Uncategorized

Mayor Segarra Files Papers to Run in 2011

Hartford Mayor Pedro Segarra has filed the papers to run for mayor in 2011.   Segarra made the announcement during an exclusive interview on “Face the State” this morning.    

When Segarra took over the scandal plagued city following Eddie Perez’s corruption conviction and subsequent resignation, he said he had no plans to run next year because the city was in such bad shape, and he didn’t want to take away from the work at hand.    Segarra told me he changed his mind because he wanted to  send the message to investors and CEOs that if the voters will have him, he’ll continue to be the man at the helm.

Segarra’s bold approach to running the city has led to several accomplishments in a short amount of time.   The anti-business attitude of the Perez administration led to the loss of companies, jobs, and put the city in the state of inertia.    Segarra told me one of his top priorities has been economic development, which will create jobs.

There are two other declared candidates in the 2011 race for mayor:   Attorney Shawn Wooden, a Democrat,  and J. Stan McCauley, who ran as a Republican in 2007, but is now running as a Democrat.

In case you missed the interview we will have the story tonight on Eyewitness News, and the interview will be on wfsb.com tomorrow

Categories: Uncategorized

5 replies »

  1. Dennis: I want positive Hartford spin too, but do tell what is “bold” about Pedro’s approach to governing, and how that is responsible for the accomplishments you allude to.

    Webster’s Dictionary: “bold: fearless before danger, adventurous, standing out.”

    I hear things are pretty much “business as usual” at City Hall. While a sound position, asking for union concessions is expected with a soaring deficit, so not too bold to do so, and is merely following Eddie’s lead.

    What has Pedro done to accomplish something, which could seriously endanger his political prospects and stands out from his predecessors? (like pissing someone off to get something worthwhile done.)

    How about: Instigate immediate balanced budget spending throughout remainder of city fiscal year; Demand homeowner tax relief on the backs of business; Demand reversal of small business tax phase-in; propose serious reductions to pension and insurance contributions for city workers/retirees; Demand moratorium on fee waivers by City council until budget is balanced; Grant full tax breaks to businesses to get them to move to the city; immediately cut spending to non-profits by 25%; propose a commuter tax on city employees who live outside Hartford; propose a social service tax on city employees from the suburbs; Demand immediate cuts to city and school board management personnel by 25%; stand on the capitol steps and demand the new governor fully fund PILOT.

    Bold leadership should be upsetting the status quo for the better good, and getting results.

    Like

  2. @ Hartfordite Too:

    1) He’s only been in office 4 months and has yet to propose a budget of his own making — the one he is presumably working on now will require him to cut at least $10 million. A budget is the traditional vehicle for bold and radical policy proposals, so it’s unfair to draw conclusions until we see what he submits.

    2) His focus on the arts is something new and the “arts pipeline” that ties schools, universities & colleges, and the many historical jewels downtown is in the works.

    3) Too many of your proposals are untenable, would limit the pool of talent available to the city, and some are downright contradictory.

    For example, how can you force businesses to bear a greater financial strain — when the balance is already overwhelming against them — and then attempt to entice relocations with full (short term) tax breaks?

    Moreover, in tenuous economic times, far more people depend on the services that non-profits provide (often at less expensive rates, as our Republican brethren would tell us), are you insinuating that the Mayor should simply ignore that fact and leave thousands exposed?

    4) Calling for fully-funding PILOT is truly a silly notion. It’s impossible due to the geographic allegiances in the legislature (in that it is overwhelming tilted to the suburbs) and would add another billion or more annually to our state budget.

    Like

  3. Yo Bull Moose:

    As to your #1: Read the Blog post. I’m not the one drawing the conclusion that Pedro was being bold, it was Dennis and I was challenging that. Nobody was mentioning a way to be bold in the future (the upcoming budget)…I was wondering how Dennis could say there was ALREADY a boldness to Pedro’s leadership.

    As to #2: The politically correct idea to solve our fiscal problems “through the arts” is not new. Eddie blew the budget a big hole with this idea to buy off Councilman Cotto a few years back, and where is all the stimulus? Spending money we don’t have is not bold, just irresponsible.

    As to #3: Beginning with untenable IS the only way to accomplish something bold. It seems you really didn’t understand what I was saying. By definition, it must pretty much be untenable or the solution can’t be bold. Get it? And I didn’t proffer the list as being all the ideas to accomplish, but to pick and choose those with the most likelihood of political and budgetary success. I guess the main point you missed of the list is this: It was merely a list of ideas to get politicians thinking out of the box, be creative, start conversations to lead to solutions. That’s why I started the list with “How about:”.

    I have been on more non-profit boards than I care to admit, and each of those fiefdoms could easily do more for their clients, even with a little belt tightening and less concern for the executive director’s salary and benefits, etc. My comment was not meant to deprive needed services to people – see my idea about a social services tax on suburbanites???

    As to #4: Until regionalism takes hold in this state and people from Avon and Glastonbury realize Hartford’s homeless are only here because they can’t find a bed in Yuppieville, the point needs to be continually addressed. Having the overwhelming majority of shelters in the area end up in Hartford requires that the “area”, and not just Hartford, all share in the financial burden of sustaining them.

    The state owns non-taxable real property in Hartford and at the same time tells us our main vehicle to raise funds for services is the property tax. See the dichotomy? Pedro needs to let the state know this is patently unfair and an absurd burden, regardless of whether suburban state reps want to keep their head in the sand about truly regional problems and costs. Silly? Not if you’re a Hartford taxpayer.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s