Yale has no place on the Board of Aldermen

The Community Builders, a 35-year old non-profit affordable housing development corporation, has benefitted greatly from public service-minded Yale students. All of these students have had a sophisticated knowledge of local affairs and thought critically about public policy.

Although my experience with students has been limited and self-selective, the ones I know had little regard for the Board of Aldermen. This is borne not out of disrespect but out of practicality. In a system that rewards seniority, Ward 1 representation never matures because students, after a term or two, leave to go to law school. Many of the students I have spoken to thought being an aldermen was purely a resumé-builder. Do students really have an interest in the mundane matters of municipal affairs such as street sweeping, signage, zoning and sidewalk repair? Becky Silber, SM '01, ["Yale activist reflects on getting out the vote," YH 10/6/00] argues correctly that Yale students are stakeholders in local affairs. But does Yale need a seat on the Board of Alderman?

Good, progressive public policy must begin with quality public services such as reliable garbage pick-up and street sweeping. High-profile legislative issues (which Yale students frequently champion) such as the Living Wage Ordinance have symbolic purpose, but these initiatives often have limited effectiveness. The Mayor of Washington, D.C., Anthony Williams, SM '79, a former member of the New Haven Board of Alderman, has made sensible, responsive government and the efficient delivery of public services the litmus test of his administration. Further, Yale provides its own police and fire protection, and the vast majority of undergraduates have no children attending New Haven public schools. So why does Yale have its own seat? If students think they need direct influence in New Haven affairs in order to see the value of citizen participation, they should be prepared for a rude awakening when they return home.

The important question for all citizens of New Haven—be it student or full-time resident—is the size of the Board of the Aldermen. Having a 30-member Board of Aldermen in a city of 120,000 diminishes everyone's voice in the community. A large, unwieldy body readily defers to executive authority—especially when the executive controls the distribution of municipal perks. Like most legislative bodies, authority accrues to those with seniority and longevity. In a one-party town with a 90 percent reelection rate, the seniority does not always foster legislative leadership which, in turn, makes coalition-building difficult. Thirty wards yield 30 Ward Committees and a complex, often empty process. Often, the sparring on the Board of Aldermen is an end in itself. The ratio of legislator to voter is so small that elections are decided, in many wards, by a handful of votes. In the end, it's impossible to know whether voter apathy is due to the diminution of voice or the lack of choice. If good public policy comes from meaningful debate between the legislative and the executive branches, then having a large, unwieldy legislative body for a small community has the opposite effect of limiting democracy in municipal affairs.

I am in no way detracting from the public-spiritedness of many members of the Board. It would be far easier to remain at home than attend committee meetings, caucuses, and subcommittee meetings three or four nights a week. However, their job might be more satisfying and rewarding if the Board were smaller and their individual voices were amplified. Members of the Board would have to represent, for example, not only Yale, but also the Dwight Neighborhood and Edgewood Avenue. Instead, we have members that zealously represent small domains that are too often homogeneous. Each member would have to embrace a more expansive view of the common good. Fewer Board members would give us a more strengthened legislative body and better, more thoughtful legislative output.

Michael Skrebutenas is a Project Manger at The Community Builders.

Back to Opinion...