the Vibes, held annually in Bridgeport’s Seaside Park. Some music comes from various cultures, traditional dances or monumental life stages.

(Illustration by Mary Treschitta)

All music evolves and paves the road for inspiring a new generation. For example, the punk movement grew out of the hippie generation. Musical artists then initiate future merchandise, which spawns the Next Best Thing to Have.

The film, “The Merchants of Cool,” documents how music is marketed toward people, specifically adolescents. Teenagers — who want to be cool, want to be heard, are impressionable and have the cash — are Corporate America’s dream. MTV, Madison Avenue and Hollywood all market images with which youth can identify, perpetuating a culture filled with consumerism. “The Merchants of Cool” takes a hard look at the world of buying, selling and hunting for “cool.”

For this movie, researchers conducted several surveys and focus groups looking for the “next big thing” that will grab the attention of their prey. “But are they simply reflecting teen desires or have they begun to manufacture those desires in a bid to secure this lucrative market? And have they gone too far in their attempts to reach the hearts — and wallets — of America’s youth?” ask the documentary’s makers.

An interesting book, “Growth Fetish,” demonstrates how emotions do play a role in influencing economic decision-making. It’s mainly about economics, politics and discussing the high that people receive from spending money.

To sum it up, people have become so materialistic that they buy things they don’t need, with money they don’t have, just to impress other people and to fortify their fetish. Why do we do this to ourselves? Does it have to do with hunting for “cool” (cool being self-esteem comprising material worth)? Ha! Put a price tag on self-esteem! What does music have to do with the hunt for “cool” and how does it affect self-esteem?

Maybe it’s bigger than the marketing industry, and marketing is only a small part of the picture. If so, what is it about music that makes people feel so alive (aside from being “cool”) besides the rich cultural identity, tradition and history? Maybe it’s rooted in culture. What is it about music that binds groups together? Does it have to do with the environment in which a person is raised? Does it have to do with individuals sharing similar experiences in life? What about frequencies and sound waves in instrumental music? Could there be a meditational aspect? Does music appeal to certain ages?

It is common for people to have preferences for favorite artists. Why do people like certain genres of music and not others? Do we identify with music? Could it be that artists have a knack for addressing certain emotions that may be difficult for people to communicate? And by doing so, the outlet of expression creates a community in which individuals feel less alone in the world, in return, feeding off each other’s energies and allowing us all to be part of something bigger, perhaps spiritually?

Even though music can be mass marketed, the merchandise only covers the outer appearance. What is crucial about music is what each individual draws from the experience, the fundamental importance being what strikes a chord in the inner self, the transcendental experience onto cloud nine.

These transcendental experiences happen in different ways for different people through different music at different times. For some, it may be a very personal experience; for others it might be exciting to go to live performances. For some it could be creating music; for others it might be supporting a musician you care about, such as a friend or family member.

Sometimes music can be a source for focus, success or achievement, played in the background to score the day’s activities. For example, music is often played while a person completes a task or assignment, or while they exercise. Music often accompanies travelers on a long road trip or journey through life. It is the sound in the background instead of silence, or, for that matter, to drown out something that a person just does not want to hear.

Some people may find it therapeutic to blare music while taking a long drive with no destination and then watch the sunset with someone special. Everyone knows the image of cruising down the highway in Los Angeles, blaring those tunes that turn your soul into a lead foot that simply won’t turn around, won’t look back, windows down, hot air blowing pages out the window and the dog’s head hanging out the side, verified by the rearview mirror.

It is the song that a person plays over and over to identify an emotion that life has granted with the hand he or she is dealt. It is the song that has so much sentimental value that it perfectly rekindles a sensation, triggers a nostalgic memory engraved in a person’s brain. The sensation of missing someone so much, so deeply, so hard, that your heart begins to hurt because you can imagine their sweet scent, or their smiling face or that cackle after a witty joke that puts a smile on your face.

It is capturing a moment of time in the palm of your hand. It is counting down the days of your favorite band’s debut album release date until, at last, the day finally arrives. It is singing at the top of your lungs, really poorly, into a hairbrush, the lyrics that you know far to well of your favorite 1980s band with your family members.

For many, listening to music is like being part of something bigger, something better, and songs can be used as a tool for communication. It’s a ticket to freedom, like the scene in a movie called “The Shawshank Redemption,” when Andy Dufresne plays classical music through a microphone in a prison and says something to the effect of, “Forget that there are places in this world that aren’t made out of stone … That there’s something inside that they can’t get to, that they can’t touch. That’s yours … Those voices soared higher and farther than anybody in a gray place dares to dream. It was like some beautiful bird flapped into our drab little cage and made those walls dissolve away, and for the briefest of moments, every last man in Shawshank felt free.”

No matter who it is, whether it’s the creators or the avid fans, music equates spiritual freedom. It’s grabbing a moment of bliss and holding it in the palm of your hand for infinite time.

Musical performances are memorable experiences for audiences and an outlet for creative expression for the musicians. At festivals everyone looks so wild and free. Some of us enjoy going to live concerts and music festivals because when we are surrounded by that environment we enter that state of freedom, a state of complete euphoria.

It may come as a surprise to some people that all these strangers from various locations, and of various backgrounds and crazy life stories congregate for similar reasons, those reasons being to scream the same heartfelt lyrics, to dress like a weirdo and maybe even paint your face, to dance like a wild goofball who can’t be tamed and to escape from the social norm of a square lifestyle.

A person can be anyone he or she desires to be. A person can dress up or dress down; he or she can wear a mask and simply experience life to the fullest through the music. For those truly devoted fans, music can be a state of awe and admiration that another human being could create such intense beauty.

A live musical performance may be more personally fulfilling. For example, going to hear the artist perform some sick, nasty guitar solo sounds sooo much better than that the same solo on a good ol’ CD — the CD that a person played too many times and still can not get enough of it because it is that good. That feeling sends serotonin racing through the brain like shooting stars light up the night sky in Patagonia after summiting. Grateful Dead sure does do a nice “Scarlett Begonias” song, huh? Well, now Dark Star Orchestra, anyways.

Perhaps we find going to live music more enticing, more memorable, more meaningful and cheaper than the usual night out in town. Or maybe we just go for fun. To each their own. Attending live music events provides common ground for strangers to meet and greet and talk about likes and dislikes. Eventually, attending live music becomes an addiction for some, becomes a need to fulfill desires that can’t be met by any other adrenaline rush. It becomes a temptation to see more sweet guitar solos, to meet more people, hear more stories and travel to more unmarked territory. Again, a ticket to freedom.

Even though music is mass marketed, there is a meaningful connection behind the merchandise. All music, marketed or unmarketed, evolves from other artists who paved the road for inspiring a new generation. Ultimately, people find their own niche, and as long as you find what you like, that is what matters. Put on your dancing shoes and get on out there and enjoy yourself while you can. “Don’t ask yourselves what the world needs. Ask yourselves what makes you come alive.” [unattributed quote]

For many people, it is that electric feeling of freedom, that tingling sensation that you only find while you lose yourself in the moment, dancing wildly to your favorite band performing live. It doesn’t matter what genre of music it is or if it’s even music at all for that matter — just find it while you still can. It is never too late. Sometimes it’s good to take a long hard look at things from a fresh perspective.

Things are not always what they seem. Life doesn’t always work out the way you imagined, but the light shines through the cracks in the strangest of ways.

Stay strong and carry on.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Connecticut Supreme Court spoke loudly and clearly in its near unanimous (6-1) decision. Justice Peter Zarella, writing for the majority, went to great pains to demonstrate that the holiday weekend coup of last July was contrary to the relevant statute, contrary to the legislative history that produced that statute, contrary to the rule of law and contrary to our history as a democratic people.

Anyone reading the majority opinion or the passionate concurring opinion penned by Justice Lubbie Harper cannot help but be impressed by the legal and moral outrage that leaps from the pages.

On Feb. 28, the Supreme Court announced its decision, declaring the state board’s authorization to the Interim Commissioner of Education to “reconstitute” the Bridgeport Board of Education to be void and without effect. The only remedy ordered was a remand of the case to the lower court of Judge Agati, with “direction to set a date for a special election for the local board.”

On March 8, John Bohannon, the attorney for the city, claimed in a motion that further “clarification and guidance” regarding the Supreme Court’s order was needed.
On March 23, the Supreme Court obliged. It directed the trial court “to order a special election for the local Board of Education pursuant to General Statutes Section 9-164 (b).

The trial court shall set all applicable dates under the statute but shall schedule the special election no later than 150 days from the date of its order,” the Supreme Court declared.
Because a local board must continue to function until a new board is elected, the court suspended the effect of its order until final certification of the special election results by the town clerk.

On April 13, Agati will preside over a hearing in Waterbury Superior Court. While most of the disenfranchised voters in Bridgeport might expect him to follow the direction of the Supreme Court and set a date for the special election, we may be disappointed.

Agati has already had “in camera” or non-public, discussions with representatives of the secretary of the state. He has received the secretary’s extensive documentation regarding four proposed special election dates. However, he has now given the parties an opportunity to present evidence regarding their views on the best dates on which to hold a special election.

Count on the city of Bridgeport to use this as an opportunity for further delay.
By allowing the lawyers the opportunity to file motions by April 11, Agati is needlessly complicating a simple case in order to sustain the illusion of complexity. He is allowing the city’s legal team, steeped in the mystique of grandiosity and terminal condescension, to further obstruct the democratic process.

Despite its presence on the complex litigation docket, this case is really very simple. The Supreme Court has said that the voters of Bridgeport have a right to vote for their board of education members and the court has been asked to preserve that right.

By calling the basis of this historic decision a “technicality” Finch, Gov. Dannel Malloy, Paul Timpanelli and their cadre of backroom bullies hope to make us forget that they plotted this coup in secret and cared nothing for the people’s right to vote in a democratic society.

We must see their spin as a pathetic attempt to justify that which cannot be justified and to defend the indefensible.

They are trying to tell us, “It wasn’t all that bad,” hoping that we will forget their clandestine and antidemocratic cabal. They cower behind public relations gimmicks and have even resorted to the nauseating “but we did it for the children,” which in this instance is the last refuge for these scoundrels.

The Supreme Court said a board elected by the people cannot be reconstituted without due process and transparency. Nor can the clear commands of a statute be avoided simply because Finch can produce a 6-3 majority composed of rubber-stamp board members who agreed to “waive” requirements of law on the advice of the Bridgeport city attorney.

The Supreme Court unambiguously told our local lackeys: This issue is not about you. The issue is about the right of the people to vote, to have that vote counted, and to be governed by those chosen through the democratic process.

The Supreme Court never referred to the training mandate as a “technicality.” Instead Zarella declared: “We conclude that the legislature intended the training provision to serve the following proposes.

First, requiring training prior to authorizing reconstitution provides notice to a local board of education — and theoretically, to the electors of that local board — that the state board is considering authorizing reconstitution.

Second and related to the first, the training itself serves a substantive and remedial purpose, by providing the local board of education with an opportunity to prevent its reconstitution by successfully completing training and thereby demonstrating to the state board that it can operate effectively and that extreme measure of reconstitution is unnecessary.

Viewed this way, the training provision is premised on the importance of maintaining the continued local operations of a democratically elected board of education, as well as on providing certain due process protections. Third and most importantly, the state board does not have the authority to authorize the reconstitution until it first requires the local board to undergo and complete training in accordance with section 10-223e© (2) (M).”

Not only was the Supreme Court outraged by what was done, it was clearly incensed about the way that this coup was accomplished.

In an unequivocal condemnation of the tactics employed by the conspirators, the court said, “The training provision represents the legislature’s intent that, in the rare event that a local board of education should be reconstituted, reconstitution would occur in a methodical, deliberate and transparent manner. This provides the local electors, the local board and other citizens of the state with notice of the process and the timeframe in which reconstitution potentially could occur.”

It is only in the minds of politicians, drunk with their power and seeking to drown out the voices of the people, that their delusionary drivel has any credence. The significance of the Supreme Court decision lies not only in what was said, but to whom it was said. Six Supreme Court justices, sworn to uphold the rule of law and the Constitution of the state of Connecticut, (the Constitution State) told billionaire hedge fund mogul Steve Mandel, Teach for America, ConnCan, Excel, the Bridgeport Regional Business Council and their well-heeled conspirators, that there are certain things no amount of money can buy in a free society.

Among those commodities is the fundamental right to vote for a government that operates with the consent of the governed. The right of the people, even in a poor city like Bridgeport, to chart their own destiny and that of their children, is paramount. The Supreme Court declared that the right of self-determination cannot be bought.

Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s affirmation of self-government, Finch, his legal team and his regional business council backers are still determined to prevail.
Robert Trefy, of Fairfield, who continues to usurp the office of board president, publically congratulates himself and applauds each time the special election is delayed.

One might ask Mr. Trefy, Timpanelli and the out-of-town reformers the following question: “If a board of education appointed by the state Board of Education is superior to one elected by the voters of a municipality, why have you not sought to impose this model on the people of Fairfield, Trumbull, Easton and Westport?”

The answer to that question is obvious. These elitists will never impose on themselves that which they seek to dictate to the people of Bridgeport.

As Abraham Lincoln once famously said, “When I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally.”

On April 13, once again, expect the mayor’s legal team to attempt to delay the special election in order to keep their business council allies in power.

In an otherwise innocuous puff piece about Mayor Bill Finch’s brown bag lunches with residents, Connecticut Post reporter Tim Loh caught the mayor making an offhand and ill-conceived remark that is sure to raise the ire of almost every resident in a particular Bridgeport neighborhood.

While responding to a constituent upset because they had an overdue tax bill, Finch opined that Bridgeport residents don’t have a “bad deal” when it comes to taxes. Finch then noted how waterfront homes in Black Rock that are worth $900,000 would be $3.5 million if they had been built in Westport. His Honor then went on to say, “They (read: Black Rockers) have got to stop complaining about their taxes.” Come again?

I guess Black Rock residents should be so overjoyed with the quality of their schools and city services that they should be singing the praises of the mayor, thus not having any time whatsoever to carp about their tax bills. I guess everyone who lives in that eclectic seaside community should be thrilled that an armed robbery that occurred last week in the Garden Apartments in the heart of Black Rock was reported and drew zero police response. That’s right: No response whatsoever. And that tidbit comes from a resident who is a police officer in a nearby community.

It appears many residents feel differently than Finch believes they should. For example, imagine the nerve of this Black Rock homeowner and parent who said, “Hey, I wouldn’t complain about my taxes if I could send my kids to school here. If we had decent schools, I wouldn’t complain.” Obviously, this taxpayer is nothing if not tacky.

But don’t worry, Mr. Mayor. Those complaints will be dying down soon as the disgruntled taxpayers of Black Rock continue leaving the city in droves. Where are they going? I don’t know, but my guess is probably Westport.

- – -

Speaking of the mayor’s brown bag lunch program, I firmly believe this is an excellent idea. Former Westport First Selectman Diane Farrell used to hold them regularly and they were always popular, attracting a healthy number of Westporters to each session.

The sessions provide for a healthy and civil exchange of ideas in a relaxed environment, and often good ideas arise from these informal meetings held over a sandwich and a soda. Just because Finch shot his mouth off and then inserted his foot in said mouth does not mean the program does not have value. Nice job Mr. Finch!

- – -

I read with interest an article submitted last week by Sharon Miles, the press person for AccuWeather and I couldn’t help smiling to myself as I perused its contents.

I mean come on. 25 DAYS? Are you #%&*@!-ing kidding me? Those eight-day forecasts that television radio stations are always touting are wrong. Or in politically correct terms: always inaccurate. No, check that. Always wrong.

If you happen to listen or watch local media, and I myself certainly do, then you know all the weathermen. Oh, excuse me, I mean chief meteorologists. That’s quite an accomplishment when you have to oversee an entire staff of one. But I digress. What these people generally accomplish is scaring the bejeezus out of Bridgeporters whenever there is a hint of snow in the air. And once the weather people are finished wailing and gnashing their teeth, then all havoc breaks loose.

Everyone and their brother has to run out to their local grocery store and buy more bread and milk than they have in a year. And then when we get the ½ inch of precipitation on the ground, we are awash in sour milk and stale bread and the convenience store owners are laughing all the way to the bank.

- – -

Finally, let’s bid a fond farewell to the Bridgeport News, which will now only appear online, if at all. This is no surprise. Bridgeporters should have seen it coming when the publisher, Marty Hersam of Hersam-Acorn, removed “Bridgeport” from the heading and began calling the paper the generic title “The News.” At the same time, the Bridgeport News stopped serving the city as a whole and focused only on Black Rock and the North End.

This is a disgrace and Hersam-Acorn is the poster child for companies that are run by idiots. Maybe I’m prejudiced because I was the editor of the Bridgeport News for five years. Back then it served the entire city and not just an exclusive few. It was also a hard-hitting, full-bodied newspaper that was opinionated, informative and fun to read.

R.I.P. Bridgeport News.

Not that it’s any great surprise.

Ernie Newton is officially returning to the political scene and will challenge incumbent state Sen. Ed Gomes (D-23) for the seat Gomes has held since Newton began serving his five-year federal prison sentence. The seat was once held by Newton and the veteran Park City politician wants it back.

Newton didn’t exactly hide the fact that he was itching to return to the political fray. He has told numerous friends and observers since his release from prison in 2010 that, “I’m going to do something.” The question at that time was what was Ernie going to do?

Originally there were thoughts that Newton might run for mayor, an idea that has been bandied about before. There just was not enough time for the East Ender to put together an organization and launch an assault on incumbent Bill Finch, so the idea of running for City Hall Annex faded away.

That didn’t stop Newton, however. He quickly jumped on the Mary-Jane Foster bandwagon in her attempt to unseat Finch and soon became one of her most vocal and ardent supporters. And when Foster made her concession speech at the Bijou Theater after losing to Finch in the primary, there was Ernie, front and center, sharing the spotlight with his candidate.

Ernie Newton is a political animal. It’s what he knows. It’s what he’s done his entire life. His bid for elective office should surprise no one. Former Providence Mayor, and Fairfield University grad, Buddy Cianci, went to jail for attempted murder, got released and was once again elected mayor of Providence. Of course he went to jail again and served time in the same jail with Newton and former Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim, but that’s a story for another day.

From this vantage point, there is no reason whatsoever that Newton shouldn’t run for office. We’ve already heard from some of the holier than thou types who believe that once released from prison, former convicts should be banished to the outskirts of society, forever reminded of their past transgressions and never being able to be on equal par with those denizens of society who have never broken the law. Or, more accurately, have never been found guilty of anything. Excuse me, but that’s pure balderdash.

Ernie Newton took some payoffs. He got caught. He got arrested. He was found guilty. He went to jail. He went kicking and screaming, arguing that he was ‘the Moses of his people,” but he went anyway. He did his time and paid his debt to society. Now is his chance to be a productive member of society once again. Who are we to deny him that opportunity? Aren’t we better off with Ernie out there fighting for some good causes?

And so Ernie is back. He has opted to challenge Gomes, a controversial move in and of itself. Gomes is popular in the district, which ranges from Whiskey Hill in the North End through the East End and into Stratford, so he will be tough to beat. Gomes has been a sick man in recent months, and has undergone triple bypass surgery. The veteran legislator is well on the road to recovery and fully expected to answer the bell when this year’s legislative session opens. Still, Newton may suffer the wrath of voters who feel it is unfair to challenge a man who has been in poor health.

The race itself is going to be interesting. Both candidates have pockets of strength: Gomes in the North End and Newton in the East End. Gomes, a former steelworker, will bring tremendous union support that Newton’s flair may have difficulty overcoming. (A bit of full disclosure here: Gomes and my father, John, were both union officials, and my father tapped Gomes to replace him as civil rights director for the United Steelworkers of America’s New England District.)

In any event, Ernie Newton is back and lots of Bridgeport residents will be casting their ballots for him this year. His campaign officially kicks off on Saturday, Jan. 28, at noon in front of the now-closed post office at 1234 Stratford Ave.
He’s back and all I can say is “Welcome back, Ernie!”

Rather than get involved in the political fray, I am more of a handicapper. Actually, if I can sniff out a winner, perhaps I can get to the best party. Chris Niedermeier threw a dandy one at Fredricksburg—and lost.

As a snarky, seat-of-the-pants columnist, I usually eschew politics. Why? This would involve actual reading and research. I’d rather listen to two hours of a Dead concert without the aid of brain-numbing helpers.

But I do have a wish list for Beepo. And some of them are sincere.

I wish we had more arts in our schools. I don’t care what economic caste kids live in, they all need more than reading, writing and passing the latest Wyoming Standardized Test for Caucasian Overlearners. Just down the road in Norwalk, both of my daughters attended middle and high schools with national-caliber music, voice and theater programs. And there is more of a smattering of diversity there. So please don’t tell me that you need to go Izod High to benefit from this.

I wish Bridgeport had even a smidgen of a public relations stance. The city lacks a decent website (look at infonewhaven.com and cringe at how we pale) for visitors and neighbors. To wit: We just had the circus here. It’s their 100th anniversary. Yessir, the Ringling Brothers and BARNUM & Bailey Circus. Not the Toby Moffett Circus. THE Circus. So do we tie in with them, due to the fact that the name of our former MAYOR is on the bill? Nope. This lowly writer has a gazillion ideas to boost the Park City’s image. Sorry, I get paid for stuff like that.

I wish we had a small baseball stadium for Legion and high school games. See Palmer Field in Middletown. The Ballpark is wonderful, but it just costs too much to open for such games. An intermediate site would be great. Don’t get me going on how we lost the Eastern Regional Little League headquarters due to a smug, self-absorbed, nimby-esque cadre of North Enders.

I wish we had more concerts at the Arena. It’s fabulous to host world-class hockey and decent college hoops here, but the place is dark too many nights. I know there are musical acts out there who would make it feasible to turn the lights on. It’s great to have Charlie Dowd back in town; he has sports savvy coming out his earlobes. Someone with showbiz acumen is needed to fill in the gaps.

I wish that the Barnum Festival could return to its former glory. One way to raise funds would be to ticket cars parked near the parade route that didn’t have Bridgeport stickers on them. Say, 200 clams a pop.

Ditto Saabs at Saint’s during the fireworks. Also, combine the Champs on Parade into a huge junior-senior drum corps event. You’d have a packed Kennedy, with visitors from far and wide. They could go to the new BeepoSkinny.com and find out –oops, there isn’t one. By the by, said stadium was voted third in the nation in an Internet poll of most famous drum corps venues.

I wish we had a Bridgeport Traditional High School. Uniforms, a strict discipline code (detention, expulsion—just like when we went), and teachers who cared. No entrance test—just an essay on why a pupil wants to attend. Tuition would be paid by a parent or guardian who must come to the school four times per year, ante up a buck each time, and meet with faculty and staff. In June, if the kid has toed the line, showed good attendance and acted civilly, the funds are given back.

I don’t see why we can’t have Yuengling beer here. If were Hizzoner, I’d make a pilgrimage to Pottsville and offer them free Vibes ducats. And what about a Gathering of the Boomers? RVs only, chilled Chard on tap, a brie bar, with Chicago, Styx, REO, The Jaggerz, Tower of Power. No nitrous, no patchouli. No Helen Reddy, either.
I want Guy Fieri to set up camp here and do two weeks of shows on P. C. foodstuffs. One week, apizz’, the next, wieners.

I wish that the next suburban half-brain who says “Bridgepuertorico” should be made to wear this on a big sign around his neck and walk down Pembroke Street at eleven on a steamy Saturday night.

Above all I wish all of you to get more involved in this city of ours, no matter who wins on Tuesday. Celebrate this place; don’t trash it.

Did I say vote early and vote often?

Please send comments, brickbats, treacle and love letters to curbcon@gmail.com. See you again at the curbside.

Fearful as the drafters of our federal and state constitutions were of the abuse of power by a tyrannical ruler, and fully aware of the human tendency to control and dominate, they determined that the power of government should be divided among the branches so that no one branch could gain absolute control. They wrote a system of checks and balances into those documents.

They knew that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

The matter of the takeover of the Bridgeport school district by a State Board of Education heavily influenced by outside forces was argued Thursday before the Connecticut Supreme Court in Hartford.

The Judicial Branch is being asked to decide the legality of the actions of the state Board of Education, an agency of the executive branch. Acting through a 5-4 majority, the State Board of Education voted to dismantle, or as the politically correct would say, reconstitute, the local elected Board of Education, and replace it with a bureaucratically appointed board.

The action was taken pursuant to General Statutes Section 10-223e(h), a law recently enacted by the legislative branch. This law allows the State Board of Education to “reconstitute” a local board of education, as long as training to improve the local board’s effectiveness was provided by the state and an action plan was in place for the school district to follow and the state board to monitor. The parties agree that no training was provided, nor an action plan ever put in place.

By this move, the State Board of Education effectively nullified the right of Bridgeport electors to select our own local board of education.

Briefs have been filed by the various plaintiffs who are challenging the takeover action. Both the plaintiffs’ brief, and that filed by the Attorney General on behalf of the State Board of Education have framed the legal issues that the court must decide.

Those issues involve statutory construction and constitutional rights. The process known as statutory construction requires the court to determine the intent of the legislative branch in passing the law and to give effect to that intent when it considers the facts of the case before it.

Since the plaintiffs have also claimed that this statute violates several provisions of the state constitution, the Supreme Court will also be conducting a constitutional inquiry.

The court will hear argument and announce a decision at a later time.

The members of the unelected board of education, referred to as the Reconstituted Board, have filed a brief with the court. This board is led by Robert Trefy, an Easton resident. It will be remembered that one of the first official acts of this newly appointed board was to hire an attorney with public funds, to contest claims brought against them as individuals. The claims of the plaintiffs challenge their right to hold the offices to which they were not elected. The claims against them (quo warranto) have nothing to do with their duties, responsibilities or performance as members of the reconstituted board of education.

A few days ago, non-parties to the action received permission from the Supreme Court to file a brief as “friends of the court,” or “amicus curiae” in support of the takeover. These non-parties are the Bridgeport Regional Business Council, (BRBC), led by Trumbull’s Paul Timpanelli, Bridgeport Public Education Fund (BPEF), led by Marge Hiller, and a recently established Bridgeport education reform group, known as EXCEL. These “friends of the court” are represented by the firm of Pullman and Comley, the firm in which City of Bridgeport Bond Counsel, John Stafstrom is a partner.

Similar to other Bridgeport residents who are still trying to comprehend how it was possible for so many out-of-towners, including Meghan Lowney of Fairfield, an employee of Steve Mandell, the Greenwich hedge fund billionaire, to secretly act in concert with members of the governor’s office, the mayor’s office and the State Board of Education to, literally overnight, overthrow a democratically elected local board of education, I am eagerly waiting for the day of legal arguments to arrive. In order to be prepared to follow the arguments of the lawyers and the questions of the justices, I have taken some time to read the briefs of the parties, as well as the brief of the “friends of the court.”

The observations which follow are not necessarily made as a person who has received legal training, but rather as the daughter of a mom and dad who arrived in Bridgeport from Puerto Rico over 50 years ago in search of the American dream. In order to try and realize that dream, they worked in factories to support their two daughters and make sure that they had an education to lift them out of poverty and into a better life. While my dad worked in the factory at GE, not in the corporate headquarters, he cared about the city in which he chose to raise his family.

The legal documents filed by the reconstituted board and the “friends of the court,” in my view, are disrespectful of the working poor.

Unlike the plaintiffs and the attorney general, the brief filed by the unelected board largely eschewed legal arguments or case law analysis. Instead, the brief involves statistical compilations, spiced with polemics. The brief of the “friends of the court” echoes the sentiments of the unelected board. Indeed, the brief is in support of the unelected board.

Both briefs boil down to one simple belief: “We the distinguished corporate executives, business leaders, and suburban activists, are here to save you, because you, the residents and taxpayers of the City of Bridgeport cannot govern yourselves and are in need of saving.”

While the members of the reconstituted board may operate under the belief that their motives are pure, they have no political agenda and “only want to help,” their paternalism and condescension reverberate through the pages of their brief. They brandish their resumes for the court to appreciate, describing themselves as “present and former executives of Bridgeport area companies and an education scholar.” They may view themselves as enlightened progressives and forward thinking individuals, but the reality is quite different.

Although, the appointed board also counts as members, a Latino parent activist, who was included as an afterthought by the Interim Commissioner of Education following the Latino community’s outcry of outrage for the lack of a representative, and a member of the African-American clergy, who also happens to be the campaign treasurer of the mayor, as well as an African-American female involved with charter schools, the imbalance in the power structure of this board leaves no doubt as to who is running that show.

The picture that emerges from their brief is an elitist mind set of privilege and power which seeks to turn back the clock to the “bad old days,” which Americans should have long ago consigned to the proverbial trash heap of history.

Perhaps unconsciously they urge us to return to a time in our history when a poll tax served as a barrier to the exercise of voting rights, the voting franchise was restricted to white male property owners, and literacy tests camouflaged racism and denied access to the voting booths to African-American citizens.

Their briefs seem to envision an America where “the good people” do good for the less fortunate, but don’t permit them to share equally in the governing process.

What did our State Board of Education just do by the narrowest of margins? They drew a line synonymous with the municipal borders of the City of Bridgeport. Those outside the line, to the east in Stratford, to the north in Easton and Trumbull and to the west in Fairfield, will all vote for their members of their local boards of education on Nov. 8.

Those inside the line, two-thirds of whom are African-American or Hispanic, and many of whom constitute the working poor, will be denied that right of self-government which their suburban neighbors will freely exercise. The area inside the line, the City of Bridgeport, is a designated area for those residing safely outside of it, to play, experiment and dispense charity. Similar to a playground and a laboratory, Bridgeport has been used by outsiders for many reasons, not the least of which is to reap financial rewards for practicing kindness to others who may be a little less fortunate.

If these actions would not be tolerated in Meghan Lowney’s Fairfield, Bob Trefy’s Easton, or Paul Timpanelli’s Trumbull, then they cannot be tolerated in the City of Bridgeport.

We can only hope that the Supreme Court will function as a court of justice, not merely as a court of law, and the wrongs to which we have been subjected will be righted.

As the students and teachers of the Bridgeport school system were engaged in the usual activities of a summer vacation during the months of June, July and August 2011, the superintendent of schools, along with the Board of Education president and their six- member majority, the mayor of the city of Bridgeport, the city of Bridgeport bond counsel, the state Board of Education chairman, the interim Commissioner of Education and high level officials within Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s office were involved in some summer adventures of their own.

The planning for the summer adventure of the government officials began in January 2011.

The discussions surrounding this particular type of adventure, however, were very exclusive in that only individuals in possession of political and/or economic power and control were allowed to participate.

The rest of us, relegated as we are to the status of mere mortals (voters and taxpayers), were precluded from membership in this “power club.” We were not even allowed to know of its existence until it was a done deal and all of the political actors were in place.

This elitist mindset cannot entertain the notion that those of us on the outside of power can possibly comprehend the benevolent nature of their plans, or provide any meaningful input. They, and they alone, designed the plans, orchestrated the school system takeover and dispensed information on a strict need-to-know basis.

Those of us who vote and pay taxes in the city did not need to know, according to these elitist snobs.

The paper trail of emails between Bridgeport and Hartford are very revealing and disclose a paternalism and arrogance one usually associates with a feudal society.
Steve Mandel, a Greenwich resident, is the founder of Lone Pine Capitol in Greenwich. He is described as a hedge fund billionaire with an interest in education reform. He has used some of his wealth to start a family foundation entitled the ZOOM Foundation. He is in possession of economic power.

Meghan Lowney, a Fairfield resident, is employed as the executive director of the ZOOM Foundation. She is also the founder and principal of Ripple Effect Consulting in Fairfield. As an employee of the foundation, she is presumably charged with the responsibility of assisting ZOOM, a philanthropic organization, to accomplish its goals of education reform.

According to an email sent by Lowney to Allan B. Taylor, the chairman of the state Board of Education on Jan. 11, 2011, Mr. and Mrs. Mandel were interested in learning what they “might do to help Bridgeport get going with meaningful school change as Hartford and New Haven and many other districts had done.”

In this email, Lowney also informed Taylor, a partner in the Hartford-based mega law firm of DayPitney that “a small group of us are strategizing a Bridgeport charter revision campaign that would result in mayoral control of the schools. This is a confidential conversation of course.”

And so begins the epic tale of the overthrow of the elected Board of Education in Bridgeport by non-residents. Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, the residents of Bridgeport now have an email paper trail that unambiguously sets forth their scheming, conniving, and abject contempt for the people of this city. These emails reek of arrogance and pomposity.

The members of this cabal were united around one central belief, that the residents of a city two-thirds of whom are African-American or Hispanic, could not possibly understand or debate the future of the Bridgeport public school system. They decided to keep us ignorant, presumably, for our own good.

The idea, however, of replacing a democratically elected board with a board appointed by the mayor did not originate with this cabal. It emanated from the highest levels of our nation’s government in Washington.

So where did the idea of a mayoral controlled school board gain traction?
The U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) is the official nonpartisan organization of cities with populations larger than 30,000. According to the organizations website, there are 1,191 such cities in the country today. Each city is represented in the conference by its chief elected official, the mayor. It is a dues paying organization.

The city of Bridgeport is a member of the organization.
In March 2009, the organization held a National Forum on Education in Washington sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (a philanthropic organization in possession of economic power). The event consisted of a morning session, a key note address and an afternoon session. The forum, of course, was attended by the nation’s mayors.

The keynote address was delivered by Arne Duncan, who had just been appointed by President Obama as U.S. Secretary of Education to spearhead an agenda of educational reform to address the failure of the nation’s schools system.

The National Forum on Education was covered in the April 6, 2009, edition of the official newspaper of the U.S. Conference of Mayors entitled “The U.S. Mayor.” In the article, Duncan is quoted as proclaiming, “I fundamentally believe mayors should be in control of their school systems.”

Duncan accompanied the declaration of his philosophy on mayoral control of school boards by promising to do whatever he could to help the mayors take control of the school board.

“I’ll come to your cities,” Duncan said. “I’ll meet with your editorial board. I’ll talk with your business communities. I will be there.” (The irony is that the Bridgeport takeover has revealed how completely our public school system is dominated by the mayor and the machine).

Malloy, at the time, was the mayor of Stamford. He served as vice chairman for education of the Conference of Mayors Jobs, Education and the Work Force Standing Committee. In that capacity he moderated a session of the forum. He was quoted as telling Duncan to “Make sure you address our state legislatures the way you have addressed us because at the state Capitol building it’s just not getting through. You really need to get the message out for us.”

One of the forum’s session included Washington, D.C.’s Mayor Adrian Fenty and District School Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee. They are described in the article as boldly setting forth their strategy to take control of the district’s schools. Fenty declared that the mayors must “Get rid of the school board, just do it. They have no purpose anymore.”
Rhee said that “the mayor’s willingness to tackle key issues head on is the primary reason we’re able to see these reforms.”

Armed with the information acquired in the Forum on Education, the mayors adopted a resolution at their 77th Annual Meeting in 2009, entitled, “Mayoral Leadership and Involvement in Education.”

The seeds of reform having been sown by the Obama administration, the mayors were sent home to inform their constituents and to explore the various options designed to improve the failing education system.

Bridgeport has never had a debate concerning the merits of an elected board versus a board chosen by the mayor. Apparently, the elitist snobs, aided and abetted by state governmental officials, did not think we were smart enough to have that debate.
They, therefore, chose clandestine, closed-door plotting rather than open and robust debate in the marketplace of ideas. They chose to impose their will on the city of Bridgeport, rather than soliciting our input.

This is in the best tradition of tyranny.
The 2011 conspiracy did not result in a board chosen by the mayor; instead it resulted in one imposed on the residents of this city by Hartford bureaucrats and political schemers. Perhaps reform can take place in our city. However, as a necessary first step, our leaders must both trust and respect the people.

Democracy is a test, an examination designed to measure our ability to tolerate ideas with which we disagree. Those who orchestrated this secret cabal have failed that test.

Carmen L. Lopez is a retired Superior Court judge and a columnist for the Fairfield County Independent.

Frank Delgado, owner of Edit Group, is also quoted, “What is Mr. (state Education Commissioner George) Coleman trying to say? Is he trying to say he can’t find any qualified candidate? Is he trying to say, I don’t care about them?”

Both Garcia and Delgado applied for membership on the reconstituted board.

Several weeks ago, I wrote a letter, published in the Fairfield County Independent, stating why I would not apply for a seat on the reconstituted Board of Education.

I did not apply because I did not wish to legitimize a process which is, at its core, illegitimate.

Therefore, what follows, are not the musings of one who is saying, “The grapes are sour anyway.”

The people of Bridgeport have had their right to vote for the Bridgeport Board of Education ripped from them in a “Holiday Weekend Coup.”

Our elected Board of Education has now been replaced by an appointed oligarchy. A minority of this reconstituted board are residents of Bridgeport. By all accounts, none have children in the public school system. No one in Bridgeport has ever voted for any of these individuals in a municipal election.

Rather than providing a Board of Education that looks like and reflects the diversity of Connecticut’s largest city, we have a board that mirrors the board of directors of the Bridgeport Regional Business Council.

Several members of the Latino community have been vocal about the need for the presence of a Latino on the reconstituted board. As the quotes above indicate, they feel insulted and outraged that the Latino community is an afterthought. I am personally acquainted with most of these voices of outrage and know them to be long standing supporters of the principle of inclusion of Latinos on boards, commissions and elected positions. They have labored long and hard to promote the notion of Latino representation.

More than a few of this outraged chorus applied for a seat on the reconstituted board. They claim to require diversity, but, I respectfully submit to them that, they have confused that very worthwhile objective with mere representation. They are willing to settle for the latter.

Representation is easily achieved. I am certain that General Electric has at least one Latino it can loan to this board in order to give it a bilingual flavor.

However, true diversity is another matter.

I am saddened by the fact that the outrage of those who question the makeup of this new board is highly selective.

While they howl for representation, they are OK with an appointed board whose chairman is from the bucolic town of Easton and one of whose members is a resident of New York. They are OK with the fact that this board has only three residents of Bridgeport, one of whom has lived here for less than six months.

They are apparently OK with the fact that another resident board member is the campaign treasurer for a candidate for mayor and operates a non-profit organization that receives money from the Bridgeport Board of Education.

They are apparently OK with being ruled by Bridgeport Hospital, Sacred Heart University, Sikorsky Aircraft, People’s Bank and presumably, General Electric.

They evidently have no problem with an elitist corporate mindset which masks a thinly disguised paternalism, which is directed to every citizen and taxpayer in this city.

They also seem to have no outrage or shock over the fact that the Jan. 11 email exchange between Megan Lowney, a Fairfield consultant and employee of the Greenwich billionaire, Steve Mandel, and Allan Taylor, the chairman of the state Board of Education, clearly establishes that the Gold Coast of Connecticut was engaged in seriously “strategizing a Bridgeport charter revision campaign that would result in mayoral control of the schools in a confidential conversation.” In other words, none of the residents or taxpayers was deemed capable of comprehending the merits of this scheme.

They are evidently not insulted by this patronizing and condescending attitude. Only the absence of a Latino surname spurs them to action. While their outrage might be sincere, it is misguided.

If the merchants of outrage wish to blame anyone for the absence of Latinos on the new Bridgeport Board of Education, they need only look to the now defunct elected Board of Education and its two Latina members. Both of them voted to abolish the elected board.

Because the vote was 6-3, the resolution could not have passed without the vote of the board’s two Latina members. Why does this not produce outrage?

Some have said that the Bridgeport school system is in such desperate need of assistance that they are willing to do anything to help, including relinquishing their right to vote. This philosophy misses the point entirely, because according to Mr. Coleman, the reconstituted board will not receive any additional state money or resources.

In fact, it is quite possible that the first act of this oligarchy will be to conduct a “get acquainted retreat.” presumably paid for by Bridgeport taxpayers.

What is desperately needed is a diversity of thought in this machine dominated city. Placing a compliant Latino on this reconstituted board will do nothing to alter the reality of the elitist takeover of our city. Whether or not the next appointment has the demographic attribute of being a Latino is not as significant to the principle of diversity as whether or not that person brings a diversity of skills, ideas, experience and perspective, along with a fair amount of moral courage to resist the subtle, and not-so subtle attempts to seduce an outsider with the promise of insider status.

The pursuit of political power relentlessly seduces the pursuer without mercy. This is because the person in pursuit of political power generally neglects to take a serious and thoughtful look into all of the reasons he or she is seeking political power. Additionally, he or she has entered into the pursuit firmly entrenched in the illusion that it is an act taken exclusively in furtherance of the community interest rather than an act of self-interest.

While a desire to improve the “public square” may provide the impetus to becoming Theodore Roosevelt’s “Man in the Arena,” the perks connected with political power provide overwhelming temptation. Few can resist the seduction.

Indeed, most refuse to acknowledge that the privileges bestowed on political leaders are even a part of their thought process. The possibility that one’s motivation to enter the arena may be informed by self-interest is buried so deeply in the unconscious, that the mere mention of the thought is immediately resisted and vigorously challenged.
The seeker of political power will argue to anyone and everyone who will listen, that it is common knowledge that entering into the world of politics is tantamount to a personal sacrifice of all that the average individual holds dear and sacred. This includes one’s life, privacy and family.

The result is rationalization.
How can anyone suggest that the seeker of political power is in search of anything other than improving the conditions of the community, they ask? Clearly, only someone in search of the “greater good” would undertake such an arduous quest filled with so much risk and so little self-interest, they explain. To paraphrase Shakespeare, “Me thinks he doth protest too much.”

Regrettably, recent history does not support such an argument. In fact, if by some stretch of the imagination, the person making such a statement has convinced himself of what he is saying, he only fools himself. Furthermore, that person’s ignorance of human nature may be so extensive that it may very well disqualify him from any meaningful and credible attempt to lead a community as an elected official.

The remedy for this situation may be as simple as spending a little time in the world of the inner self. Perhaps the inquiry into the uncovered and hidden crevices of the self will shed light on an aspect of the person, which is seldom explored, and is therefore unknown. As the Greek philosopher Socrates said, “An unexamined life is not worth living.” It can also be more than a little dangerous.

Just ask any of our recently disgraced politicians whose portraits have been removed from the Hall of the Powerful and Spectacular to the Hall of the Irrelevant and the Insignificant. (Notwithstanding the post disgrace success of John Rowland and Elliot Spitzer).

Temptations
People in pursuit of political power are perpetually in the presence of temptations to greatness, and opportunities for self-aggrandizement. Without a clear understanding of their own weaknesses, limits and flaws, they provide multiple opportunities for those in a community who, through life experience, specialized training, or just plain old cunning, have become experts in seducing less experienced folks on the edges of power. Indeed, in many cases, a lack of self-knowledge can make the seduction as easy for the seducer as “taking candy from a baby.”

There is no shortage of examples of possessors of political power who have entered into, and remained, in the playground of personal privilege while simultaneously expressing overwhelming concern for the well-being of the community. Perilously, or perhaps tragically, there have been too many who have been willing participants in the seduction.

Corrupticut
It has been such a common occurrence in our state that many in the media and in the community make references to Corrupticut, rather than Connecticut when speaking of the Nutmeg State.

This erosion of public trust and confidence in our political and appointed leaders places a greater burden on those who aspire to leadership. Repeated exposure to the abuse of power by political leaders has created such a high level of suspicion within our state and municipal community that paralysis and inaction have often resulted.

A sense of hopelessness has begun to take root and has had a profound effect on the powerful as well as the powerless. We all suffer from this corrosive atmosphere.
The residents of Bridgeport are on the threshold of a critical mayoral election this coming November. However, as in most urban centers in America these days, the election is usually decided in a September Democratic primary. The Republicans of Bridgeport have, without a doubt, completely abdicated any sense of responsibility to their mission of fielding candidates for political office.

In search of a reason for existing, and lacking any backbone whatsoever, this shadow of a political party has failed to identify anyone to oppose the incumbent mayor. It has however, been heavily engaged in asking its members to switch to the Democratic Party in order to vote for one of the Democratic candidates. The remnants of the Republican Party have apparently found this candidate to be particularly appealing.

Machine in control
As I have stated in this column before, Bridgeport is a machine city manipulated by a cadre of district bosses who decide the fate of those pursuing political power through the use of a well-oiled machine. It is no secret that this machine is busy doing what it does best: distributing and withholding rewards and prizes. The machine cynically manipulates the process through the ancient axiom, “reward your friends and punish your enemies.”
Should sound public policy result, it is purely by accident.

Due to the presence of an intense and profound culture of abuse of power in this city, it is critical for those who are new to the political arena to pause and take inventory. These newcomers must ask the twin questions, “Why do I aspire to public office and why do I long for political power?” The answer to these questions determines whether the candidates’ desire is truly for an opportunity to exercise authentic and caring leadership, or simply a desire to position him or her in order to enjoy the advantages and privileges of political power.

The questions of the heart must also be asked and answered. How will the acquisition of political power give life meaning? Will the values of Respect, Truth, Compassion and Justice inform decisions or will making a deal to keep power undisturbed be the guiding principle? Is seeking power an end in itself, or a means of contributing to the progress of our community?

Answers to questions such as these require time for introspection and prayer, as well as an earnest search for guidance from God, from whom all power flows. An examination into these areas of one’s life can undoubtedly provide some level of protection from the diabolical temptations of worldly power and fame. To ignore such an important and vital self-examination is to do so at one’s own peril.
And, since this is Bridgeport, an extra prayer or two is always necessary!

Carmen L. Lopez, a retired state judge, is a columnist for the Fairfield County Independent.