Occupy asked to leave the Green

Photo by Selen Uman.

If City Hall has its way, Occupy New Haven may soon leave its home on the New Haven Green.

Two meetings were held at City Hall on Feb. 8 and Feb. 15 to discuss the future of Occupy New Haven, the anti-economic inequality protest that has been encamped on the Green since mid-October. Members of the municipal government have argued that the presence of the protesters on the Green is limiting others’ right to use the public place and has offered several proposals it finds acceptable to both parties. But leaders of Occupy New Haven have said the group will decline the city’s offer and that the protest will not leave the Green until major social and political changes are brought about.

At the first of the two meetings — attended by representatives of Occupy New Haven, the Yale Police Department, the New Haven Police Department, the city’s parks department and the Chief Administrator’s Office — the city invited the protesters to move the camp to another location, City Hall spokeswoman Elizabeth Benton ’04 said. The Occupy New Haven encampment is one of the few nationwide protests to maintain much of its strength in the same position through the winter.

“We didn’t come to into the meeting with any specific plan or end date,” Benton said. “But we did state our concern that there can’t be a permanent encampment on the Green.”

The Green is supposed to be available for a variety of public uses, Benton said, including events like the International Arts and Ideas Festival and the St. Patrick’s Day Parade, as well as impromptu events such as frisbee games or dog walks. Having a permanent encampment on the upper part of the Green, she said, means other people are not able to use the Green in the way it was intended.

Some of the proposals floated by city officials included having Occupy New Haven relocate to another space or only occupy the Green for a certain part of the day. But following the first City Hall meeting, at their weekly assembly on Feb. 12, the Occupy protesters decided not to relocate their encampment, regardless of the potential alternative locations offered by the City.

“The camp is part of our political statement,” said Ina Staklo, a member of Occupy New Haven. “We are not going to dissemble it, for now.”

The protesters on the Green also expressed their desire to collaborate with the city and make accommodations for future city events and festivals, Staklo said.

“There is a misconception that Occupy New Haven is detached from the rest of the New Haven population, but that’s not true,” she said. “We support the people and want to collaborate to everything that is for the people.”

A second meeting was held last Wednesday, in which Drew Days LAW ’66, a law school professor and head proprietor of the Green — which is owned by a trust of prominent Elm City citizens — expressed his concern that there needed to be a specific date at which the protesters’ presence on the Green would terminate.

Staklo said that Days’ presence caused Wednesday’s meeting to get “pretty heated.” Still, Benton said she believes the two meetings between city officials and protesters were promising.

“I think there has been a dialogue and I think that dialogue is going to continue,” she said.

Staklo said that if the protesters were to depart from their current location, it would be only in the interest of expanding the movement. Occupy New Haven’s current objective, she added, is to expand and strengthen its ties with other Occupy movements in New England.

Chris Garaffa, a member of Occupy New Haven, said that the city’s offer to accommodate the protest in another location is motivated by political purposes.

“We made no agreement yet, but it’s clear that the City wants Occupy off the Green,” Garaffa said. “They want to squash our movement.”

He added that he believes Yale’s Commencement ceremony in May is a factor in the city’s desire to relocate the encampment.

“They just don’t want the camp in the background for Commencement,” he said.

Benton responded that the University had nothing to do with the city’s request, and University Secretary Linda Lorimer said the secretary’s office, which plans Commencement, has had “no involvement with any suggestion that Occupy New Haven move at all.”

At the end of the second meeting, city officials and Occupy protesters decided that the city would develop a specific plan to be proposed to protesters at the next meeting, Benton said. She added that the groups did not set a time frame to meet again, but that it would likely be very soon.

While fewer and fewer Occupy protests have maintained their physical presence, members of New Haven’s contingent said they were determined to maintain a strong presence on the Green.

“People in Occupy New Haven want to stay here and are willing to defend the camp,” Garaffa said.

Unlike many other Occupy protests across the nation, Occupy New Haven has had a cordial relationship with the city since its inception. City and police officials have said since the protest began on Oct. 15 that safety was their primary concern about the encampment, and have repeatedly said since then that they had no plans to evict the protesters as other cities have done.

The New Haven Green was designated a National Historic Landmark District in 1970.


  • Catherine08

    Yay! I don’t believe there’s much of anyone living there, anyway. Every time I pass by at night, it’s dark, and it looks like it’s just a collection of tents and junk.

    • nocheez

      Yay? You have some serious issues. You should applaud anyone making an attempt at change, or even changing the discussion which Occupy has done globally. Yet you say yay get rid of them? How this bothers you so much is beyond comprehension. Oh, the poor strip of grass. We haven’t been able to put our nice little chemicals all over it given to us by the military industrial complex who doens’t want to pay for safe disposal of their chemical weapons left overs and creates the green grass hysteria so many love. Moo. Lets have a nice little lawn we can’t walk on or use. Jeez…………….

      • yayasisterhood

        “Lets [sic] have a nice little lawn we can’t walk on or use.”

        That’s just the point. We can’t walk on or use what was once the New Haven Green because a bunch of people erected guarded tents on it surrounded by angry signs. Time to go!

        • nocheez

          Really, I walk all over the New Haven green, tons of room. Amazing you can’t find room to walk. By the way historically greens were meant for people to come together to chat about community issues. Is that what you go there for?

        • MsMoneypenny

          Who USES New Haven Green? It’s perfectly safe to walk through now. Give me a break!

      • Standards

        Wait, what?

        Yeah, why would Yale students be bothered by a cardboard shanty-town set up right in front of our campus?

        You’ve had your speech. You’ve made your message. A right to free speech is not the same as a right to live in a park.

        And I don’t want to even touch the crazy that is the second half of your paragraph. Yeah, I’m sure the U.S. government is dousing the New Haven grass with Agent Orange.

        • penny_lane

          The right they’re exercising is that of assembly, and I don’t believe the Bill of Rights put a time limit on that one…

        • nocheez

          “And I don’t want to even touch the crazy that is the second half of your paragraph. Yeah, I’m sure the U.S. government is dousing the New Haven grass with Agent Orange.”

          LOL, wow, you totally did not get the reference. Not surprised.

          “You’ve had your speech. You’ve made your message. A right to free speech is not the same as a right to live in a park.”

          The green has a private board and is not owned by the town so apparently up until now it is the same. Get over it.

  • Jaymin

    “leaders of Occupy New Haven have said the group will decline the city’s offer and that the protest will not leave the Green until major social and political changes are brought about.”

    It would help if ONH would tell us what they actually want. Their website lists no prescription for change, and the only explicit statement of political desire I’ve seen is the “End the Fed” sign painted over one of the tents.

    • nocheez

      Apparently you didn’t go down to the Occupy info desk and read the original Occupy declaration. I think it is pretty obvious they want those who caused the economic crash via fraud to be held accountable and want money out of politics such as in creating an ammendment to end corporate personhood. They also want everyone to come down to the General Assemblies and have their voice heard, bring in their own ideas. It’s called democracy – heard of it? Horizontal democracy, the only real voice you have yet you decide to say nothing because you think your vote means something. Poor thing…

      • RexMottram08

        Fraud? They caught and prosecuted Madoff.

        The only frauds left are sitting in Congress…

  • sonofmory

    Get them out! it is unfair to the other citizens of New Haven that this encampment has become permanent and the green cannot be used for other purposes. I respect the right of the people to protest but not when the protesters take away the rights of other citizens. In addition, the ONH mantra of not leaving until “major political and social change are brought about” – well, how is that being measured or determined? and how, other than camping on the green, are you actually doing anything to instigate that change?

    • OccupytheClassroom

      How about calling for a moratorium on all foreclosures in New Haven for one year? Would you back that?

    • nocheez

      The encampment takes up a very small part of the green. To claim they are in the way is an absurdity. They are doing things to instigate change. If you wanted more done you would join. Apathy from the rest of the population that sits in their lounge chair playing armchair QB and complaining is slowing the change. The whole message of Occupy is to have everyone join in and have their voice heard and figure out together how to make this a better community/country/world. Apparently you aren’t up for it. Or maybe you’re doing just fine at the moment and care not about others. But don’t worry, as the capitalists drive this into a third world country, you’ll eventually feel the pain too.

      • LtwLimulus90

        It doesn’t look as if ONH is having much success convincing people of this “horizontal democracy”. Why do you think that is? Perhaps it’s the antagonizing attitude people like you display that drives people away from participating, because it’s very clear to everyone with eyes that this movement isn’t going to last much longer. Just look at the green now. What do we have, around 30 tents with maybe 10 people in them? Inspiring, really…

        • nocheez

          If you allow me to make you move away from addressing good ideas you have serious issues. You should judge issues on their merit, not the messenger. I mean, you’ve been so peachy to date? What is inspiring is the global changing of discussion and the many accomplishments (you dont know about unfortunately) that have taken place. The movement will explode in the spring. Do yourself a favor. Put away your prejudices and look into horizontal/direct action democracy and you’ll see how sensible it really is – for you, for all of us.

          • LtwLimulus90

            I understand the ridiculous pipe dream that is “horizontal democracy”. I am capable of judging ideas on their merit (or in this case, lack thereof). Nothing in my post suggested that I* don’t do that. My point, If I need spell it out for you, is that their plan to “have everyone join in and have their voice heard and figure out together how to make this a better community/country/world” is quite obviously a huge failure, partially because of the way it is presented. I think Occupy New Haven is going nowhere. Maybe I’m wrong. We will see. In any case, your attitude and condescending tone are winning you no allies here.

        • nocheez

          It will be the majorities loss to not look into horizontal democracy. Often the masses are wrong. Because of ignorance people will stick with systems that hurt them. Unfortunate. Apparently you are unaware of how many occupy’s there are and that the majority do not live in public spaces. The spring events will prove this and the movement will grow dramatically.

          • RexMottram08

            If it grows, it will be as a rash, an irritant not a salve.

  • penny_lane

    Major changes start with small changes. ONH should take a leaf out of OP’s book:


  • Ciarrai

    I can’t imagine what is to be gained by keeping this mess in place on the Green. The Green is a place for open greenness in the middle of the city and each time I pass by and see the tents and stuff of the Occupy crowd I am reminded of the balls these folks have to tie up the Green with their message that the establishment impacts upon us all in ways that are out of our control. Sort of like the way this Occupy group is impacting the Green with no say from those of us that like to look at the Green without all the junk on it. BTW, I agree with 99% of the goals of ONH, but them staying on the Green is not one of them.

  • lakia

    Housing is a human RESPONSIBILITY, not a right.

    • nocheez

      You are brainwashed.

    • nocheez

      “Housing is a human RESPONSIBILITY, not a right.”

      In a barbaric society your comment is accurate.

      • eli2015

        The barbaric society is the one where I can demand property from the people around me and claim it as a right

        • nocheez

          You demand property from the people around you?

          Any society that cares about it’s people puts life above acquiring land. It’s ovious you prefer land. This shows your lack of character.

  • tomago

    Playtime is over. These “campers” have accomplished nothing. Most of them are AA and NA addicts with nothing better to do. They are gone most of the time, seeking warmer quarters, like the New Haven Library or Barnes and Noble. The city of New Haven has been more than patient with these half-way house tenants. We all have a right to protest under the Constitution, but no one has the right to “occupy”. Honestly, if they wanted to make a statement about “corporate greed” and the “1%”, they should have shown some guts and pitched their tents in the middle of the Old Campus, isn’t that where all this “greed” is borne? Time to throw them out…they’ve wasted their opportunity to effect change. They are not the 99%…not by a long stretch.

    • penny_lane

      Haha, wow, bigoted much?

      • LtwLimulus90

        None of this is bigoted.

        • nocheez

          Yes it is, because Tomago doesn’t want to be reminded by these homeless folks about the failure of our system. We are only as good as our weakest link. When we ignore these ills we do evenutally pay for it in a myriad of ways most moo cows can’t think deep enough to see. To ignore it shows the lack of character in folks. PERIOD!

          • River_Tam

            That’s not what bigotry is.

        • penny_lane

          It’s also a horrible way to talk about people who are recovering from addiction, as if that had anything to do with whether or not their cause is worthy. It’s just as bad as if he said, “It’s mostly gays” or “It’s mostly blacks,” with the derisive implication that because they are part of “group x,” their views don’t matter. An insidious ad hom attack and open bigotry at its worst.

          • LtwLimulus90

            This is your* erroneous and illogical understanding of his sentence projected onto his idea. That AA and NA people live in the camp is a fact. That they are addicts suggests the likelihood of certain habits and predispositions is only intuitive. That they *probably* don’t actually hold the views expressed by ‘ONH’ and are rather more interested in the material benefits of living in the camp is what is suggested here, and is not an illogical supposition. That their views don’t matter because they are addicts is nowhere to be found here, and only what *you* read.

        • joematcha

          Actually, everything involved in making blanket assumptions about a group of people is bigoted. Claiming that “most of them are AA and NA addicts with nothing better to do”, or saying “these half-way house tenants” is an effort on tomago’s part to use what he considers base associations to somehow make his claims about Occupy’s irrelevance seem stronger. It’s fine if he or she disagrees with with their ideas and/or their methods, but trying to imply that it’s a fact that they are mostly addicts and this somehow makes them bad people is obviously a bigoted reliance on a stereotype often used to discredit the poor in urban areas.

    • OccupytheClassroom

      They are as close to Yale as they possibly can be. Occupying Yale would be tantamount to throwing yourself in jail.

    • nocheez

      Whats the matter, the realization that there are homeless, and have been prior upsets you? Need to get them out of your site? I guess that makes the problem dissappear in your eyes? The campers have accomplished nothing? Really? You know what all the work groups have or haven’t done. Amazing ignorance. The fact that you so worry about a tiny strip of grass being used by folks who are trying to bring new ideas to the forefront is truly sad.

  • OccupytheClassroom

    “The Occupy New Haven encampment is one of the few nationwide protests to maintain much of its strength in the same position through the winter.”

    Can we stop spreading this myth? There are 50 camps still active. http://firedoglake.com/state-of-the-occupation/

    • LtwLimulus90

      What’s a myth is that this camp is still “active”. It’s actually effectively dead. Barely any tents are occupied during the day (even fewer are occupied at night) and the movement has ceased to capture people’s attention save for when it cries out like a spoiled child. “Night of terror”? Please. That was simply a desperate plea for attention now that the movement has squandered all of its political momentum

      • nocheez

        The movement doesn’t reside in the tents, lol. Wow, try understanding what you are talking about before spewing sheer nonsense.

        • Standards

          If the movement doesn’t reside in the tents, feel free to remove them and carry it on where the rest of you sleep.

        • little_mango

          Thus remove the tents.

          • nocheez

            Nah, it is still one small part of the movement, a statement. And it gives presence, so much that you are talking about it, and disturbingly upset about it. I think you might rather worry about the bank fraud that lost 40 percent of the worlds wealth instead of a small patch of grass.

          • LtwLimulus90

            One can care about the bank fraud that “lost 40 percent of the world’s wealth” (false) without propping up an empty shantytown to pretend the movement still has momentum.

        • LtwLimulus90

          I said “camp” not movement. “lol. Wow.”

  • cjzurcher

    I cannot imagine anyone right to use the Green being impeded upon by the ONH encampment. 1. It’s cold out. Who’s going to go out there and play Frisbee in this weather? 2. Arts and Ideas and any other event would support the goals of the Occupiers if they were asked. 3. This is a people-powered movement that began on September 17, 2011, and has spread to over 100 cities in the United States, and similar actions have taken place in more than 1,500 cities globally. These people who are camped out and, if not camping, then they’re occupying the Green during the day, are fighting back against the banks, corporations and Wall Street tycoons that created the economic collapse that we’re currently wallowing in and that caused the greatest recession in generations. Many of the Occupiers lost their jobs in the very collapse they’re protesting. It aims to expose the richest 1% of people that are writing the rules of an unfair global economy that is foreclosing on our future — mine AND yours. Maybe you, or someone you know, haven’t been affected (which I find very hard to believe), but the people on the Green, the Occupiers, are assembled peacefully and are protected by the first amendment of our Constitution. To claim they are blocking others’ use of the Green is not only ridiculous, but the idea subverts any morsel of social justice the Occupiers trying to communicate by sacrificing their daily lives for the well being of the rest of our lives. I think we could all learn something by going down there and talking to some of the Occupiers. Ask them why they’re there. What they’re doing there. Why is it important to them. This story, written by not one but two reporters for the Yale Daily News — a newspaper that is produced by one of the largest, richest Ivy League universities in the world — does a mediocre job in covering this issue. They went to the meeting. They talked to some folks there, or at least they got quotations from some of them. Maybe the reporters are from families of the 1% and would otherwise feel threatened by delving into this subject a little deeper to explain the morals and values of the hippies in the tents that so many of us who are sleeping in our warm dormitories and homes are so afraid of. It’s not a crime to Occupy New Haven Green. It would be a crime to force them off because what those people represent are crimes that have been committed against millions of Americans for decades. I think it’s about time people stood up for their rights and the rights of others and I applaud anyone with the nerve to do so.

    • nocheez


  • sonofmory

    how about a compromise – take down the tents that are not being used, other than to make it look like there are more people there than there are. That would leave the Green with about 4 tents and most could deal with that. Let’s not make this movement out to be more than it is.

  • MsMoneypenny

    There is a whole other section of Green on the other side of Temple St. for those who want to….you know, play games or whatever. And Arts and Ideas is pathetic.

    I’ve never seen the upper section of the Green used for much and I’ve lived in New Haven since 1985. I guess maybe the banks don’t want a clear view of the people they’re ripping off.

    • LtwLimulus90

      Oh right….it’s ARTS AND IDEAS that’s pathetic…

      • MsMoneypenny

        Arts and Ideas is the biggest mishmosh of no talent around. The only shows worth seeing are too expensive for a lot of people.

  • cyalie

    Great–it is an eyesore in the middle of what is supposed to be a beautiful public space for all to enjoy.

    • nocheez

      Of course an attempt at making social change is less important than what the green looks like, phew…

      • Standards

        It is, actually. Because your “attempt” is going nowhere, and the Green is public space which is currently an eye-sore.

        Your ability to attempt “social change” will not be impeded by getting off the Green.

        • nocheez

          It already went somewhere. Because you aren’t aware of the gains doesn’t mean I have to dumb myself down and pretend what you beleive is reality.

          By the way I don’t live on the green. It’s obvious you do not understand this beyond your petty beliefs.

          • Standards

            Did it go somewhere? News to me. If it did, again, there is no reason for anyone to stay there.

            If it didn’t and, as you yourself has said, few people even stay on the Green, then nothing is lost by moving out anyway.

            So why should occupiers stay again?

            (And no one is asking you to “dumb” anything down, and I fail to see how my beliefs are “petty.” Usually, when adults talk, they give what’s called “reasons,” instead of just saying random silly nonsense. Like instead of saying “your petty beliefs,” you say “your beliefs are petty because ____”

            I know it’s subtle, but you’ll get the hang of it.

          • nocheez

            You don’t get to decide whether there is a good reason for those who want to stay there.

            Actually, my first comment was correct because you chose to assume without investigating. You made comments insinuating Occupy has done nothing. It is certainly a false claim. Republican folks like Frank Luntz are very afraid of Occupy changing the national conversation as they have. That is the first step of the movement which is only months old. It has moved folks in over 100 cities to draft proposals to create an ammendment to end corporate personhood. It has made millions pull their funds from large banks and put them into credit unions and small local banks. It has moved two Senators to also draft proposals for ammendments to reverse Citizens United. I could go on and on, and you yourself could actually research before making ignorant comments.

            Maybe you’ll get the hang of it? Maybe not?

          • Standards

            I’m not speaking about the national movement. I’m speaking about the group camped on the green. This isn’t about the national movement.

          • nocheez

            Listen, this is part of protesting,part of that gets under peoples skin. The point is the people complaining have a very weak argument, I am sure most or none of them ever even go to the green. And even so, the TWO greens are massive, This encampment is worth keeping to make a statement that we need massive change. A statement of the people against the establishment. The green is privately owned by the way and is why they have been able to stay there so long.

            You will get your way because eventually they will send the “troops” in to get these folks out and you can cheer. Hooray for your victory, not a victory in the least.

            I am asking you to look at the bigger picture, be enraged over incredibly serious issues, not that little strip of grass that truly is not cauing any problems. In fact some folks told me they feel safer walking through that part of the green at night now because of the presence. You must understand that homeless and criminal activity was there prior, will be there after, you just won’t see the tents. What will the system do then? Nothing. As long as it appears to be fine. Well it isn’t. There is a homeless problem, a large part of them who are mentally ill or addicted and need help. Again I bring up NIMBE – let someone help, but not here…

            Is that really a good thing?

  • nocheez

    You have to laugh, Yale doesn’t want the tents in the background for their commencement, lol. How pathetic. Yale is an organization with much land it does not pay taxes on in New Haven and an endowment that is equal to some small countries and whom puts massive burden on homeowners to make up for Yales lack of paying taxes .

    God forbid there are tents on a small part of the “privately owned” green where some grass might turn brown. Let Yale find another place to have commencement on all that land they have.

    It’s pathetic that people are so controlled by false background assumptions they cannot see who the real criminals are, or where their focus of anger should be. People who are worried about this small encampment need to get a grip and actually open their mouths on a real issue.

    Leave the tents alone. And for gods sake, Occupy’ers are feeding the homeless there, that is a public service. Thats a good thing. Or is this a case of NIMBE? Not in my back yard?. Hide all the homeless away from the uppity folks who can’t deal with looking at those who need help. Have you folks a humane bone in your bodies or are you really that pathetic?

    • Standards

      You must be kidding.

      Yale has done so much for New Haven, way more than necessary. And New Haven would be far worse off were it not for Yale. Skim through some of this. http://www.yale.edu/onhsa/economic.htm

      But do tell, who are the real criminals here? So what if the occupyers are feeding the homeless? It’s a great thing. They don’t need to do that on the Green. It’s great if the occupyers want to “enact social change,” whatever that means. They don’t need to do it on the green.

      In fact I see no reason for them to stay on the green.

      So if there’s no real reason for them to stay, and reason for them to leave, then what’s the problem with Yale or New Haven wanting them gone?

      Or are the occupyers just throwing a little fit because their meaningless pow-wow is over?

      • nocheez

        Yale does offer some good things however, you are not seeing the big picture. They have also increased taxes for everyone, people who cannot afford those taxes. You are under the idea we need powerful institutions to do good for us instead of letting everyone do good for themselves. You need to shed the idea of Kings, Pepsi, whomever…

        • LtwLimulus90

          And how exactly has Yale “increased taxes for everyone”?

          • nocheez

            If an institution owns largfe parts of the town and is releied of certainb taxes someone has to make it up. There are many things Yale needs to better themselves with.

    • Robbie

      Okay, it’s fine to be passionate about ONH, but don’t lie outright while calling other people ignorant. Yale does indeed pay property tax to the city.

      • nocheez

        Yale is relieved of many taxes on properties. Get real.

        • LtwLimulus90

          send us your evidence?

          • penny_lane

            S/he is correct; Yale’s non-profit status makes it tax exempt.

            However, there is such a thing as Payment In Lieu Of Taxes (PILOT), which Yale does indeed make.

        • penny_lane

          Yes, but they also pay one of the largest PILOTs of any institution in the country.

    • LtwLimulus90

      Commencement happens on Old Campus, not the Green. Yale has had nothing to do with the proposal to kick the occupiers off.

      • penny_lane

        The graduates march from Cross Campus to Old Campus, through Phelps Gate via the Green.

  • kellygreen

    For me, it’s not about the size of the encampment or the “wasted utility” of the green, because nobody used the grass in that area anyway. It’s about how long they’ve been there and how much the camp itself is doing. Were they proposing new and ORIGINAL change, working like dogs every week to better solve America’a financial structure, I may be all for it. But as is, without a radical reason to be there, it’s been far too long to have a hooverville in the center of a town already slapped with a stigma of high crime and overall shittiness.

    I for one am amazed at the patience of the city of New Haven tolerating their presence for so many months. If the protesters are worth their weight they will be able to use this removal to better propagate their agendas. Occupy is over. Removing the camp should not mean killing their movement.

    • Ja

      Do you know what you just said? You said: The movement is weak right now. We can take advantage of that and silence them further.

  • TheOtherHalf

    The article defines ONH’s presence on the Green as an “anti-economic inequality protest”–perhaps the more precise definition here is “inequality protest.”

    More to the point, the many commenters above who call for the camp’s removal seem confused about the cause and effect of the Occupy movement: indeed ONH is a shameful blot on the city, but getting rid of the tents isn’t exactly what will rid us of the reasons they went up in the first place. Indeed, those of you who feel uncomfortable about the presence of the camp got it precisely right: it’s downright disgusting that people have to camp out for months on end in order to be heard making a relatively simple statement about the state of social justice in the U.S.

    All this is just to say that an argument for getting rid of the tents is simply an argument for making it easier for most of you to worry less about the problem of inequality.

    Also, here’s an interesting definition of what “public space” means in the U.S: public space is where the homeless are–the libraries, the parks, the beaches on the West Coast (those that aren’t privatized), the sidewalks. I dare any of you to come up with a better definition (some of you argue that ONH activists aren’t “real” homeless. That really puts the “b” in subtle.) And I dare any of you to make a claim for how ridding the Green of tents will count as a statement against inequality. Before the 99% rhetoric and the encampments, these problems were conveniently located in poor, for most of you *invisible* communities. Open your eyes.

  • nhtownie

    While I believe in the movement’s intentions I fail to see any real change being made by people being camped out on the green. KellyGreen nailed it for me: “Were they proposing new and ORIGINAL change, working like dogs every week to better solve America’a financial structure, I may be all for it.” I walk by the camp daily. I’ve visited and spoken with people there and in the early days dropped off supplies. At this point, they’ve made their statement and we 99% ers have heard it. It’s time to find other ways to enact change.

  • CX

    I sincerely hope they are booted off before Commencement. I can’t imagine having to walk past them with my parents.

    • nocheez

      I can’t imagine the depth of prejudice in your soul…

    • MsMoneypenny

      Boo hoo, CX.

      • dolphinfetus

        Yale has done more for economic inequality in this city than the ONH “movement” has done or ever will do for it. Now it’s time for City Hall and ONH to give Yale the respect it deserves and get rid of the empty tents that they insist are somehow supporting their “free speech” but which are doing nothing but making our city look like trash.

  • joey00

    I never had a chance to stop by and meow a hello.Would regular schmoes and working poor,even some union folk be welcome there ? Was this a private club closed to the public ? Maybe make their noise in a controlled new intellectual fashion, but part of the problem was NOT enough noise,it would have worked better if they had marches and mini riots,where extra police would have to be called in etc. – of course with no one getting hurt , but make an angry statement than move on.Well,since your right across the stret from the Union Halls,PAC finance,ITS,and Corp offices,stay for a while more – BTW ,Spot anything peculiar ?
    It reminds me of the homeless occupy “tent city” . The Occupy certainly had good intentions,the occupy movement as a whole has made excellent points,absolutely informing the public about a wide range of issues..The poverty trickle up theory has affected a few more, but all i see is hobnobbing with the 1%.
    What about the sex in the dirt week ? Or the upcoming intra mural frisbee tournament ?

  • RexMottram08

    Kick them out. Just a bunch of children imagining that their dirty tents, poorly written signs and contradictory rhetoric will last longer than a fly’s fart.

    • Ja

      If nothing else they have proven their relevance as a final bulwark to the sentiment in some of these comments, which demonstrate the desire to overpower the marginalized and those perceived as weak. For that reason alone, they have plenty of reason to remain.

  • Ja

    I find it curious that Occupy New Haven remains in need of legal help when it is next door to Yale Law School where some professors and many students have come out publicly in specific support of overnight occupations/protests. They seem to keep their eyes trained on New York

    Members of Occupy New Haven attended the recent Rebellious Lawyering Conference at YLS and made some contacts that one hopes will remedy this.

    There have been affirmations from some New Haven activists of an earlier era — 1970s — that there is legal precedent for the Upper Green that might make it difficult to evict overnight protesting there. But no lawyer has confirmed it yet.

    This piece posted at Yale Law’s website specifically addresses overnight occupations:


    So we know interest is there.

    And law professor Jack Balkin, who also is involved in the school’s First Amendment clinic, has written or featured writing about the rights of Occupy protesters several times in his blog.

    So, I don’t get it. It seems a glaring example of the Town-Gown disconnect we are always talking about and wanting to address. No one from Yale Law so far has signed up to help the New Haven encampment, so far as I know. And the New Haven encampment is one of the few that has yet to be driven from its tents.

    One hopes the contacts made at the recent conference will change that. Lawyers Guild members attending the conference seemed interested in the situation in New Haven.

    How can anyone profess to support grassroots protest when they shun association with anything but the most prominent Occupy locations? New York, Oakland, etc.

    Elitism permeates even here?