Editor’s Note: This article is part of an ongoing column called Camden Front and Center, analyzing the city’s politics, development, and power structures. It reflects the author’s examination and perspective on how decisions by political, business, and civic leaders impact the city’s Black and Latino residents.  

At the conclusion of ‘The Godfather Part II,’ a scene unfolds at the family table where Tom Hagen expresses his disappointment with Michael’s decision to join the army. Michael, the adopted son of the Corleone family, explains that he had previously discussed Michael’s future with Vito, his father. 

Sonny, the heir apparent to lead the family business, was equally upset. But it was the fact that Tom, who wasn’t a blood relative, was discussing his future—as if he was a relative—that upset Michael, causing Michael to ask Tom in disgusted disbelief that they were planning his future. 

Camden residents should feel a sense of unease, much like Michael Corleone. Business and political stakeholders gathered on September 2 to discuss the city’s economic outlook without representing their interests. The meeting was headlined by lame duck Gov. Phil Murphy (D), followed by some notable names, like George Norcross, Democratic party boss and Cooper University Hospital chairman; Mark McDonough, president of New Jersey American Water; and Lara Price, COO of the Philadelphia 76ers. 

New Jersey American Water and the 76ers received tax incentives to relocate to Camden: $164 million and $82 million, respectively, thanks to Norcross, who, according to a ProPublica report and the state attorney general’s indictment, had a role in orchestrating the tax incentive program, securing incentives for his businesses and allies to the tune of $1.1 billion. Norcross was indicted with several other business and political partners.

Also in attendance were representatives from the medical services and education, science, and technology sectors, as well as, notably, Richard Smith, president of the New Jersey NAACP. Smith, who once abhorred the idea of party bosses, defended one against charges from the state attorney general, arguing that Norcross’s tactics were akin to “unorthodox tactics” of freedom fighters during the Civil Rights Movement.

Saying such was audacious and equally asinine, but I digress.

There were actual stakeholders from the city, including non-profit leaders and members of the city clergy. Missing from the gathering were community activists and advocates. They included entrepreneurs who clash with city government and residents who challenge policymakers at meetings. Protesters who pressure city officials were also absent.

Of course, Camden Mayor Vic Carstarphen’s presence marks resident “representation,” right? I suppose those in attendance “represented” the interests of the residents.

Sure, most of the folks in attendance work in Camden. They may even be from Camden (before it became Black and Latino), but how many of those folks currently actually live in Camden… not just have a Camden address? Were the needs of the residents addressed, or were they only those of the organizations represented, using needs that aligned with those of the residents to justify claims that they have the residents’ best interests at heart? 

I think we know the answer.

Those in attendance gave themselves kudos for what they deemed success. Public and private investment in Camden has resulted in a lower violent crime rate, an A+ bond rating, and an acknowledgment of success by former President Barack Obama. Equally valid is that governing power over their schools and police was taken from the residents. Tax breaks were given to already wealthy corporations—corporations with a poor record of hiring residents. 

Camden still has the second-highest poverty rate in the state. Residents must contend with pollution from a sewage plant, a garbage incinerator, and a trash pile of burning lithium-ion batteries. If that wasn’t enough, for decades, the Democratic Party, which claims to represent the interests of Black people in Camden, has utilized “the line,” which gives party candidates a competitive advantage.

Camden is a colonized territory, and it’s the result of the white power structures’ work to circumvent Black (and brown) political power, as explained by NYU professor Domingo Morel. However, Black (and brown) politicians deserve some of that blame.

Mayor Carstarphen, former Camden Mayor Dana Redd—indicted alongside Norcross for backing the tax incentive program—and other Black and Latino executives, dating back to Melvin Randolph Primas Jr., have all, in some way, compromised residents’ needs to sustain their careers, win white voter approval, reassure the white power structure, or some mix of the three.

So, no, it’s unlikely that the best interests of the people took priority.

Black executives in Camden and elsewhere have often served as political pawns. This has made them ineffective in meeting the real needs of their primarily Black constituents. The late professor of sociology, Robert Staples, spoke of this ineffectiveness amongst many Black mayors in 1978, showing that the more things change, the more they stay the same:

“A number of Black politicians have been nothing but neo-colonial pawns, whose primary allegiance has been to white institutions and values. Few of them have developed or implemented a single new program or policy of any benefit to urban Blacks. Moreover, Black mayors have carried out cutbacks in social services, opposed school desegregation, participated in strike-breaking attacks on government employees, ordered police attacks on Black communities, and tolerated police brutality and done little about high rates of black unemployment… Elected Black officials who relate to the needs of the Black community often find themselves under attack by the white-controlled media and government agencies.”

The activity of Black mayors proves Staples correct; the most recent example is Washington D.C.’s mayor, Muriel Bowser, who kowtowed to Donald Trump’s military surge in her city. Camden City is particularly unique. Black mayors—traditionally Democrats—like Bowser often kowtow to the white power structure usually represented by Republicans. In Camden, however, Black Democratic mayors have bent to their own party, which functions like Republicans in the city.

Historically, Black mayors in Camden haven’t always put the people first. Former Mayor Melvin Primas ushered in the sewage plant, garbage incinerator, and state prison. Redd and Council President Frank Moran (who later became mayor) sued residents in 2013 after they pushed back against losing control of the police department. Carstarphen “negotiated” a financial settlement with EMR in April after the lithium-ion battery fire in February. The agreement was reached without community input on how the money would be spent.

The state Democratic Party didn’t rebuke these activities.

Traditionally, Republicans are the champions of the privatization of government services, particularly public schools. State takeovers typically happen under Republicans who lead in the legislature and in the statehouse. Traditionally, Republicans encourage and benefit from low voter turnout and favor election loopholes for their benefit. 

Where Camden is concerned, Democrats assisted Republicans with taking over its municipal government in 2002, its police in 2012, and its schools in 2012. Democrats, via the Urban Hope Act, streamlined the privatization of schools. The city’s partisan election structure, combined with most voters identifying as Democrats, creates major hurdles for independents. Independent candidates who challenge party bosses struggle to secure ballot spots or gain recognition. Democrats have also hidden donors and created phantom candidates to win elections.

So again, it’s unlikely that the interests of residents took precedence at that meeting since Camden politics is neo-colonial. Ghanaian President Kwame Nkrumah said that: 

“The essence of neo-colonialism is that the State which is subject to it is, in theory, independent and has all the outward trappings of international sovereignty. In reality, its economic system and thus its political policy is directed from outside.”

In the spirit of Nkrumah, what most call an economic summit, I call a Scramble for Africa. The next scramble… I mean, the next summit meeting is scheduled for October 6.