Rifkinson will run, seeks signatures > Ridgefield Press July 20,2011

Rifkinson will run, seeks signatures

Written by Macklin Reid, Press Staff
Wednesday, 20 July 2011 05:36

Jan Rifkinson

Jan Rifkinson is in. He’s decided to run for a seat on the Board of Selectmen.

“I have indeed decided to make this run as an unaffiliated candidate,” said Mr. Rifkinson, a frequent critic of town government who has been seeking feedback for a couple of weeks on the idea of running for a board seat — and announced his interest in the idea in last week’s Press.

“I’m filing my papers today,” he said Tuesday. “That’s without any guarantees from anybody for anything. I have no assurance of any kind from any of the parties that they will endorse me, or cross endorse me, or side endorse me...

“I’m just going out on my own,” he said. “It’s just me.” 

Because he plans to run unaffiliated, Mr. Rifkinson has some work to do to get on the ballot.

“First thing is you get an application for a nominating petition — not part of a party — and then I get this filled out, with the help of the town clerk,” he said. “And then it gets sent off to Hartford, to the elections office.”

The state elections office then computes the number of valid signatures of registered Ridgefield voters — of any party affiliation — he’ll need to sign a petition in support of his being placed on the ballot.

“They send me a letter of acknowledgment that they’ve received my petition, and then they tell me how many names I’ll need on a petition to become a candidate.”

The number of valid signatures needed is one percent of the number of votes cast for the office of selectmen in the previous general election.

In the winter, when Maureen Kozlark petitioned to get on the special election ballot as an unaffiliated candidate after losing the Republican caucus to Marty Heiser, she needed 59 signatures — 1% of the 5,844 votes cast for selectmen in the 2007 election.

Whatever the number, Mr. Rifkinson was optimistic — 1% is [sic] a low threshold.

“It couldn’t be more than 150, because there’s only 15,000 registered voters in town,” he said.

“The entire process has to completed by Aug. 10. It all has to be in to and confirmed by the Town Clerk by Aug. 10. So, I don’t have a whole lot of time.

“I have to have an official form, and then I guess I’ll go stand somewhere and, hopefully, people will sign it,” he said.

People don’t have to plan on voting for him to sign the petition to get him on the ballot.

“I hope people will sign it just on general principle, whether they’ll support me or not. It’s an exercise in democracy,” he said.

Mr. Rifkinson said, “I continue to get comments both privately and publicly that I should run. And it seems to be from a wide swath of the community,” he said.

He has no qualms about doing it the hard way.

“I suppose the conventional thinking is that if I were to run from a party platform I would stand a better chance, and that’s probably true. But I’m just not comfortable doing it,” he said.

“I don’t want anybody calling me or saying to me ‘Don’t support that’ or ‘Do support that’ or ‘If you don’t support that, I’m not going to support you.

“People have written to me,” he added. “They say they’re tired of politics as usual.”

He may not have a party, but he does plan to make his voice heard.

“Oh, yeah, I’m going to run a campaign,” he said. “Certainly I have to sit down with people who know what they’re doing along those lines, because I’ve never been through one of these before.

“I guess, try to find a campaign manager, try to raise some cash, get my face out there, talk to people so they get to know me — and keep my fingers crossed.”

While he’s not going to run on any party’s platform, he said, he wouldn’t mind if the Independent Party, or even one of the major parties, decided to support him.

“Anybody can endorse me, that’s up to them. I’d accept anybody’s endorsement,” he said.

“All three of them can endorse me, as far as I’m concerned.

Mr. Rifkinson said he wasn’t ready to detail the topics he’d be campaigning on, but he had sense of what he wanted to talk about.

“I have a lot of thoughts about that,” he said. “I suppose open government, more transparency, more, more public meetings, more cooperation between the boards...

“I’m hoping people can come around to dealing with issues from a common sense and common good point of view, instead of a political point of view,” he said.

“It should be interesting."

Rifkinson May Run > Ridgefield Press July 16, 2011

Rifkinson may run

Written by Macklin Reid
Saturday, 16 July 2011 12:00

Jan Rifkinson

Time to stop throwing tomatoes and take a turn in the stocks?

Outspoken town government critic Jan Rifkinson is considering a run this fall as an unaffiliated candidate for a seat on the Board of Selectmen.

“I’m still sort of betwixt and between, but I’m really seriously thinking about it,” Mr. Rifkinson said in an interview Tuesday.  “I’m considering running unaffiliated, just plain unaffiliated,” he said.

Mr. Rifkinson, a retired television news producer, said he wasn’t interested in running as a candidate of either the Republican Party or the Democratic Party.

He was skeptical but hadn’t closed the door on a nomination by Ridgefield’s Independent Party.

In writings on his blog Mr. Rifkinson traces his unease with party affiliations to his career in the news business, where reporters, editors and producers were eager to guard their independence of thought.

Mr. Rifkinson attends most selectmen’s and some meetings of other town agencies. He speaks out for taxpayers, and is skeptical of school spending. Two years ago he rose repeatedly to speak at the annual town meeting, on a mission to make First Selectman Rudy Marconi explain the use of and need for every pick-up and dump truck in the budget.

In his blog and on various online venues he contributes to, such as The Ridgefield Forum on The Press’s Web site, Mr. Rifkinson has been asking people what they think of him seeking office.

“I’ve just been talking to people, just individually,” he said, “...to get a sense of what they think, not so much to get a sense of my running as an unaffiliated, but my running at all, in terms of my usefulness.”

It’s something he wonders about.

“The question I’m trying to evolve for myself is whether I can do more good as part of a loyal opposition, or whether or not I can be of any use were I elected to the board,” he said.

In December, when the selectmen were appointing someone to the vacancy left by Joan Plock’s resignation from the board, Mr. Rifkinson joined Republicans Marty Heiser and Maureen Kozlark in interviewing for the seat.

“I thought I was treated pretty shabbily, not because they didn’t select me, just the way they went about business,” he said.

Mr. Rifkinson sat out the subsequent Heiser-Kozlark special election.

Many people who’ve read his blogs and periodic opinion pieces in The Press have suggested he run, Mr. Rifkinson said.

He believes the public has an appetite for candidates outside the two-party politics-as-usual mainstream, and says an unaffiliated candidacy shouldn’t be dismissed as a hopeless long shot.

“I’m just not interested in wasting my time,” he said. “If I run it’s not an exercise in freedom of speech, or to make a point, it’s to win.”

Why is Jan Rifkinson thinking of running as an un-affiliated candidate for Selectman rather than as a R,D or I?

The simple answer is because I want to get away from the kind of dialog that is taking place on the Ridgefield Forum.  It's the kind of political discourse that I believe obfuscates, dilutes, detracts & confuses the issues before Ridgefield.

What we need in this town are some new ideas -- from anyone -- regardless of party affiliation. It's like adding a new ingredient to a recipe; it can change the taste but not the dish.

I think party affiliation has come to mean monolithic thinking, i.e. a Republican is conservative, a Democrat is liberal, an Independent is.... ??? When one is un-affiliated, there are no expectations except, hopefully, common sense.

I don't think political parties are intrinsically a bad thing. I'm just not comfortable with the current political climate as represented by these organizations. I also think they are useful for individuals who are interested in political advancement. I'm not interested in that. In fact, if I run for Selectman, and if I won a seat, I doubt I would run for a second term. I think new blood is good.

Also in the equation is my life experience. Most of my adult working life was spent within news organizations. In those days, publicizing political affiliations was absolutely verboten. Many of us never belonged to political parties; some even stopped voting so we couldn't be identified with one side or another.

Did you know what political party Walter Cronkite, Peter Jennings, Mike Wallace or others belonged to when they were broadcasting? I doubt it. Well, I grew up in that world so it is more natural for me to belong to no political party than to belong to one.

And finally, about splitting the vote, you have to understand that the only consequence of my possible run as an un-affiliated candidate that I considered was, not how it might affect an existing political party's chance of winning a seat, but how I would feel about myself & my ability to represent everyone to the best of my ability. 

For my Ridgefield Friends & Neighbors

I'm thinking about running for a Selectman seat in the upcoming Ridgefield election as an un-affiliated candidate, i.e. not aligned with any political party. What do you think? I need candid reaction(s) -- from you & your circle of friends. Do you think it would be good for Ridgefield.... or not?  

You can comment here or on Facebook or privately. 

I sincerely thank you for your input, be it positive or negative.

-- 

Jan Rifkinson

169 New Rd. 

PO Box 1197

Ridgefield, CT 06877

HTel: 203-431-1691 

Email: janrif@gmail.com

Blog: http://www.myridgefield.blogspot.com

The jackpot is now $88,169,669. Soon it will be worth more > Ridgefield Press editorial

Monday, 20 June 2011

Ridgefield Press Headline: Should Finance board sit in on [town] union talks?

I say “sure”, why not? A member of the Board of Finance is already able to do that for BoE teacher negotiations.

To date, the rationale for this minor organizational change on the town side has been buried in mis-information and a sea of red herrings.

The Board of Finance has NOT suggested that it wants to negotiate labor contracts alongside the BoS. They just want a place at the planning table.

In fact, the BoF has NO place negotiating along side the BoS, any more than it does with the BoE.

While I subscribe to more inter-board dialogue, public tri-board meetings, that’s where it ends. Each board has a function. Checks and balances should be preserved.

Consider the following: The BoF is the only board tasked with tracking the town’s overall finances so let’s look at their utility in that context.

1.    The Board of Finance can break out the total town-wide costs of the entire labor pie, including salaries, insurance, medical, pensions.

2.    The BoF should be allowed to present such data that would support a notion that if there is to be less pressure on tax payers going forward, only an x% labor increase should be contemplated for that pie -- short term plus long term, i.e. salaries plus pensions & benefits.

3.    The BoF should be encouraged to offer (if they have anything to offer) their perspective on possibly more nuanced approaches to achieve those goals.

And that’s where the Board of Finance involvement should end in my opinion.

From then, the BoS & BoE should act independently. Periodically, in executive session, the boards can (and probably should) discuss their progress with the BoF.

There are differences in how labor negotiations are currently conducted in Ridgefield.

The BoE has PROPERLY included several members of their board on the negotiating team along with a labor relations attorney, the superintendent of schools as well as a representative of the BoF (currently David Ulmer).

On the flip side, the current first selectman likes to negotiate the town contracts ALL BY HIMSELF. (The Human Resources Director is present but that person reports directly to the first selectman.)

In my opinion, this process smacks of politics and conflict of interest as the negotiation is between politician and constituents.

The first selectman currently makes progress reports or presents completed contracts to members of his board (the BoS) for their ratification. Yet none of those members attend any of the negotiation sessions nor have they been encouraged to join the process.

Yet, quoting selectman Manners, this process has “worked very well.” I wonder on what she bases this comment. As compared to what — wishful thinking, political allegiance, convenience? There are certainly no facts or statistics that I know of to support this statement but it must have felt comforting to state that for the record.

The first selectman, like any good politician who wants to assure an outcome, presents a report from his vantage point and since NO ONE ELSE from his board attends any negotiation sessions, who’s to disagree — or even has grounds — for serious discussion about his approach to the negotiation or with the first selectman’ assessment of its outcome. Moreover, there is no real ability to discuss the long term implications of these contracts on future tax rates & by then, it’s too late anyway.

In the Ridgefield Press of June 2, 2011, Mr. Marconi is reported to have stated “[...] that with 12 years of contract negotiations experience, he understands the budget implications of contract decision without advice from the Board of Finance.”

If accurately stated in the press, I take the following from that statement: Mr. Marconi has nothing to learn. He has done it right for 12 years and sees no room for possible improvement.

An open discussion with the only board that is ultimately responsible for the town’s financial health only intrudes on his ‘territory.’ It seems he may be resistant to change for some reason other than than for the public good.

This is a very foolish position to take in my opinion. A good idea — no matter where it comes from — should be welcomed and embraced, not mired in territoriality and rejected as out of hand.

If we are to compare our town’s first selectman to a CEO (vs a political leader), then asking all management parties to the table in order to get the town’s financial ducks in a row before starting a negotiating season should be a no-brainer.

Considering that labor costs represent at least 71% of Ridgefield’s entire $124 million dollar budget, I firmly believe exploring this kind of reorganization to include the Board of Finance in labor negotiations is a vital step in making Ridgefield’s financial future more conducive to growth.