The Undemocratic City Committee
Plus, Redemption Rock (RIP) and housing housing housing
What’s up, Suckers! I’m writing this little intro at 10 p.m. Thursday night. I’m drinking a hot chocolate with espresso in it because I’m a Little Latte Boy lately. We have a bougie machine with the milk steamer and everything. As I’m frothing my milk and grinding my beans I think of myself a member of Paul Attreides’ Fedaykin, asked to prepare a coffee service for some convening of a war council.
What a day. All day—all week, really—I’ve been at work on a freelance piece for a larger outlet that I’m very stoked on. Almost done! Hence the late hour of my writing this.
And then I recorded a podcast episode for a new, soon-to-be-added-to-this-newsletter media property called Outdoor Cats. It’s me and Chris Robarge and likely some other people in the future. We’re gonna do it weekly, taking a process-over-product approach. Loosey goosey, baby. It’s a good episode. When me and Chris get cooking on a thought it gets hot in the kitchen, as you’ll see in the coming days.
Today’s main piece comes courtesy Cara Berg Powers. It’s about the useless and self-serving entity known as the Democratic City Committee. Then some quick thoughts from yours truly.
As always, please consider supporting this outlet, and the necessary, difficult work of building a durable and truly independent local journalism outlet in a city with a power elite that would prefer it didn’t exist.
Onto business.
The Undemocratic City Committee—RIP Redemption Rock—13 percent homelessness increase—odds and ends
The Undemocratic City Committee
By Cara Berg Powers
There’s been a lot of talk the last few weeks about “the Democrats.” What “they” should have done, could have done to prevent the impending coronation of fascism. What even are “the Democrats,” though? People mean a lot of different things when they say this. Most technically though, it’s the Democratic National Committee. They’re the group of elected officials, party activists, and emerita that set the rules and procedures for the Democratic National Convention every four years, and how people are chosen to be delegates. In February, those 453 people will meet to elect a new party chair, who will set the direction of the Democratic Party for the next four years.
The race is shaping up to be competitive, which is incredibly unusual. Vice Chair of the DNC Ken Martin says he has 100 of the 453 members already lined up to vote for him. But at least five other people have thrown their hat in the ring, including Wisconsin Party Chair Ben Wikler, with this announcement video on Monday:
Many active in electoral politics are excited about Wikler’s run because of his success in Wisconsin as an organizer and a communicator. Wikler is bringing new people to the table with ongoing doorknocking, training, and organizing at the state house and on the streets. He’s doing it without compromising on values, as many pundits have suggested “the Democrats” should do in the weeks since the election. This would signal a huge shift for the party, toward more grassroots participation and ground-up power building. Whether the majority of DNC members will buy into this (necessary, I’d argue) shift remains to be seen.
Back in Worcester, though, it’s business as usual, with the meager “party infrastructure” we have here being used to gatekeep power and protect the elected at the expense of building a broader and more energized base.
A good way to sum this up is to share my own introduction to Worcester Democratic City Committee politics. Picture it: Worcester 2010. It’s my first caucus to attend the state convention. I’ve been encouraged by my dad and a neighbor to go to the caucus for Ward 10, where I live, to run to be a delegate to the convention, where Deval Patrick is running for reelection, and there is a competitive race for, of all things, State Auditor. One of the people running for the seat is then-sheriff (and now highly paid lobbyist) Guy Glodis. When I arrive to check in, there are barely enough people to actually fill all of the delegate seats, and Bill Eddy and Paul Giorgio (neither of whom are officers for or even in Ward 10) are doing a headcount and telling people who to vote for. There is one more woman interested in attending than there are seats available, so they ask me if I’ll commit to supporting Glodis. I decline, and after a few minutes of hemming and hawing they say they think I’ll be ok. The “vote” on the proposed slate is conducted, and I sign the paper to attend my first convention.
Now it’s 14 years later, Giorgio and Eddy are just as deeply embedded in the old boy network of politics, and continue to work behind the scenes to funnel resources and connections to loyal candidates in their orbit. One of the tools that they use to do that is the Democratic City Committee, or DCC.
What is a Democratic City Committee?
To go back a little, City, Town, and Ward Committees are the grassroots level of State Parties, which are sort of the base of the national party, but not exactly, and there’s lots of different rules about how you would move up from city to state to national. So being elected to the City Committee (which, full disclosure, I am) doesn’t actually mean anything, except, it seems, that you get the privilege of the Facebook page posting your fundraising events if you run for office (more on that below). And being elected to the State Party is only relevant to the functioning of the State Party, not necessarily to who represents the State in the National Party. Are we following?
So what, then, is even the purpose of a group like the City Committee? In a two-party system, the role would be to outbuild the other party and win elections, to have power, to make the policies that Democrats stand for (aka the platform). I say would because in Massachusetts, we don’t have a viable GOP. The DCC is embarrassing, to be sure, but consider that in the same election that we fielded only 164 of 350 members, the RCC elected their entire seven-person membership with write-ins of one another. With only seven people, they have an insurrectionist school committee member and a former chair as a City Councilor, not to mention that they have taken over a formerly Democratic State Senate seat, after Anne Gobi retired and neither the DCC nor the SCC did anything to prevent Peter Durant from winning a special election in 2023 or the general this November. Which brings me to my next point.
One party to rule…?
Last year we had three competitive local races in which a Democrat was running in a close election against someone unenrolled or in the GOP: District E School Committee, District 5 City Council, and the Special Election for State Senate. In all three of those races, the City Committee could have played a role, and in the two that were lost—Nelly Medina and Jonathan Zlotnick—it’s likely that a boost in resources and/or volunteers could have made a big impact, and quite possibly swung the race to the Democrat. Medina especially, as she lost by only 103 votes. Medina was running against Republican City Committee member Kathi Roy. Not only did she not get any infrastructure support for basic things like setting up a website, or getting a team together, she didn’t even get a donation from the City Committee or any Democratic local electeds. In fact, in all of 2023, with these three races happening, the DCC spent less than $2, on bank fees.
In the case of Etel Haxhiaj, whose unenrolled opponent heavily relied on conservative contributions from GOP activists like Fred Nathan, Rivera also banked gifts from the Carlsons, the Bergmans, and even Tim Murray. I guess that shouldn’t surprise anyone, since Carlson infamously also supported police union official Rick Cipro against Sean Rose back in 2021. I’m old enough to remember when Konnie Lukes was kicked off the DCC for supporting a Republican for Governor. Conveniently for folks like Mero-Carlson, those rules don’t apply in non-partisan races.
Taking “party” too literally
Last night, I stopped by Senator Robyn Kennedy’s Winter Fundraiser and saw some familiar faces. In addition to a number of Kennedy’s state house colleagues and Mayor Joe Petty, school committee members Sue Mailman and Jermaine Johnson were also there. Fundraising is a critical part of campaigns in our current system, so it makes sense that a lot of our local elected officials are using the holiday season to round up some end-of-year contributions. If you looked at our Worcester Democratic City Committee’s Facebook Page, however, you’d have a hard time finding much of anything except fundraising parties. So much so, that questions about the policy for posting these parties generated dozens of comments between their page and the Worcester Political Dialogue group after famed poll worker Matthew Noe and I both observed the DCC posting a fundraiser for incumbent D2 City Councilor Candy Mero-Carlson, and not her announced opponent’s recent fundraiser last month.
Admittedly, I assumed some untowardness on behalf of Mero-Carlson and her husband, given my previous reporting (see my post from last June: Joe Carlson and the politics of "business as usual"), but DCC Secretary (and current School Committee member) Molly McCullough was quick to assure Noe and others that this was just the committee following the rules that they made up to explain why they are only sharing things from the people that are already involved.
Former Treasurer and current School Committee member, Sue Mailman also chimed in:
Another group member still brought forth the legitimate and central question:
As I said in the thread, the very specific (and very made-up sounding) rule that McCullough cites above, that they’ll share events for any of the 150 or so elected members of the City Committee who happen to also be running for elected office, rounds it down to… Oh, all of their friends. So interesting. When it’s races like Bilotta vs. Carlson or Kamara vs. Biancheria, stacking the deck still puts a win in the D column. And sometimes, as with Rose or Haxhiaj, they’re able to prevail despite backstabbing from fellow Democrats. In cases like Medina, though, not being seen as the “right” kind of candidate doesn’t just hurt her, it hurts us all.
What is it good for? Absolutely nothing!
As longtime Worcester journalist Walter Crockett commented on a recent City Committee post, “We've got Trumpers on the City Council and School Committee. When are you guys going to take them on? What's a Democratic City Committee supposed to do if not to win elections?” That is a great question.
So we have this body, the DCC, that is supposed to be in charge of building power for Democrats here in Worcester, growing the base of the party, and turning out people to elections, but they don’t even have a half-full contingent of members. Currently, it’s headed up by Sean Rose, who has announced that he’ll be running for city council again next year. Under him, two vice presidents, Mark Borenstein and Winnie Octave, that are longtime loyalists to the old guard, as well as School Committee Member Molly McCullough as secretary (admittedly much more competent at outreach than predecessors, still much to be desired as transparency goes) with Treasurer Meg Mulhern, who has run Rose’s campaigns, as well as former City Councilor Tony Economou and former School Committee Member Laura Clancey. The future of the Democratic party, everyone. It’s hard to imagine that we won’t see more of the kind of exclusion Bilotta, Haxhiaj, Medina, Kamara, and others have experienced this coming election year.
I will be honest, I don’t care very much what the Worcester Democratic City Committee does on their Facebook page. If you read through the comments on the Facebook posts from this week you will see that people who have run for office, or who are very active in city policy, had to jump through hoops to even figure out how to get involved in the City Committee (and I use the term “involved” very loosely). A couple of meetings a year, a few parties, and a bunch of Facebook posts is not exactly political action. And we need real political action, now more than ever. The Mass GOP has been building resources and power for years, aided by Democratic complacency and infighting. In the most recent election, they flipped three seats in the state house, and though their numbers remain small, they are disproportionately in our backyard.
This is why organizations like the Working Families Party, Indivisible, and MoveOn have been indispensable in the weeks since the election, organizing hundreds of thousands of people in their communities on next steps to fight to keep the progress we’ve won and continue to push for the future we deserve. The fact is, groups like Worcester Indivisible, the Community Labor Coalition, unions like those of the carpenters, teachers, nurses, and social workers, and others, are doing much more heavy lifting to get the kind of elected representation that would align our city with the principles that Democrats literally stand on in the Massachusetts party platform. Things like, “everyone has the right to healthy, affordable food, everyone has the right to safe and affordable housing, we must act with the boldness and urgency necessary to address and adapt to climate change,” and, “that our political process, government, and public officials must be free of undue influence, be open and accessible to the public, transparent, and held accountable to act in good faith in furtherance of our interests as described herein.”
We have a municipal election in about 11 months. We know already that there are awesome folks ready to run. Don’t look to the Worcester Democratic City Committee to be part of any of that progress. We can build the infrastructure to get more people out to vote, show up to meetings, and pass the policies that can protect our community from the incoming attacks on our immigrant communities, LGBTQIA neighbors, education funding, and more. We know that the local party leadership is more concerned with protecting their own power than building a shared power that can meet this moment.
The good news is, whether they realize it or not, they need us a lot more than we need them. They are only powerful as long as access to each other is currency. They are not going to send you canvassers or share their fundraising lists. They won’t train volunteers or campaign staff. They won’t send you a template for a campaign plan. Let them keep basking in their own irrelevance and it will become more and more irrelevant. Meanwhile, those who want to make the leadership of Worcester more reflective of the awesome people can get to work, and let the democratic country club committee keep gatekeeping the dwindling power they think they have.
Some people have already declared that they are running, like Billotta in District 2. You can get involved in campaigns that you are excited about specifically, or with organizations like Indivisible or Neighbor to Neighbor. There’s plenty of work to do, and we know who is not going to do it. So let’s get to work.
Help the Worcester Sucks team!
Bill again. Contributors like Cara are paid for their work out of the money that comes in from subscribers! Don’t forget about the new merch discount for paid subscribers either! A little perk to sweeten the pot, and say thank you.
Tips and merch orders are great as well: Venmo a tip / Paypal a Tip / Send a tip on Ko-Fi. Speaking of, I ordered some wall flags! Pretty cool. Only six left as of last time I checked.
Reminder that I’ll be bringing my Worcester Sucks wares to the Worcester Punk Rock Flea Market on Dec. 14, 1-7 p.m. at the Hotel Vernon. Going to be a fun time.
RIP Redemption Rock
Such a massive bummer that Redemption Rock is closing. The Shrewsbury Street brewery was one of the best places in the city, run by the most supportive, community-oriented people. I’ve held several events there and they were always so gracious with access to the space.
A Worcester that can’t support an establishment like this is not a good Worcester. Lately it seems like we’re losing nice thing after nice thing. From the statement they put on their Facebook, it seems like operating costs were the killer.
“Despite our best efforts, we simply haven’t been able to grow the business enough to remain open. And we’ve run out of time.”
Property values and thereby rents are over-inflated in such a way that beloved small businesses like Redemption Rock simply can’t afford to stay that way—small and beloved—they need to grow to meet the demands imposed by the market or die. So they either turn into something less than special or they run out of time. Seems the latter happened here, and it’s such a shame. The comments of the Facebook post are filled with such laments. Talk of the Commonwealth producer Ben White’s comments were particularly gutting to read:
I am devastated. I’m so sorry. Thank you for everything you’ve done for me and for so many and for making Worcester a better and more welcoming City. Redemption Rock is so important to so many, including me. It’s such a special place where I’ve spent hundreds and hundreds of hours and so many memorable moments including birthdays and reunions and political debates and concerts and festivals and so much more. But most of all I am going to miss the amazing people and friendships I made here. And I’m forever grateful for the love and care and kindness you all showed Choko (and I). I’m rambling but I’m just distraught over this news. I look forward to spending as much time here as possible while I still can. This hurts a lot.
We grieve every day the city we could have if it wasn’t so beholden to the growth machine of distant and ambivalent private equity firms.
What makes Worcester special is deeply tied to its affordability. Without it we have nothing. Our value is in our position as a haven—for new diasporas and for freakin weirdos (artists, musicians, singular beings like the Pill Man). The direction we’re heading boxes is toward a hollow and soulless husk as these haven seekers are boxed out. A parking lot for leveraged equity that can’t afford a sense of itself.
A city hall so motivated could mitigate the repercussions of a rampant speculative real estate market, but ours is a city hall that wantonly facilitates it, at the expense of everything else. If that’s what it takes to get ‘on the map’ I for one would rather be off it.
Meanwhile, Redemption Rock closes at the end of the month. So plenty of time for one last brewski. Perhaps tonight, for me.
“We would fight to create more housing”
Homelessness in Worcester is estimated to spike 13 percent this winter. Per a Central Massachusetts Housing Alliance estimate, there are 732 people this winter in need of shelter, up from last year’s 650. From too many to way too fuckin’ many.
With the freelance story I’m working on (very related), I haven’t had the time to watch the most recent Board of Health meeting, wherein Director of Health and Human Services Mattie Castiel gives an update on the situation. Luckily the Telegram has a capable write-up.
“If we care about the community, we would fight to create more housing,” said Castiel during her recent presentation on homelessness and housing to the Worcester Board of Health.
I like the use of “would” here, the implication being we don’t care about the community. A delightful bit of sass from Castiel, who runs the most grossly defunded department in the city.
You, too, can give the city manager the business on an upcoming Zoom call. On Monday, 5:30 p.m., the city is holding a “Housing Production Plan Virtual Community Forum.” Comments made there will ostensibly inform the city’s housing production plan. So a few productive things to say would be:
1. Abolish single-family zoning.
2. Strengthen the city’s inclusionary zoning ordinance so that it actually does something (80 percent AMI is not affordable by any colloquial or even common sense definition).
3. Sanctioned encampments and sweep moratorium right now.
4. Municipal eviction moratorium.
5. Pursue a Polar Park-style DIF arrangement (draw an arbitrary district around a project where all collected revenue pays the construction loans) for a massive municipally-funded worker housing complex. As big as $160 million will allow us to build it, I say. Such a project would pay for itself in ways Polar Park couldn’t dream. If the city can be a construction company for a sports franchise, it can be a construction company for the working families who keep the city running.
Something else for Worcester to consider, per GBH: “Boston, Cambridge and Somerville councilors join forces to reform broker fees.”
Brokers are usually hired by landlords, but in Massachusetts, tenants often end up paying for the service. A group of city councilors in the Bay State’s most expensive rental markets are banding together to put the bill back in landlords’ pockets, likely through home rule petitions.
Since New York City Council voted this month to shift the burden onto landlords, Massachusetts remains the only state where renter-paid broker fees is common practice. Councilors in Boston, Cambridge, then Somerville each recently filed hearing orders in their respective municipalities to get the cost of brokers put on those who hire them.
Odds and ends
One more subscriber pitch for the road!
Merch store / Venmo a tip / Paypal a Tip / Send a tip on Ko-Fi
I need to seriously get going on my history of I-290 research, so for the month of December I’ll be going down to one post a week to give myself a bit more bandwidth. Although I already blew the first week of that plan by taking on this freelance story. And this Sunday I’ll be announcing/sharing the new podcast. Too much cool stuff to do! Good problem. But yeah, bear with me for a few lighter weeks of posting.
Does anyone want to be a social media manager, by the way? Really need someone to pick up the Worcester Sucks Instagram. Send me a line at billshaner@substack.com.
Absolutely massive housing project hit the Conservation Commission this week. At some 490 units (of which only eight will be three-beds, the rest one- or two-), Grafton Woods Luxury Living (yuuuuck) would be the largest “luxury apartment” big box project to hit the city... maybe ever? It’s planned for an area off Grafton Street that’s historically been something of a dumping ground. It’s across the street from Roosevelt Elementary School.
I do not imagine this project sailing smoothly through the approval process given given that this neighborhood is one with some manner of “character.” Curious to see how Luxury Living handles the city’s inclusionary zoning ordinance as well.
Ok I think that’s enough for today. Talk to you on Sunday!