In the holiday spirit, I would like to mention some of the positive things the McCarty Administration has already accomplished or started to put into motion, including the things done under the last administration, which McCarty had been calling for for years, but were done by the Kopetz Admininistration only due to the threat of losing power.
1. Paramedic Service - so that the town has paramedics among its first responders
2. Town Website - This was bid out during the election season, but still did not manage to include basic things such as the town Ordinances or the actual (instead of proposed) board and commission schedule. Plans are to greatly increase the information on the website, including meeting agendas and minutes, budget information, etc. The best thing will be that meeting agendas will be available in advance, so that people can prepare for meetings and can decide whether or not to attend.
3. Easy Communication - Town Hall employees are being given email, so that town residents can communicate with them in a way other than playing telephone tag during working hours.
4. Energy Audit - of town buildings, to both conserve energy and save money.
5. Important Hiring - McCarty is trying to fill important positions that had been left open for many months: a new Community Services director, a new Finance director, and a Town Engineer.
6. Public Updates and Question Answering - While the Kopetz Administration did not even support the idea of asking town officials questions at Town Meetings, McCarty and Fontana have begun a series of NHTV shows where they will let people know what has been happening with town government, and what will soon be happening. They will answer questions called in or sent to them at QuestionsForJanet@aol.com.
7. Greater Involvement of Independents in Town Government - McCarty made a concerted effort to attract people to sit on boards and commissions who do not have close party ties, especially unaffiliated voters. She is being attacked for appointing cronies, but the attraction of independent individuals to town government is her greatest accomplishment. Even the idea of having an independent assistant town attorney to give her different views than the Town Attorney’s firm is a new, effective way of getting more points of view expressed in North Haven’s government.
8. Public Comments During Board and Commission Meetings - McCarty called for this for years, but it would not be allowed until the upcoming election and the controversy over the forensic investigation made the Republicans give in.
9. An Honest Budget - McCarty called for this for years, but it would not have happened (although still only partially) without the cloud over the Finance Department, the upcoming election, the New Haven Register and Post editorials, and of course the rejection of the first budget by voters.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
I agree. Two radical changes from the past are already clear.
First, both Janet and Steve are accessible by email (I haven't tried phone) and both are making information more available to the public.
Thus, greater openness has already begun!
Second, Janet and Steve have already set a new standard of professional demeanor during town meetings.
Gone is the disrespect and derision of the former regime.
As documented on local TV, this professional demeanor has been extended to the very Repubs who fought for secrecy and treated the public with scorn and dismissal.
Thus, greater respect for citizens has also begun!
These two changes (openness and respect) chart a whole new direction in town government.
I look forward to an informative town website at long last. In the past I have noticed that elected officials, employees and also board members are apparently invisible beings as far as any facts available about their credentials, affiliations and employment info. This should be available information. When this information is available to the public, conflicts of interest and cronyism are often immediately obvious. Elected officials, town employees and vounteer board members should not have secret lives or obligations.
Under the headline of "Disrespect and derision", please view the NHTV coverage of the Fire Commission meeting of last week. Commissioners Nuzzolillo and Criscuolo (aka DTC Chair) go at it pretty good. In this case, I thought Criscuolo was over the top, out of line and an embarrassment.
I have to agree with the anonymous on that Mr. Criscuolo, the DTC, was out of line at the Fire Commission meeting. He says that it isn't "sour grapes" but we can all see from his tone, disrespect, and attacks against Pat that it was.
Pete believes that because the town voted the democrates into power that the Fire Commission should have a D Chairman. His words (watch the meeting).
If he does that this to the Ethics board, he will be turned away. All his arguments were hear-say and cannot be valid in an argument; yet alone the Ethics board. If anything, Pat should bring Pete to the Ethics board on account of his actions.
In my eyes, Pete Criscuolo was 100% disrespectful and is not a great example of what the Democrates preach.
There is no doubt that it would be very hard for Peter Criscuolo to prove what he alleged, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that his description of what happened is true. He could not take the issue to the Board of Ethics due to the evidentiary problem. What should he do?
In other words, do town officials have any responsibility to disclose offers of bribes? Or should they say nothing and let the practice go on in secret?
If they have a responsibility to disclose offers of bribes, should they go to the news media with their accusations, or should they confront the issue at a public meeting?
Another alternative was to report the matter to the First Selectman, but the First Selectman has no authority over the Fire Commission.
Another alternative was to report the matter to the chair of the Fire Commission, but he is the one that Mr. Criscuolo says offered the bribe.
What should Mr. Criscuolo have done?
As for disrespect, if every official in the Kopetz Administration went before the Board of Ethics each time he or she showed disrespect to citizens and to other officials (which is not, by the way, a violation of the Ethics Code), there would be a few years' backlog of cases.
Try your same analysis with the start that "lets assume for the sake of argument that the description of what happend is NOT true"
See where that takes your thought process.
Bottom line is that no one should talk to Peter Criscuolo without a tape recorder. He has the bully pulpit and no one, well intenioned or not, is safe from misrepresentation if they are of a different political mindset.
There should be nice holiday discounts on tape recorders at Circut City. Anyone deaing on the other side on an issue from Mr. Criscuolo should invest. Otherwise, your reputation, and your commitment to the community is at risk.
What a shame...
Mr. Wechsler,
You are officially a hack for McCarty and DTC, despite your claims of independence. Clearly, McCarty was in on that charade at the Fire Commission and allowed it to transpire.
Before he went on his "Nuzzolillo tried to sell his Chairmanship" diatribe, Criscuolo claims that he is deserving of the Chair based on the Democratic landslide and his being the longest serving member. Obviously, he forgot that Dom Palumbo, a Dem and honorable man, has been Chair of P&Z for years. I think that was even when the repubs were in control???? Second, the newly elected Chair of BOF is a brand new member. (I acknowledge that he is qualified and I believe previously served on BOF.) Frankly, he was appointed and not elected.
At the end of the day, local politics should not smack of this much partisonship by either side. This is not a presidential election. We all generally want the same things...good schools and services, fire & police protection, all for a reasonable cost. Criscuolo clearly does not understand this. He preambles that this is not sour grapes or politics, but it clearly is. Grow up Mr. Ierardi...oops I mean Criscuolo.
Just a comment or perhaps a clarification. At the last BOF meeting I asked our First Selectwomen about her plans to hire a new Director of Finance. Mr. Palmieri had indicated his desire to retire and the First Selectwomen had stated her intention to fire Mr. Palmieri. Since either choice precluded Mr. Palmieri from returning to work, I thought that cleared the position to be filled. In response, the First Selectwomen did not say the recruitment or hiring process was underway. Now that may have changed over the last two weeks, (and I do think we need to fill the position)but as of the last BOF meeting, the town had not begun a search for a new Director of Finance.
Timothy Doheny
Robert,
I have to say I honestly enjoy reading this blog. I am also very happy to see so many people who are passionate about local politics replying here. I plan on replying to your blogs in the future, and because of that I want you that I consider myself an open minded Republican...that might sound like an oxymoron but it's true. But I want you to know that my responses aren't closed minded unintelligent rants of an angry right winger.
With that said, I must know from you a couple things...
1. Taking away the negative conotations of the word, aren't Janet and Steve promoting anarchy?
2. You accuse the RTC of being Chronies, but after election day, positions were swtiched and no public reasoning were given to the citizens that voted for them? With the "open government" that Janet is promoting, why didn't she write any weekly letters or make any statements about that?
3. What is an honest budget?
4. Is Steve Fontana not busy enough on the hill that he can also serve the 2nd Selectmen position to it's fullest?
5. What do you think the Republicans need to do to win back Town Hall? Who should be their candidate?
6. Are there any Republicans you like?
I don't expect you to answer all those questions, but I honestly want to know what the democrats think about these questions. Word has it that the RTC will be starting a TV show in a couple months as well.
When it comes to a vote on a state cap of municipal tax increases, does Steve Fontana vote yes for the burdoned tax payers in his district, or does he vote no because to avoid handcuffing the administration???
Or.......
Is he conflicted...hmmm
Nothing can ever come close to the rude, disrespectful, thuggish bullying attitude of the previous republican leaders in public meetings. These are people that I would rather not have living near me. The town of North Haven is still being poisoned by their spittle and piss because they have lost the perks and plums they helped themselves to, at the expense of their neighbors, for over 100 years! Not surprising that these folks are angry and combative. Some even have the gall to think that it isn't fair to have across the board changes in appointments etc.
To those who found Peter Criscuolo's comments inappropriate at a recent meeting:
I wonder how perfectly you would behave after having dirty incumbent boots ground into your faces for over 100 years? Enough ugliness, let Janet and Steve try to put things back together after decades of damage to this town.
A response to Mr. Peterson's (Chris) choice of the word anarchy. This begs the question. Is anarchy a word those who recently lost power use to discredit wider participation in the process? Seems to me one man's anarchy is anothers freedom. Mr. Peterson, We had been living under a Monarchy. If I am an anarchist I surely enjoy the freedom from the monarchy now.
It seems that the last comments that "anonymous" fall under the unintelligent closed mindness I was talking about. If you had read my comments you would have seen that I stated, "my responses aren't closed minded unintelligent rants of an angry right winger".
Anyway the definition of anarchy is "absence of government". The definition of a monarchy is "undivided rule or absolute sovereignty by a single person" Wrong choice of wording. I would respond further but when you're dealing with the closed minded what's the point? At least I'm proud to leave my name on here as well.
Susan,
What damages are you talking about exactly, you seen very angry. The Democrats in this town finally won an election because they had a platform to run on and Steve Fontana. If Janet is the saint you say she is, then why didnt you elect her the previous times she ran? Before the scandal that involved stupid people, what was so bad about this town? I really want to know. The taxes were reasonable compared to the rest of the county, public education was never better and big business wanted to come to North Haven. What was so bad? I'm not saying that the Republicans were great, most of them still have no idea what they're doing and they're too stuck in their ways to fix it, but how did they wrong you?
Janet has been rallying against every word a Republican has spoke for the past 5 years, I should know. Now when she finally gets her wish and takes over and makes some minor mistakes in the first month, we as tax paying citizens shouldn't question those actions? The scandal happened because we didn't question our leaders more. Janet and Silent Steve have given us the opprotunity to know more about what's going on in town hall. We should take advantage of that and question the moves they make, Republicans and Democrats alike.
Mr Peterson-
Your comments on anarchy reveal your profound lack of education. Sir, someone needs to tell you that your comments make no sense at all. Evidently, your lifestyle has not been kind to your brain. Give up--these issues are clearly too weighty for you. So sorry to be the one to tell you.
who is this judy lady, and what makes her think she can say that someone else's "comments make no sense at all," and that "the issues are clearly too weighty" for that person, when her most substantial comment was that the other commenter had a "profound lack of education." Judy, you need to get back to the issues yourself honey. Comments like yours seem highly uneducated and closed minded in and of themselves. So sorry to be the one to tell you.
Judy's comments may not have been kind or polite (but that isn't what a blog is for...) but she is spot on.
It's incredible to me that here I am trying to have an open honest and intelligent conversation and all I get back are close minded comments from people who weren't truely reading what I was saying. Lack of education? I copy pasted those definitions from Webster's dictionary. Are you calling them uneducated?
And none of you answered any of my questions. All you do is throw insults to anyone who's trying to have a peaceful disussion. I guess I expected more from the angry left.
Mr. Peterson-
You continue to embarrass yourself. Janet and Steve are the Kropotkins of Connecticut? Let me advise you to consider reading and thinking before writing.
You state that "none of you answered any of my questions". You're right. That's because you posed stupid or trivial questions.
If you want a good reception for your sophomoric babble, try posting on a conservative blog, where it just might be treated with reverence.
It's time to move on to important issues. Bye bye.
I have heard the latest rumor is that Mr. Kopetz, our former first selectman, has "surprisingly" taken a lucrative job with Rabina Properties as legal counsel for the P&W project. Is there anyone on this blog that can confirm or deny this as fact or just a rumor? If this is true it would explain his not taking the third selectman position for obvious reasons.
Marty, I haven't heard the rumor about Mr. Kopetz, but I would be very surprised if he did something so blatantly unethical (although, sadly, it would not be a violation of the current North Haven Code of Ethics). Not that he hasn't acted unethically before, but this would not only sully his reputation, it would also be harmful to the interests of Rabina Properties.
I can tell you that Kopetz is not working for Rabina Co. He is working full-time for the State of CT as an attorney.
Yes, I googled Kevin Kopetz, and someone with his name is listed as working for the CT Dept of Public Works. There's nothing about his position there, but his phone number is one off from the department's Legislative Liaison.
Post a Comment