There has been a strong bump up in political conversations throughout the city lately. The Village of Camden just recently hosted two public forums for the mayoral candidates hoping to succeed Dana Redd and the council candidates hoping to unseat some of the incumbent Democrats in city hall. There are few pieces that Steven and I have both posted recently around these forums so feel free to check them out and comment your thoughts around that! Still, I digress because I want to focus on a larger issue at play here as the city enters another election cycle that could determine a lot of big ticket items on the community’s “Things to Address” list.
Congressman Donald Norcross just recently held a public forum here in Camden at the Kroc Center to, as most town halls are conducted, update his constituents on the things taking place in Washington and to get a better sense of what those constituents needed from him as one of their three federal representatives. What occurred was probably a little both expected and unexpected as members of Camden Communities United (a local community activist group currently leading the fight behind saving Camden High) protested the Congressman and his connection to the Urban Hope Act which has damaged the sustainability of traditional public schools in the city. Again, kind of digressing but I like to build suspense.
What I really want to focus on rests firmly on the idea of developing people. One of my coworkers has close connections to Mayor Redd and mentioned to me that one of her family members went to the Kroc Center for another purpose but wanted to pop into the public forum and the doors were locked before the event started. I’m honestly sad to say that this isn’t the first time that I’ve heard of this happening in state politics but there are so many lenses to analyze this even just metaphorically that we could be here all day. Nonetheless, from the information I was able to capture from my coworker and Steve’s post about the forum, I could tell that what seemed to advertised as a democratic opportunity – both for Norcross and his constituents – turned into nothing more than another checkbox from the Congressman with little ideas about resolutions to the problems the city was bringing to his attention. And this is important to notice in the way that current democratic politics takes place, not just in places like Camden, but all over the state.
I wrote a piece a while ago about entrenched Democrats in the midst of President Trump’s healthcare bill push falling apart – following another article Steve wrote about parochialism in the Democratic party – and this was also touched on in the piece about the Congressman’s forum. What can easily be distinguished from all of this writing is that 1) there is much left to be desired within the Democratic party and 2) the consideration altogether of whether incumbents can live up to the expectations placed on them by an increasingly progressive demographic. What lies at the root of these current components to the overall status of the local Democratic party can be seen through a general sense of lacking basic democratic principles – these have been especially propagated here in Camden.
Basic democratic principles are those seen in the simplest forms though they are usually the ones hardest to fight for and protect. Local participation of residents in decision making that could affect their everyday lives or adequate and diverse representation of the community in more formal administrative positions (public office, appointed committee members, etc.) are a few sincere instances of where the principles live and play out effectively. In my theory of community development course, I learned about a concept called the “public participation ladder” which essentially outlines the spectrum of power a government can give to those it represents. The ladder crescendos towards something called “citizen control” which basically means that those who live in communities in which decisions would affect are the ones who must ultimately make those decisions; these citizens would be the ones to both have the greatest understanding of how to assess consequences (in order to minimize them) and who would also benefit the most because they live in that community.
I think that this is really indicative of a both what the current administration and what the neighborhoods ultimately want to see throughout their city. Unfortunately, that’s not what we’re seeing in instances of a state takeover that strips the local community of the right to free and fair elections of their own school board; a board that would represent the parents who live and send their children to school in Camden, and who need to be assured that they have the power this ladder dictates it offer them to address the concerns of the quality of their children’s education. Now going from the “manipulation” rung that Camden currently sits at (as the state holds all the cards of the city’s public education system) directly to complete “citizen control” in my opinion is probably not the best way to go automatically, and this is for a few reasons.
Giving anyone (an individual, a city government, or a community) too much power all at once provides the opportunity for mismanagement and corruption to flourish almost unimpeded – absolute power corrupts absolutely. I also don’t believe that the city needs to move from one rung to another as some strong foundations have already been laid by the communities in order to take back control of their school board and their city overall. Everyday citizens are becoming engaged in the local democratic process as evidenced by the Village of Camden candidate forums and so there is a sense that the community is informed about the basic channels and avenues available for them to effect change. Additionally, many of these community members and everyday citizens are very well connected to the local government in one form or another – most of those forms exist through community activist or development center roles, but these are still promising starts to authentic relationships. In my opinion, I would say that while the city as a whole is ready to and could easy shift up to the “partnership” rung of the public participations ladder, to be more safe than sorry I would move that down a peg and start looking at how the community can firmly grasp the “placation” rung. Placation essentially means that those in power can efficiently and effectively soothe and appease the community’s woes. Easy examples of how to allow a city to move up to Placation would be to address the poor social conditions that deem Camden neighborhoods as marginalized.
There are three components to effective marginalization: 1) Addressing peripheral issues such as increasing trash pick-up without looking into the health concerns of establishing a waste removal facility in the middle of that community; 2) Picking easy targets such as privatizing the water system of the city without establishing sound regulatory or complaint procedures when the quality of the water isn’t adequate*; and the third component is where the heart of marginalization lies: lack of critical reflection. It is because of this component that marginalization can be summed up into one word: Why? Holding a public forum once every so often and locking the doors before the event starts creates a lack of politicization in the city, and therefore potential voters become apathetic to the democratic process altogether. Designating three minutes for a community member to voice concerns at a city council meeting decreases the opportunities for both community and government to evaluate the quality of life of neighborhoods.
When the communities of the city begin to question and analyze why exactly conditions are so poor in their area – and when better off parts of the city also do the same – a consensus of reflection is built. With reflection comes a stronger urge to become and informed, and with enough correct information, a community and a city together increase citizen control and provide power to its people. That’s what Camden Rising should really mean: lifting up people, not buildings.
Jared Hunter is a current student at Rutgers-Camden pursuing his Masters in Public Administration in the community development track. His research focus includes disparities between marginalized communities and local governments as well as community development centers and anchor institutions.
*It should be noted that privatizing the water system for an entire city is not usually an easy task, but the political connections between the city and state expedited this process somewhat.
Share it!
