>> From WXXI News.

This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection this hour will be made on Saturday with the start of early voting, and we do our best to invite candidates from a number of races that you will see on your ballot on this program.

So you've got information that you need to make informed decisions at the polls.

We are always grateful when candidates agree to join us.

And both hours of the program today are dedicated to candidate conversations.

In this first hour, we're talking with two of the candidates for Rochester City Council.

You heard from the Democratic candidates, and today we welcome the Conservative and Green Party candidates.

And I'd like to welcome our guests.

Marcus C. Williams candidate for Rochester City Council is back with us.

Welcome back.

Thanks for being here.

>> Glad to be here today.

>> And Dave Sutliff-Atias candidate for Rochester City Council.

Welcome back to you as well.

>> Always good to be on.

>> It's a good chance for our guests to reintroduce themselves to you and Marcus C. Williams.

The floor is yours.

First tell us, first of all, what party lines you're running on a little bit about yourself and why you sought this particular seat.

>> So my you guys, my name is.

Hey everybody.

My name is Marcus C. Williams.

I'm running for Rochester City Council.

It's an at large seat, so anybody in the whole city can vote for me.

And no matter what your party is, you can vote for me.

So whether you're Democrat, independent, Republican, working families, you can vote for me.

I'll be on the conservative line and you just have to check my name.

You don't even need to change your party to do it.

I'm running because I believe in our city.

I'm running for this position because I believe that legislation and budgetary priorities are where we can actually effectuate the most change in the community.

And I very much so believe in advocating for changing legislation and stuff.

And you guys can check out my website.

Marcus, the number four rochester.com, that's Marcus, the number four rochester.com to find out more.

And I won't belabor it too much because we got to let Dave get in here a little bit.

>> We got a lot to talk about.

>> With.

>> Marcus Dave Sutliff-Atias Dave Sutliff-Atias candidate for city council.

Tell people what ballot line you're on and more about yourself here.

>> Well, I'm on the Green Line and I'm running this year because, well, I've run for office before and I ran for school board a couple times in the 2000.

As an educator, I'm a teacher myself.

I really focus on our kids and what I realized when I ran for school board was a lot of the issues that I see with my students in terms of what they need, it has to do with issues that they're bringing into the classroom.

And so I decided that city council would be a better use of my time, because the issues that they're dealing with outside of school is affected by city government.

So that's where that's why my focus has been there over the past 12, 15 years.

>> And do you have a website tell people about.

>> Oh yeah.

Absolutely.

Well, if you're on social media, you're probably tired of hearing me.

Tired of hearing me say it.

But it's w-w-w-what for Change.org.

>> Dave, for change for.

>> Yes.

Dave for change.

Dave for Change.org.

>>.org.

So those are the candidates with us in studio this hour.

Again, very different views.

I think it's fair to say, than the Democrats who are in power in the city.

And I think a good question for both of you is just what it has been like running uphill, uphill battles.

You're on the conservative line, but you're a Republican in the city of Rochester.

Yes, indeed.

In this country, if you are a Democrat in rural areas, it's hard times.

If you are a Republican in urban centers, hard times to win elections.

>> tell me a little bit about how you're trying to break through and what it is like running, knowing that in this city, Democrats hold the power.

And a lot of American cities, Democrats hold all the power.

What's that like for you?

>> So for me, as a Republican, that's going to be on the conservative line this year, it is very eye opening experience to encourage people to understand that they don't have to just vote one party line.

That's what a lot of people think.

Since we're a Democrat heavy city, most people think, oh, well, I'm Democrat.

I only can vote Democrat.

But you don't have to only vote Democrat.

I'm running to give you a real option so that we could work on restoring some actual policies and budgetary priorities that focus on the everyday issues in our city.

>> Do you find common ground with people?

>> Yes, very, very frequently.

I mean, almost all the time.

Things like crime, housing, you know, education and economic opportunities and local small business and entrepreneurship, empowerment all the time.

These are the things that everybody cares about.

People want to know that they're safe if they walk outside of their house and their car isn't gone or broken into, or they won't get mugged, going to the corner store.

Important everyday issues transcend party.

And that is why I'm running.

Because when you start to point out to people that the actual everyday issues that we deal with aren't getting addressed, they start to go home.

And I tell them, I say, hey, you know, you might be Democrat, but is the Democrat Party right now really representing you?

Give me a shot, because I'm really focused on these issues.

I do political advocacy.

I do policy advocacy, I do budgetary advocacy all the time with the city and city council.

That's why I'm running, because the community matters to me and we need to put community first.

>> So Marcus is saying he finds common ground.

Dave, do you find common ground with voters when you talk about the issues?

>> Most of the time?

Absolutely.

Let me just focusing on this race this year, it's been amazing.

My the door to door.

I'm out almost every day.

>> People open their doors.

They answer the door.

>> Actually, here's the funny thing.

All right, I'll give you the story.

>> That's a good question.

That's a very, very fair question.

>> So here's the thing.

you have the list of voters.

So you know who lives at what house generally, and you knock on the door and you ask for Tom.

Right?

And they look at you like, what are you selling me?

You see the look?

I know the look.

And I say, hey, I'm Dave, I'm running for city Council.

And they actually looked relieved and.

>> Almost not selling something.

>> Yeah, well, I'm not selling something.

I'm not asking for money or something like that.

But then by the time in my elevator speech is really quick, and then almost every time I'm hearing, man, I am so glad you came to the door.

Nobody else who's running for office is coming to my door.

I mean, I'm it is extremely rare that I get anyone that's legitimately annoyed that I'm just knocking on their door unannounced.

>> So what are the issues that you find more common ground with?

>> Dumping Ghajini.

dumping Rajini like overwhelming?

That was in my top three.

Like, you know, you have your three bullet points and it right off the bat, it got to be such a huge issue with folks that that that's now on my lawn signs.

>> So let's I want to ask both of you about this.

I'll start with you, Dave.

But you want to tell people what are the other two bullet points that we'll get to as well, dumping Rajini and what else?

>> Treating the city, treating housing as a human right.

And I have a plan for universal child care in the city as well.

>> Okay, let's start with Randy dumping Randy effectively means what I mean, we've talked about it on this program a bit in the past, but take me through what your vision for what ought to happen, Dave.

>> Well, there's state law, so you have to go.

You have to do three.

There's three things that have to has to happen.

And so first thing is a feasibility study.

And we can talk about that in a second.

And then the second thing that has to happen if assuming the study says yeah you guys can do this, this is doable, then there needs to be a referendum.

We get to vote on it, and it could end up being the first unanimous referendum ever in the history of elections, because so many people are upset with our genie.

And then the third thing is, if assuming it gets approved by the voters, then we have to and this will be the stickiest part.

Then we have to negotiate with our genie to buy their stuff.

>> Now hold on a second.

Marcus is going to be voting, and I don't know that he's voting for your referendum.

So I don't think it's unanimous.

We'll talk to Marcus in a second.

but the the first step being the study that you talk about.

Yep.

You heard Mayor Evans and some city leaders say we shouldn't be the only ones funding it.

There should be county support as well.

you know, and it's never even gotten off the ground for for the study here.

>> Well, if you look at my plan, I'm saying I want this just for the city.

The towns can worry about themselves.

It was so.

>> City only.

>> Yes.

And the only reason is for that is because that's how we can make it happen.

I mean, if we do it for.

>> You, I think it's feasible to do it this way.

>> It's more.

Definitely.

And it's more doable this way.

There's not one town that can block it.

And so or Adam bellow.

>> In the mechanism you're talking about, you get this referendum and then our genie has to cede their infrastructure to a new public entity.

>> Yes.

Well they have to they have to sell it.

>> They have to sell it.

Yes.

So the new public entity, which what are you going to call it?

>> Oh, gosh.

So far down the road, whatever you'd like to call it, we can we can deal with that.

And that's actually the other I just went through the state law.

So then the, the details like exactly who gets appointed to to on the board.

And that's where we get to come up with how we decide to make that happen.

And that's and that's something I'm not going to come in and say, I know exactly how to do this.

That's where we start having discussions.

>> And but you think you can get qualified people to run the utility for the city of Rochester only after this forced purchase from Randy, right?

Yes.

Okay.

And you'd be able to do that in a way that lowers rates.

>> Yes.

>> And it's going to be more efficient.

>> Yes.

So, so when we say let's let's define here running our genie, we would be bringing over the same employees right to the actual day to day operations.

It would be the upper level.

The people that Iberdrola and Avangrid bring in.

So those.

>> Qualified local people.

>> Absolutely.

>> But now they're working for this new public entity.

>> Absolutely.

Same contracts.

If there's union, same union contracts, no one loses their jobs.

>> Why would rates be lower?

>> So it's a nonprofit entity.

I mean, look, it they're just we'll call it our genie, but Avangrid or whoever is going back to the state, and they're asking for another rate increase.

They do it every year.

And I don't see either of those two multinational corporations going out of business.

They're making money every year.

They do not need more money.

This is and I use this pun intended intentionally.

Their business is to just keep the lights on.

They don't have to make a profit.

They're not supposed to make a profit.

>> All right.

This is where I think Marcus is going to say there's at least one vote against that.

And it's you.

Is that right?

>> So I would never make such a claim.

Oh, so I was the first political candidate of any party, and I was a Republican, and I am a Republican.

When I ran in 2019 for city council, I actually had make Randy a public utility on.

>> The common ground that you're finding here.

No.

>> So well, now, here's here's, here's the difference between what I'm talking about and what Dave's talking about.

>> Okay.

>> We actually need energy production here in the city.

You're going to what, by Guinea.

We're going to buy all the natural gas refineries.

How are we going to buy I guess what essentially is they want a service provider.

Like we don't really generate much energy, which we need to focus on.

The hydroelectric that we have, which is abundant here.

We underutilize the river, we underutilize the High Falls and Low Falls, and that's a whole hour worth of a conversation there.

But in order to do a public utility, we need to be generating our own energy.

In order to do that, the best functionality would be to focus on what the Department of Energy is doing right now, which is promoting small modular reactors so that we can actually start being able to produce an abundance of energy in our area.

Because if we say, oh, we're going to go out and we're going to buy a company and we're still faced with the aging infrastructure, we're still faced with the fact that they're shutting down pipelines.

We're still faced with the fact that and this is the state doing this, the state is pushing this.

They just shut down a pipeline project a couple of months ago.

Now, you guys, if you're listening, most of our energy, our electricity is made by natural gas.

52% of our of our energy is made by natural gas.

In this state, the electricity, you guys.

So if we're pushing these projects out and there's no other way to actually provide, you end up with stuff like the project in Ontario where they're shutting down a whole development because they don't have enough energy supply there.

And these are things that we have to think about going forward.

If we're ever even going to talk about a public utility, we're talking about, well, we need to do research and we need to do all of this and all of that and look into it and spend $1 million to do.

Absolutely not.

We don't need to know that.

We need a couple of people with some calculators to go in there and go look at the books, see how much the infrastructure costs, see how much things cost, and see if it's even feasible.

I can tell you right now it's not feasible.

We'll never make that money back.

So that's why we need to focus on generating the energy here, because otherwise you got to bond it out.

We'll never pay off those bonds.

We already have high taxes as it is.

And they'll say they put it down, but they put it down.

But raise the assessment.

So now your taxes are higher anyway.

So we have to be very not just thoughtful when we're doing this.

We have to be intentional and practical because we want to lower those rates.

Just taking over something and saying, oh, well, now we're a nonprofit, but we've got all of these bonds to pay off, isn't going to lower our rates.

It's going to increase our rates.

>> All right.

So Dave, he's saying the math doesn't work on your side.

The city is going to be in real financial trouble with your plan okay.

>> So I got I got to go through some stuff here.

So first let me go to the very first thing.

just let's get the facts straight.

So actually in 2011, Alex White ran for mayor as green public utility was on his platform.

I was his campaign manager.

The green Rochester slate in 2013, which I was running for city council.

>> Yes.

>> You were.

Well, either way, if you're if you're saying you're the first candidate ever, that's that's actually not true.

So I'm not saying you didn't.

I'm not saying you didn't come up with it on your own.

That's that's not what I'm saying.

But I'm just getting it straight ahead.

Yeah.

All right.

So by state law, we're a company is not allowed to provide electricity and create energy.

The same company.

so I've already been asked this.

Where would we where would this public entity get.

Its the energy from, right.

We would buy it from the same place as our GE gets theirs from right now, with the caveat that then we start working on state law to either get a waiver for our public utility, or just get rid of this law altogether statewide, which we can discuss that down the road so that we can start generating energy.

Then we can look at hydro.

>> Do you think I think Marcus is right, that we're under utilizing these possible sources.

>> To a yes, to a degree.

I would not do anything nuclear though, but yes.

No, I'm okay with that.

>> Okay.

Yeah.

So you're.

>> Saying but we can't do it until we change law, right?

>> Doesn't allow it, right.

You're going to buy from the same place.

Yes, but what about all the numbers?

He says?

Look, there's so much you're going to end up with so much debt that either taxes go up, you know, the city is in trouble.

What are you how are you going to pay for it?

>> No.

You do.

So my estimates that I get from folks is it would cost 200 million.

So you put up.

Yep.

Yeah.

Well, there's a lot of infrastructure in the city of Rochester.

You're talking about lines.

No, that's that is we're talking just in the city of Rochester.

Okay, okay.

We're not talking the whole county.

So it's 200 million.

So you can bond.

You can we get up as much upfront as we can and then we bond for the rest.

Let's say it's 10 million for 20 years.

We we drop how many millions just in tax breaks for a corporation for a development project we don't need.

And I have ways to pay for all the stuff I want to do.

We can get to that whenever you're ready.

so yeah, the numbers add up.

Okay.

>> In your view, that 200 million number, you think it's too low?

>> It's extremely low.

It's not even practical.

And I don't want to really dig into this because I go to the Public Service Commission meetings.

If you guys don't know what the Public Service Commission is, those are the people who really deal with the energy rates and policies and stuff like that.

The state assembly and stuff kind of kick it over to them.

I go and I speak at those all the time.

I'm always reading the stuff through with them and it's a lot of problems with our policy.

But I can tell you for sure that if we go about it in a way in which people are proposing this be done, we're going to end up in a lurch, and rates are also going to increase, which is going to be the most unfortunate thing for our people.

>> I will say, Marcus, I mean, I've heard $1 billion, not 200 million, but that's also when it was county wide.

Dave's talking about city only.

>> And I'll add to this, the stuff that we're buying is really old.

>> That is part of the problem.

>> And and it is without question.

>> Yeah.

Why is that a selling point here?

Doesn't that sound like you have to replace it pretty quick?

>> Exactly.

>> Well, no, you're going well.

You're going to have to do it at some point without question.

Either it's going to be us or it's going to be them.

And I promise you, if they do it, we're paying for.

>> It and you'll pay more.

>> Oh, absolutely.

No question.

>> Okay.

All right.

>> So what I'm saying we won't have to pay like cost for new because we're buying it.

Used very used.

>> Just briefly because we got to move on to other issues.

These are two different views of this.

But let me just ask you both briefly.

Why do you think the status quo continues to win if when you talk to people in the city about this issue, they're unhappy with Rajini, they're unhappy with their utility.

They would like a change.

And yet we don't really see change.

Why?

>> Because the people that are running around saying that they want to do something about the genie are not even addressing the core issues with our genie.

There are two main core issues.

The main issue is that the billing is always wrong, and you can never speak to anybody to actually get it adjusted.

You know.

>> That's hard.

>> That's a huge problem.

And the second one is, is that the meter readings are always wrong, always like it's it's ridiculous.

And I got a story about that one year they didn't read my meter for a year.

I called them every single month with my meter reading.

And they ended up saying that they owed me $1,200.

And then at the next month's bill, they said, oh, they miscalculated it.

But this is the problem that people are experiencing.

And that's something simple that people that say that they want a public utility and care about our genie, they're not advocating for that.

Now, why are you not advocating for that right now?

That needs to be done.

If you really want to address the people's issues immediately and to cap that off so we can move on to other topics, I support us having a public utility, but I also support us addressing the issues that we're facing right now, the immediate issues that we can address right now are more important than saying, oh, we're going to do a study that's going to be for another study, that's going to be for another study, ten, 20, 30 years.

You know how it works, Evan.

We see it all the time.

>> Studies of studies of studies.

Yes, I can confirm that does happen.

I don't think Dave is calling for that.

I think Dave is saying no, we got to streamline this process and we know what it takes.

So let me just close this section by asking you, why do you think inertia has has reigned?

Why do you think the there hasn't been a change if people are so unhappy?

>> A public utility democratizes our our electricity and that the people who are in power that takes power away from them, no pun intended.

>> And so they are incentivized to keep the power absolutely.

>> To keep things the way they are.

>> So that's if that's issue one for Dave Sutliff-Atias and maybe one A, one B and one C for him, we'll talk about the others.

What's issue one for you Marcus.

>> Public safety and education.

They tie in together okay.

>> So what do you want to do about public safety that's not currently being done?

>> I want criminals to go to jail.

I think it's real simple.

Criminals need to be put in jail.

We have people that are getting out 4 or 5 times in a day, a day, and they get back out and they commit more crime.

I had a gentleman that I knew for 15 years.

He just got stabbed the other day by somebody who had been let out in one month, 24 times.

>> 4 or 5 times a day.

You're saying somebody gets arrested or picked up by police and then let out in a day?

>> Yeah.

We had.

>> Who were these people?

>> There was a well, there was an incident in in Greece, I don't know if you remember, with the car, with the car theft at the mall where the guy had been arrested twice that day already.

So this is stuff that's really happening and people are trying to say, oh, well, it's not that big a deal.

It's not that big a deal.

If it's not impacting you.

And we're starting to see that type of crime go into even nicer neighborhoods, like we'll see crime starting to travel into the Park Avenue area.

We're seeing a lot of car Break-Ins, but now we're also seeing a lot of home invasions in Park Avenue.

I was just over there.

Excuse me?

Knocking doors the other day.

These type of things don't get reported.

And when you see the news there, like crime is down.

Okay, you can tell me whatever you want.

But the reality of my life is there are people out there getting mugged every day.

There are small businesses that are being broken into, vandalized and robbed every day, and nothing is being done to help these people at all.

And it's real simple for me.

If we have elected officials that are supposed to represent us on city council, they're supposed to be advocating to the next level of government for us.

We have only had one and a half city council.

People come out and say, we need to work on bail reform and raise the age.

>> Law one and a.

>> Half, one and a half.

You know Willie mentioned it lightly one time.

>> You're counting that.

>> As a half as a half.

But Patterson is essentially the only person, and I don't agree with him on everything, but he's the only real person that's been pretty vocal on that.

>> Okay, so so that does answer one of the questions I had, which is what you are talking about.

Yes.

Is what has been a heavily debated set of reforms that don't just come from Rochester City Council number one.

But you're saying if you're on council, you're going to advocate.

>> Yes, but it's more than just that, too.

Okay.

If we're talking about local public safety, we don't have any reform schools.

We don't even have Josh Lofton.

If you guys aren't familiar with Josh Lofton, that was a school that we used to have where they would put kids that were chronic problems, that were violent, that were selling drugs, doing drugs in school, that were assaulting teachers, and that was a place where they can go so that they would be separate from the rest of the general population.

And we don't have that anymore.

So the schools are a terror.

And what's happening in the schools right now, the kids are graduating.

They're functionally illiterate.

They're not able to read, they're not able to write.

We've got the second highest budget in the whole country as far as school districts.

We got the second lowest proficiency rates.

So if children don't see an opportunity to thrive and succeed for the future, what are they going to do?

They're going to turn to crime or they're going to give up on life altogether.

>> Generally speaking, more discipline, more follow through.

Yes.

More incarceration.

Yes.

>> I'm still well, hold on, not more incarceration.

What I'm saying is, if you are doing crime, you need to go to jail.

What's been happening is that I have a friend.

Criminal defense attorney.

Okay?

That's his job.

That's what he does.

He defends the criminals.

He had a guy that had arrests four times for gun charges, four times for illegal firearms ownership.

I'm big on firearms ownership, but just saying.

But four times for illegal firearms ownership.

If he would have got one charge, he would have went for way for two, maybe four years.

Now the guy's going away for 20, for 20 years.

So if we actually nip it in the bud, then we don't have these other knock on issues and we don't have people seeing, oh, well, if they're doing crime and getting away with it now, I can do crime.

>> Criminal defense mean you're defending people accused of crimes, to be clear.

But also, I'm still waiting to hear who is the person who got arrested five times in a day and was out there for a sixth offense?

I don't feel like I understand.

I don't think that I've ever heard that that has happened.

>> Oh yeah, you got it.

>> Five times in a day.

Five arrests in one day?

Yes.

And the police just say what to him.

There's nothing I can do.

>> Well, with the way that the laws are.

And if you're a youth, it's even worse.

But with the way that the laws are, it's structured so that you can't hold people for a lot of prob for a lot of issues and stuff like that.

One of the big things you hear is people say, well, it's the judges.

Yeah, it's kind of the judges, but really what it is, is the laws are allowing the judges to let the people go.

If the laws say they got to hold them, then they have to hold them.

>> Nobody has been violent five times in a day in interacting with law enforcement, and was let out for a sixth opportunity.

So to commit violence.

>> So theft.

I was talking about theft.

I was talking about violence as well.

Okay, so not all of the time does that happen.

And is it the same offense?

>> Okay.

So it's different offenses.

Yes.

Okay.

So before I turn to Dave here.

So more discipline more follow through, more advocacy from city council.

Yes.

To throw out bail reform.

>> No, no.

Amén.

>> Amend.

Amend.

Bail reform.

Yes okay.

>> Dave Sutliff-Atias okay I promise I'm answering the question.

Okay, okay.

So look, as a teacher, especially over the past few years, I've really been pushing this point with my students as that actually a disservice that we do when we in schools is that we try to teach that there's a right answer, one right answer.

You take a test, it's right, it's wrong, and there's I'm generalizing.

There's there's some degree of math.

There's probably well, but even even on some Regents exams.

Right.

You have multiple choice and stuff like that.

So there's there's a right answer.

And in life most of the time there isn't just one right answer.

And usually it's one answer doesn't solve everything.

Okay.

So this what we're talking about.

The public behavior is due to generation after generation after generation of mistreatment, of poverty, of bad housing, of bad policy.

And you're not going to have one thing that fixes all this put people in jail.

That's not going to fix anything.

In fact, I've taught in jails and I've had these young guys tell me we expect to be dead or in jail.

So that's not a punishment.

That's not anything that's going to stop them.

It's not going to reduce the recidivism.

The repeating again, I hate that word repeating crimes.

Right.

It's not going to do it.

It's not going to work.

It makes us feel good.

Yeah.

So and so's going going to jail for whatever many years.

But they're eventually going to come out.

And then what?

So here is my solution to this.

For public safety.

It's all the other stuff on my platform.

It's housing.

It's it's economic development.

It's it's dealing with things in a more holistic manner.

Having business, economic development that's more cooperative, that's it's changing our community, making it an actual community so that people won't be as invested in or in their behavior.

>> Would you vote to cut the police budget >>?

>> Only if it's used for something that will actually work?

We know from the we know from generations of statistics and and results just with the eye test that more police does not mean more safety.

So if it's to use it on mental health crisis, if it's to use it for housing, if it's to use it for job development, absolutely.

I'm fine with that.

Just to cut it, to cut it.

What's the use.

>> But to some degree that argument falls apart when you say, if what you're saying is true, then no police zero police would not result in a change in safety.

And I don't think you believe that, do you?

Having zero police officers in a city.

>> I so, you know, I was just thinking.

I knew you were going to we were going to go there.

That's why I got.

So I have an answer.

No, no, I hear you.

So here's the thing.

So I it's I remember when 9/11 happened and I was a green then as well.

And people even like the most liberal person was still military.

We need more military and the Green Party.

I really liked what as a party we came out with.

It's like, look, we don't believe in militarism.

No one is saying, get rid of the military in a day.

We should be working toward that.

Will we ever see it in our lifetime?

No, probably not.

I mean, that's.

>> How you feel about.

>> Police.

Like the goal is.

The goal is we should be changing our society as if we're working towards not needing the police.

Will it ever happen?

As long as I'm alive, will it happen as long as my daughter's alive?

Probably not.

But that's the.

That's the philosophy we should be working toward.

Am I saying wipe out the police tomorrow?

No, that wouldn't be smart either.

>> Okay, but the overarching point that you're making is the reason crime is happening for a lot of people is a feeling of nihilism, hopelessness.

When you when you talk to them in jails, they say, I was going to be dead or in jail anyway.

It doesn't matter.

Yeah, if I get out, it'll probably be the same thing.

Yeah.

And they're not.

Their life doesn't give them hope.

What you're describing is a change in mindset that comes from a more egalitarian society.

You think that can be achieved?

>> Absolutely.

Okay.

Well, it can be better.

>> Okay, better than it is now.

>> But I will always have hope that it can be achieved.

>> Go ahead Marcus.

>> So first of all, I grew up dirt poor.

I'm talking rats and roaches and that poverty smell.

If you guys are listening and you know what poverty smells like that smell.

Okay, so to say something like that, oh, people are committing crime because they're poor.

That's reprehensible.

>> That's not.

>> What I said.

That's exactly what you said.

>> I said no.

>> So that's a problem in a mindset.

And we see a lot of people who have unfortunately had the great privilege of not knowing what it is to live or grow up in poverty, to say, oh, well, people are stealing and robbing because they're poor.

That's not true.

A large portion of it is because, like you said earlier, there is no discipline.

When people see that they can get away with stuff, they're more likely to do it.

That's a big issue.

But yes, we do need to work on reducing recidivism.

That's something that I'm very big on.

I'm very big on comprehensive jail and prison reform.

I've talked about that many times at length.

I've got a ton of videos on my Facebook, YouTube, all of that about that.

And nobody talks about that.

I don't know why they don't talk about that.

We need that because it's a problem in the community.

We can't let people out and they don't have any adequate housing, and we can't let people out.

And then they have to go back in the same neighborhoods.

But where they go is in my neighborhood.

Dave, are they coming to your neighborhood?

How's the crime in your neighborhood?

Because the crime in my neighborhood is very bad.

Very, very bad.

So we in my neighborhood, a crime ridden neighborhood, want the criminals locked up.

We want the criminals in jail.

You say that that won't stop anything.

What part?

If somebody is a stabber and they're out here stabbing people like the puncher that was on Monroe Avenue, going out there punching people.

When he's not out there, he's not punching people.

When the people are out here robbing people, if they're in jail, they're not robbing people.

So you're saving the people that are the victims and the city council does not address victim issues at all whatsoever.

>> A couple of things.

What part of the city do you live in?

>> So I live in the southwest.

I live near Jefferson.

>> Okay.

And I think what Dave is saying, because you talked about growing up poor.

Yes.

Legit.

Poor in a way that most people, me included, have not experienced.

Yes.

I think what Dave is saying is that when you grow up in poverty and you are taught to believe that there is no way you're ever not going to be in poverty, that there's nothing you could do that the society doesn't care about you, that you're not going to strive for better, that it's it's hopeless that that is what breeds a sense that I may have to steal.

I may have to commit crimes.

Nothing matters.

It's not poverty.

It's a feeling that the system is structured against you such that there's no way out.

Is that a fair description, by the way?

>> It is.

And also, I'm not going to have a poor off with you, Marcus.

But when, when the when the mics are off, I can tell you about how my family grew up on welfare as well.

So but I'm not going to have a poor off.

Okay.

>> But but he's not saying it's poverty that leads to it.

He's saying it's the hopelessness and nihilism.

>> So I talk about nihilism.

If you check on my Facebook page, I just put one up about nihilism yesterday, about 16 hours ago.

So it is a big issue with nihilism and the lack of hope.

But that goes back to what I said earlier, which that hope is being stolen away from the educational by the educational system.

And those opportunities are being stolen away by the lack of quality education.

And from City Council, we can address that by actually working on alternatives to the education system, the education system is supposed to make you a functional adult, so you can go out and get a job, be a productive member of society.

>> And it's failing.

There.

>> It is extremely egregious failure.

>> Okay.

So more discipline, higher standards don't graduate kids who, in your view, don't deserve it.

>> That well, that's 100%.

And that started under really got a bump under George Bush with the No Child Left Behind act.

And New York State has taken it to the umpteenth power.

And now they're even getting rid of Regents.

It's problematic.

>> Okay.

So as a teacher, would.

>> You.

>> Would you bring back Josh Lofton?

>> Josh Lofton would be fine.

I remember it, I remember and I remember teachers who I was not a I did not teach at Josh, but I was.

I do know teachers who were.

And you know why Josh Lofton worked is because the teachers that were in there really had a bond with their kids and had nothing to do with pedagogy.

Oh, absolutely.

Well, I mean, I'm working in a program now that that brings in students from different districts, the ones who are failing, the ones behaviorally or having difficulty.

And that's a hard job.

>> Do you agree with Marcus that there are too many students graduating when they're not actually prepared, and they should not be graduating, and that the system is too soft?

>> Well, it depends on what you want to do.

Yes and no.

It depends on what you want to do because they're not ready to graduate.

That's that's really important.

And I know we don't have that much time and a whole 'nother segment on education.

We could be doing, even though City Council doesn't have a direct influence on it.

We do have an indirect.

In fact, that's what I said at the beginning.

That's why I focused on running for City council, because I do care about the children are actually my biggest focus, and I think we can have a more of an effect as the teacher, as person in that classroom.

I can tell you, those kids come in the very first second with bringing in their problems.

You're not teaching them to read with the problems that they have.

>> We have to get our only break.

I want to talk to both of the candidates about what they think should be done regarding housing in the city.

One of the biggest issues facing the city of Rochester two candidates with very strong views on that issue as well.

Marcus C. Williams candidate for Rochester City Council on the Conservative Party line.

Dave Sutliff-Atias candidate for City Council on the Green Party line and we'll come right back and continue the conversation on Connections.

Coming up in our second hour, the candidates for town supervisor in the town of Perinton join us now.

This is a town where the landfill looms over just about everything.

There's a lot of conversation about what should or should not happen in regards to landfill.

But that's not it.

That's not the only issue.

And we're going to talk to the candidates about how they would see the stewardship of tax dollars.

They're part of a series of conversation with candidates for town leadership.

It's coming up next hour.

>> Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Mary Cariola center, supporting residents to become active members of the community, from developing life skills to gaining independence.

Mary Cariola center Transforming lives of people with disabilities.

More online at.

Mary Cariola.

Org and Monroe County Economic Development accepting applications for the Micro Advantage Loan Program, designed to help small businesses with expenses such as equipment upgrades, marketing and hiring details at Monroe County businesses.

>> This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson so Dave Sutliff-Atias says housing should be a human right?

Yes.

What can the city do to ensure?

I mean, one of the biggest problems in every city in the country?

Just about I don't think there's a city that's like, come here.

We figured out housing.

Yeah, it's it's really tough.

So it's inventory.

It's how much resource, what kind of resources you have as a city to deal with that.

And what is the mechanism to make it a human right?

Go ahead.

>> All right.

So it back to my point again about how problems need usually more than one solution.

If you go to my website, I'll do it again.

W-w-w Change.org, my housing platform plank has nine points to it because there is.

You can't just do one thing.

There is no one solution.

So everything we have, we have enough housing for we the, the, the number that gets thrown around.

And is that at any day in the Rochester City School District, there's 2000 students whose families are homeless.

>> Homeless?

Which could be couch surfing.

It could be a lot of different.

>> Yeah.

No.

Absolutely.

So we have we have the resource, we have the housing.

We just because everything's built on profit that we just won't put them in because those people can't contribute to the profit machine.

So no housing for you.

So my nine points, at least most of them deal with that is to actually take the housing we have, building more.

I think we're good.

I really do.

And the last time there was a vacancy study, it wasn't done very well.

And so the actual numbers don't exist.

But the eye test, if you go around, there's empty houses.

So even if.

>> You're right about the inventory, the city doesn't own all that inventory.

So what kind of what kind of resource allocation are you talking about.

>> So there's policy, which is something that folks, not just me, that housing advocates have been talking to both the mayor and city council for years.

And I know there's been people on this show who have talked about the use of area median income in terms of what's affordable, and we continue to use the either a countywide area median income or we use the nine county area which doubles the actual median income that that we have here in the city of Rochester.

So what's, quote, affordable by any project is not really affordable.

And so when we have that, we have people priced out of housing.

The stuff that was just built downtown on West Main Street, that's even there.

Quote, affordable units are not really affordable.

>> They're not affordable at all.

>> And so the minute that's done, there's a new ribbon cutting right across the street for the exact same kind of thing.

>> They're building one right across the street, too.

>> Yeah.

>> That's crazy.

Yeah.

Literal thing.

>> So it's like, that's great.

And the mayor's got a collection of gold shovels.

That's awesome.

But that's really not putting people into the housing that they need to be in.

>> Okay, but before I turn to Marcus, then what does the city have to spend each year to purchase and provide this kind of housing that's out there?

>> So well, first of all, we already have.

>> Or is it vouchers, waivers?

It's I, I don't know what.

>> I'm not so big on vouchers and waivers because that's still for profit.

It's just the government taking tax dollars and giving it to the people who make money off of.

>> You want the government to own the housing?

>> Well, actually no, no, no, no, I don't want no not necessarily.

Well, I mean, I'm fine with the well right now.

The, the housing Authority is privatizing some of their stock and I think they need to stop if they're going to do that, turn it into cooperative housing, especially apartment buildings.

But we can get into that another time.

But what I would like to see the housing that's zombie properties.

We can do this.

We can use state law.

By state law.

We can take over zombie properties using eminent domain.

And I literally wanted to do something like homesteading.

I want to make.

>> Sure eminent domain.

>> That's fine.

But if you're not taking care of your stuff and you don't live here, then we should be able to take that over and actually put it in the hands of people who live here or are homeless here, and that can take care of the house.

And that's look, it's nuanced.

And there's more at the website.

I mean, with the amount of time we have, there's way more detail to that.

I'm just answering a question very quickly.

>> No, I.

>> Appreciate that.

Yeah, yeah.

but it's it's not that simple.

But I think we have the housing stock to put it in the hands of the people who need it.

>> So more details of Dave for Change.org, which is Dave's website.

>> You need the W, so you do.

Yeah.

W-w-w.

>> W-w-w-what Dave for Change.org.

Marcus for the number four.

rochester.com.

So on housing, where do you agree disagree here.

>> So for me my biggest thing is twofold.

One, if we are giving all of these tax breaks to all of these big multi-million dollar buildings that they're turning into housing and all of this and all of that, how come first time homebuyers can't get that?

Explain it to me like I'm five.

You understand what I'm saying?

So what's happening from city Council?

They authorize that.

They just reauthorize all of the tax abatements for downtown.

Drives me mad.

They didn't bring that to the public.

By the way.

We didn't get a say in that.

So that's a problem.

But if we're going to do it for them, why can't we do it for first time homebuyers?

Why can't we do it for people who have recently purchased homes?

They deserve that same benefit of a five year tax abatement that these big multi-million dollar projects are getting.

They got the money.

You got millions of dollars by property, you got the money to pay the taxes.

The average taxpayer, the average home owner, should not be flipping the bill for all of these large developments.

Okay.

the secondarily so that's a five year tax abatement for first time homebuyers.

The second thing for that would also be addressing the near homeless issue.

Right?

So we've got a lot of new homeless.

And what happens with that is there are people who are paycheck to paycheck, and they might be one paycheck away from falling into homelessness.

So I would put together a program to actually provide three months of rent, up to three months of rent $1,000 for up to three months in protection.

But it would also go with some case management assistance and job placement and job training as well.

So there's also money to support that from what do you call it?

Dr.

>> We could get like about $200,000 or three.

It might be 300,000 from them now, and we can get it from HUD as well.

$300,000 from them to help support this.

I've got all the numbers on my website.

Marcus.

The number for rochester.com.

It's under my plan section.

Check that out.

As well as pushing back against the drugs that are in our city and cracking down on that, because that is having a huge impact on the cost of housing as well.

I really want to push to stop these people that are from outside buying up all of the properties, but that is going to involve a lot more of a how could you say it?

Judicial approach through legislation.

And we're going to have to be very meticulous at how we do that.

They tried it in the city before, but they never followed up the judge's decision actually gave them the way to do it.

The guidelines to do it, to address the issue.

But they never saw it again because it was an election year.

That year, of course.

So those are four parts of things that I would do.

I'd do some more too.

But if we're going to address the stuff that we want to do, it's got to do more than just sound good.

It's got to be more than just pleasing to the ear or look nice on a chart.

It has to be practical.

We have to be able to really fund it.

And all of this.

The government should own this.

The government should own that.

The government should own anything except the buildings that they're in.

The government owns too much.

That's why our debt burden is so heavy.

That's why the taxes keep going up.

That's why the expenses keep going up.

And that's why the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting kicked in the bum.

>> All right.

Rich, I'll take your phone call in just a second.

One other follow up.

I got a couple emails on the subject of BMI.

I'm sorry, a BMI Army, BMI, and.

>> Let's leave my weight out of this universal.

>> You be I. Which is GBI in the city.

BMI whole a whole different day.

so the city has piloted they piloted a rather small program about 338 individuals for general, general basic income and that's a guaranteed basic income.

So that's it lasted a year.

Now there's talk about expanding it, and there's disagreement among council about whether the city ought to be trying to do that at the city level.

Would you support any kind of a UBI, GBI program at the city level?

>> So at the city level, it's it's vastly becoming a necessity that there is something like that, whether I agree with it or not is a whole 'nother conversation.

But with the continued inflation that the dollar is facing and no monetary policy to push deflation, it's going to be more of a push towards universal basic income.

But that's nothing that the city can actually afford.

Again, our taxes are high enough as it is.

People are struggling and the taxes keep going up.

People that have lived that are living in grandma's house, three generations in, are getting pushed out because the taxes are rising.

We do this guaranteed basic income on the city level.

We just don't have a way to pay for it.

And that's what we always have to talk about.

I love things that sound good.

I love things that look pretty.

But if it's not practical, it's not impactful.

>> Okay?

GBI, UBI at the city level, Dave.

>> It works.

We can do it.

Yes.

>> Where's the money?

>> Well, we want to start talking about how we we can pay for stuff.

That's a whole different thing.

We can do it.

>> Give me some examples that you look at as a green and you say this is an easy way to to take money from here and put it over here.

>> Okay.

So well, Marcus alluded to it first.

No more corporate welfare right there.

Now here's the problem.

As folks who try to find out exactly how much money we give away, you always have a hard time.

The city isn't very forthcoming in terms of how much money they actually give to developers and other corporations.

So that's but that's one way.

Another way is an idea that I have that I would like to have a and again, details and and looking at time but a vacancy tax both for these some of these apartments that are not getting filled because of their supposedly affordable and they're not there's ways to do that also with some business properties as well.

And then the third way, I one of my reasons for there's many other reasons for this, but one of the reasons that is financial for getting a handle on Rochester police department is how much money I estimate it's in the millions every year we end up paying out for lawsuits on police misconduct.

Every year we get a handle on police behavior.

We don't have to pay those either.

That saves us money as well.

>> All right.

Rich and Rochester has been waiting to jump in.

Hey, Rich, go ahead.

>> Hello, Evan.

How are you doing?

>> Very good.

Sir.

>> there's a couple of things, of course, since I've been listening.

But the first thing I was, I want to say is when they talk about Josh Lofton, there's a reason that Josh Lofton was closed.

Not only when you concentrate your worst, you end up making a a de facto position within your school system.

That's what Josh Lofton ended up being.

Also, the fact that some some of the students disseminated and were spread around the school system with the overall numbers go up just because those students were allowed to go back into the school system, because there's also the effect of other students on them.

That's the problem with Josh Lofton.

When you had nothing but bad nothing but challenged students, you did not have any other models.

And they find that when you take a challenge student and put them in an area a, a setting where there are other students who will model for them and even encourage them also, as much as one of your guests said that he was poor and he didn't commit crime, his anecdotal story does not does not hold up with the data.

Poverty does contribute a large, in large part to crime.

We know this so you're not blaming the poor people, but you are blaming the situation.

The situation of poverty, even exacerbates our school system.

We always attack the teachers.

And you know they're not doing your job.

But in the end, if you're if your overall if the overall area that you're drawing your students from are constantly under stress, financial stress, food stress and everything, you can throw as much money as you want at the schools.

That's not going to fix the problem.

So I think I've heard a lot of I just and then the last thing I want to say is that when he said it sounds pretty basic, income does work.

The fact is, yeah, will will we're going to have to figure out where the money is.

But the question is, is it an investment in our society?

Is basic income the overall overarching effect of it because we know it's effective?

Will the overarching effect down the road get us more tax money from these people who are now in the system and contributing?

So it's not as simple as, you know, I hear jingles, but I'm not really hearing in the sense real solutions to problems sometimes.

>> All right, Rich, I appreciate that.

Got just about two minutes left.

So take about a minute a piece here and we'll close it out.

Marcus, anywhere you want to take that go ahead.

>> So I don't even have time to address that the way I want to.

Firstly, what I'd say to anybody that's listening go on my website if you want to learn more about me.

You can also volunteer or donate right on there.

Marcus.

Number four rochester.com.

But also if you go into the plan section, all of the plans that I have on there have how much they'll cost and have where we can get money from for it.

I'm very, very big on that.

It's important that we pay for stuff and we know where the money is going to come from and limit the amount that's going to have to be pulled from the actual people's pockets in our city, because we know that the struggle is real.

And to close off on that and put an end cap on all of that, listen, right now, we're not getting the level of attention to our everyday needs on City council.

I'm running to be a representative of the people, for the people, for the issues that these people continue to disregard, act like they're not important, and vicariously make us as if we're not important and we don't matter.

You matter to me.

Go to my website and make sure that you guys get out and vote early.

Voting starts October 25th.

election day is November 4th.

Go vote Marcus C. Williams for Rochester City Council.

>> All right, Dave, you're going to take us right through the music, and that's fine.

Go ahead.

>> All right.

Well, to look, let's let's talk about the Josh Lofton comment, because I can expand it to mean all of our problems.

All right.

Look, when you create a sense of community, things do start to it's easier to fix our problems.

And Josh Lofton did have that for a while.

And as someone who's worked in residential educational settings, recreational settings with kids, if you have the right people, with the right mindset, that community takes hold and then you can have quote, the naughty kids all in one spot.

But the minute you don't have that community, he's right.

You lose.

You lose track of them.

You can't control what's happening.

>> Well, thank you for coming in and sharing one more time, Dave.

Tell people where to find more about you.

>> W-w-w-what Change.org.

day for change is my handle on all my social medias.

>> And it's Marcus, the number four Rochester.

Com that's right.

Marcus C. Williams.

Thank you for making time for us.

>> Thank you for having me.

>> And you'll be welcome back soon.

Here, Dave Sutliff-Atias.

Same.

I know you guys are both busy with your schedules.

Thanks for making this work.

Thank you, thank you.

More Connections coming up in a moment.

>> This program is a production of WXXI Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station.

Its staff, management or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience.

Any rebroadcast or use in another medium, without express written consent of WXXI is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the Connections link at wxxinews.org.