Malloy touts mayoral experience in gubernatorial race

New London - Dan Malloy, former mayor of Stamford and current candidate for governor, says this plaza could use some planters.

Malloy was standing last week on the recently redesigned Parade in downtown New London, casting an appraising eye on everything from the newly laid tile on the steps - the city inspectors need to check for cracking, he noted with a frowning glance downward - to the row of buildings that overlooks the refurbished space.

"What great architecture," Malloy said, gesturing to the cavernous Cronin Building, long vacant and out of use, and the marquee of what was Mallove's Jewelers, a local landmark, before the company decamped for Waterford in 2006.

"Why is all of this not housing?" he said. "Does the city not allow this?"

It's not prohibited, of course. The problem is making the visions of civic leaders take shape in the real world: getting the old buildings fixed up and rented, the public squares rehabbed and re-greened.

It's that process that Malloy says he knows as well as anyone after 14 years of overseeing a resurgence in Stamford. And he is hoping his success in that city will persuade fellow Democrats to hand him their nomination for governor, an office the party hasn't won since 1986.

Difficulties raising money

But Malloy is a longshot this year, as he acknowledged in an interview, much as he was four years ago. Last time, Malloy snatched a party endorsement from New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr., in a raucous convention in Hartford, only to lose in a primary. DeStefano went on to lose to Gov. M. Jodi Rell in the general election.

This time, in a crowded primary field, Malloy has struggled to translate nearly four years of not-quite-official campaigning into a lot of name recognition among voters, and he now trails, among party faithful, former U.S. Senate nominee Ned Lamont.

With a potentially well-funded opponent in Republican front-runner Tom Foley, Lamont has opted out of the state's restrictive public financing system, pledging to raise and spend money aggressively.

Malloy, meanwhile, is plugging along in the public financing system, even as the system's administrators and supporters wait to see if it could be struck down entirely by a federal appeals court.

And even if the system remains in its current form, its fundraising thresholds and limitations have proved daunting to the Malloy campaign.

After a rally Wednesday to mark Malloy's formal declaration of his candidacy, the campaign's treasurer, Len Miller, said that in 13 months the campaign had raised roughly $100,000 in qualified contributions, which must be raised from individuals in amounts no greater than $100.

To receive a full public grant under the campaign finance system, the campaign will have to raise a total of $250,000 in increments of $100 or less before June, unless lawmakers change that threshold or move the deadline.

Malloy's campaign has slammed Lamont, who has expressed support for public financing in the past, for his flip-flop. But Malloy's supporters also acknowledge that the restrictions on fundraising have proved burdensome.

"The new campaign finance law hamstrings a candidate's ability to get the message out," said Chuck Flynn of the New London police union, which endorsed Malloy. "The advocates say special interest is evil, but we're a police union worried about working conditions and benefits, and we should have a voice just as much as the mom and pop."

So, was this participation in the system holding Malloy back?

"Oh, you can't make me answer that question," Flynn said with a smile. "I guess you look at it like you have two millionaires who have all the money to get their message out however they want, versus everybody in Connecticut contributing to a candidate to help him get the message out. I think the guys with the money have the voice ... but I don't think they've got the right message."

Malloy waved off the issue during the conversation on the Parade. Self-funding was no option for him, Malloy said.

"I can't change who my grandparents were," he said. "Simply because you were born rich or made a fortune doesn't mean that you have the currency necessary to be elected governor of the state of Connecticut. I hope they make that argument, actually, you know what - "

Malloy had turned away and bent to pick up something off the top concrete step. He held it up, grinning: a penny.

"It's the third one I've picked up today, I'm telling you," he said.

Investing in infrastructure

An hour later, standing with a group of southeastern Connecticut legislators at Union Station, Malloy also gave a ringing endorsement of increased state investment in commuter rail. That is welcome news to local backers of Shore Line East, the commuter train that serves New London only twice a day.

"The imperative to get our economic house in order is so that we can spend on infrastructure, as far as I'm concerned," Malloy said, immediately adding that the comments "maybe won't translate well" as a soundbite.

"I believe that having bonded debt to build a Connecticut for the next 50 years is not only legitimate, it's exemplary," he said. "Or, to put it another way, not having done that for the last 20 years is a disgrace. The idea that we won't invest in infrastructure because we need to reserve the right to go to the bond markets every four or five years to bail ourselves out is unacceptable. And the ability to do that has delayed some of the hard decisions from being made."

He conceded that former Gov. John G. Rowland had plowed more than $2 billion in bond funds into new construction at the University of Connecticut.

"What I'm critical of is (Interstate) 95, and 84 and 91 and the Merritt Parkway, and practically no rail expansion," Malloy said. "Having missed the opportunity to get federal money toward car replacement, and having missed the opportunity for probably billions of dollars at this point left on the table in Washington because ideologically we didn't support their expenditure."

Government and jobs

Later that same day, the light was failing over the Utopia shopping center on Route 1 in Waterford, a recently built, up-market strip mall whose offerings include a beauty salon, and Filomena's restaurant.

A fundraiser for Malloy was underway at Filomena's, hosted by New London City Councilor Mike Buscetto III, who developed the shopping center. A few doors down from the restaurant is Mallove's Jewelers, the former New London mainstay.

Ringing introductions came from local political luminaries such as Sen. Andrea Stillman, D-Waterford, and William Satti, who would be installed shortly afterward as the new chairman of the New London Democratic Town Committee.

Malloy gave his most rousing speech of the long afternoon, including the line he has been using of late to refer to Lamont and Foley.

"I'm not one of the guys going around saying I want to run government more like a business," Malloy declared. "I want to run government like a good government."

That was music to the ears of the health care union officials sitting at the table to Malloy's right.

"There's a direct correlation between who runs the state of Connecticut and the job losses, which by the way runs contrary to what we usually hear from Republicans, that they're all pro-business, " said Greg Kotecki, a field representative for AFT Connecticut, whose locals represent workers at Lawrence & Memorial Hospital.

"Dan really said it best," said Kathy Martin, the president of Local 5051. "He said that he can outwork anybody, he doesn't need the millions and millions that the rich Republicans have."

Malloy is a government believer, and says it is naive to think that the state can run efficiently on business acumen alone.

"This argument that Foley and Lamont are making that all you need is a business leader to run government is being rejected," he said. "Tell me a business that incarcerates people or treats them if they have no money at the hospital, or picks up the bill, or educates 15 or 20 thousand people in an urban educational system, or is responsible for zoning. Tell me that. There is a difference of having a level of experience of running government that is very different than raiding a company and stripping out the assets."

t.mann@theday.com