Is There Systemic Racism In Fairfield? Question Divides Equity Task Force

FAIRFIELD, CT — A question has divided the group charged with assessing racial equity issues in town: Is there systemic racism in Fairfield?

Two members of the town’s Racial Equity and Justice Task Force felt so adamantly that Fairfield is free of systemic racism that they recently attempted to rescind their votes in support of the equity blueprint the group will present to selectmen at the end of the month.

“I have to say, and I’ve said it all along, I don’t think Fairfield has systemic racism,” Sandra Tallman said at a task force meeting Thursday, arguing separate incidents of racism do not constitute a systemic problem.

Tallman moved to rescind approval of the blueprint, which had been unanimous at the body’s Jan. 6 meeting. Tameisha Powell-Dunmore seconded.

“To hold Sandra and I hostage and our voices hostage and not allow us to remove our name, that just reinstates the spirit behind the majority,” Powell-Dunmore said in an interview after Thursday’s meeting. “For me, I felt that even though they encourage you to speak up and to share, it’s like the elephant in the room, like you better not say anything that’s opposing to the voice, the collective voice.”

Tallman and Powell-Dunmore are among two of three Republicans on the task force. The third Republican member, Steve Bogan, supported the blueprint.

“It’s not shocking, but it’s baffling, after 15 months, that sombody’d want to change it at the last minute,” Bogan said in an interview Thursday night.

The task force was created in 2020 in the wake of the murder of George Floyd to research racial equity issues in Fairfield and provide the town with recommendations. The blueprint advises, among other things, the formation of a permanent racial equity commission and the hiring of a full-time community justice and belonging officer.

The group also recommended the town make a proclamation and adopt a resolution that acknowledges the existence and impact of systems that disadvantage people of color in terms of access and opportunity in Fairfield and commits to addressing equity issues in town. The recommendation initially made direct reference to systemic racism, but the term was removed Jan. 6 prior to the blueprint’s approval. Tallman and Powell-Dunmore maintain that the document's language still indicates the presence of systemic racism.

Task force members said Thursday the existence of systemic racism was a given in the context of the body’s charge, and felt the motion to rescind the vote was disrespectful and unfair.

“It’s difficult to talk about this subject without using a term as central as systemic racism,” Ryan Odinak said. “That is a useful term and to say that we need to skirt a term as central to the dialogue … I don’t think it’s productive.”

Co-Chair Gina Ludlow said she was clear during member interviews that the group would focus on systemic problems.

“I’ve always felt like this was always part of the process,” she said.

One example of systemic racism included in the blueprint is a 2018 Connecticut Racial Profiling Prohibition Project study that found Fairfield police consistently targeted Black and Hispanic drivers when making traffic stops near the Bridgeport border. Ludlow noted task force leadership had met with police to discuss changes the department could make.

“Is it really systemic if the town is working with you?” asked Powell-Dunmore after the meeting. “We are expecting government to correct issues that start at the kitchen table, that start at home.”

Odinak said in an interview after the meeting that the term systemic racism should not be equated with the notion of pervasive racism throughout the town but rather the idea that there are systems in society that disadvantage people of color and need to be addressed.

“Open discussion about racism and systemic racism and trying to unpack some of the areas where we could try to do better is where we are today,” Odinak said. “In order to take those steps you have to get comfortable with some of this language and some of the reality of it.”

In the end, the motion to rescind approval of the blueprint failed, with only Tallman and Powell-Dunmore in favor. The document will be presented to the Board of Selectmen for consideration Jan. 31.