Town Attorney Opinions

13Apr08

George, as you requested.

Advertisements


15 Responses to “Town Attorney Opinions”

  1. 1 1george1

    Very responsive, Jeze.

    However, do you have a list of the opinions, position, & case cited?
    Example:

    1. No RUNOFF > NEVER LEGAL > Cite?

    2. No RECALL > Made illegal, due to method of NEW CHARTER rather than REVISED >
    Cited ? —-

  2. 2 jezebel282

    I’m sorry, George, I do not. John Florek might be the best source for that. You can remind him that we taxpayers paid top dollar for those opinions.
    I’m pretty sure you are categorized as persona non grata at Berchem Moses Devlin.

  3. 3 1george1

    Jeze,
    If you check the Berchem Website, under insurance companies, you will
    find one of their LONG TERM clients is the firm named: SNIDE MULLIGAN.

    Snide defined: Derogatory in a malicious, superior way

    Hmmmm?
    Has Berchem’s firm deamed me to be SUPERIOR?
    Do they have an INFERIORITY COMPLEX?
    Do they consider their position inferior?

    Malicious, deliciously defined:

    Malicious \Ma*li”cious\, a.
    [Of. malicius, F. malicieux, fr. L. malitiosus. See Malice.]

    1. Indulging or exercising malice; harboring ill will or enmity.

    I grant him bloody, . . . Sudden, malicious, smacking of every sin
    That has a name. –Shak.

    (GM > Berchem’s people are not my favorite people)

    2. Proceeding from hatred or ill will; dictated by malice; as,
    a malicious report; malicious mischief.

    (GM > Is Berchem’s firm confessing THEY are Malicious?)

    3. (Law)With wicked or mischievous intentions or motives;
    wrongful and done intentionally without just cause or excuse;
    as, a malicious act.

    Malicious mischief (Law), malicious injury to the property of another;
    — an offense at common law. –Wharton.

    (GM > Could false arrest, trial rigging, tampering with opposing attorney /
    representation, etc. be considered Malicious by Berchem’s firm?)

    Malicious prosecution or arrest (Law), a wanton prosecution or arrest,
    by regular process in a civil or criminal proceeding, without probable cause.
    –Bouvier.

    Syn: Ill-disposed; evil-minded; mischievous; envious; malevolent; invidious; spiteful; bitter; malignant; rancorous; malign. — Ma*li”cious*ly, adv. — Ma*li”cious*ness, n.

    Hmmmm?
    Who do we know who are:

    Ill-disposed;
    evil-minded;
    mischievous;
    envious;
    malevolent;
    invidious; (learned this word from STAR TREK)
    spiteful;
    bitter; (OBAMA?)
    malignant;
    rancorous;
    malign

    Oh, a WHITE WOLF, the local Racist group, shares a definition with a PUKA,
    which by certain definitions is a mischievous imp who loves deception.
    Feehan supposedly protected us from them?
    Know anyone who would embrace that theme as their own?

    Jeze,
    Did I make sense or am I treading on my special pass? 8)

  4. 4 jezebel282

    George,

    Would it make a difference?

  5. 5 1george1

    Jeze,

    No, it would not make a difference.
    However, SNIDE MULLIGAN? (A COMPANY NAME & COMMENTARY on little ole me?)

  6. 6 jezebel282

    Didn’t think it would…

  7. 7 1george1

    April 14, 2008 Stratford Town Council Public Forum (page 1)
    George Mulligan, 429 Housatonic Ave. Stratford, CT. 06615 (203) 378-1888 georgeemcom@yahoo.com

    > Again, I ask the Town Council to Fund, and the Mayor to Set up, a program to have LIVE, REAL TIME Web cast of all major Town Meetings, like: Town Council; Board of Ed; Zoning; Charter Revision; RAC; Pension Board; Buildings & Needs; Ethics; Financial Review; AVCO; Shakespeare; and more
    > This past week, CT. POST syndicated columnist Thomas Sowell wrote LIVE CNN Broadcast actually helped the incumbents with FREE EXPOSURE and control of Broadcast content. So why do you FEAR showing the PUBLIC INFORMATION, which you can control the INFORMED PUBLIC?

    —————————————————————————

    > I thank Mr. Moore, Mr. Forrester, and Esq. Kubek for the 2 hour interviews for Financial Review Board.

    There were very good candidates, among them. Also there were a couple of great and appropriate resumes among the Charter Revision Commission applicants. Town Council might consider asking them, to help the Financial Review?

    ————————————————————————

    > I understand this Meeting shall designate times & dates for Budget Public Hearings, Budget Workshops, further Shakespeare and AVCO events. I want to ask that the Council try to avoid DUPLICATE DATES to other Public Hearing, such as the April 24th Charter Revision Meeting. In fact, this Thursday, there are Revision, Raymark, and Health Meetings on the same night. Isn’t it too bad we do not have a small staff of part time (H. S.?) camera people covering each event for LIVE (& recorded) WEB CAST?
    ——————————————————————————————
    > By phone and e-mail, I suggested to C.A.O. McCauley & Finance Director Norko to place the monthly approved Department Budgets on the Town Website, for maximum Transparency. They already communicate these On Line.
    It would just take a little work by I.T. & Webmaster? They will look at the idea. Mayor’s decision.
    —————————————————————————————–
    > In scheduling Budget Workshops, I would like to ask the INCLUSION of the TOWN ATTORNEY’S Office, as an office for review, during the Workshops. Why? Previously, I provided paper copies of the Town Attorney Budgets for 2004 to 2007. Now I e-mailed Carol Cabrol the 1999-2001 expenditures of the Town Attorney Office, which are dramatically lower, due to 2001 actions related to early BoE acts?

    > Posting on the Blog & by e-mail to Gavin & Kevin Kelly, I asked on the following:

    > TOWN COUNCIL & MAYOR refuse to WEB CAST and/ or BROAD CAST MEETING about these MAJOR FACTS:
    1. 300 % increase in Town Attorney (FEES & BUDGET) since 1998 / 1999

    2. Doubling of PENSIONS since 1991 and even 1995 to 2006 / 2007
    (2 separate 3 year periods in 1990s, for the averages for 1/2 of most of the 2000s)

    3. Average of the 10 January Pensions is $ 84,000 Annual Pensions

    4. Of the $ 16,312,000 pension obligation with UNCAPPED PENSIONS and GOLDEN PARACHUTES, where there were 61 PENSIONS in one year (2 to 3 times the Norm) at a 30 % increase in average over the prior year.

    > Does the Town Council know how the Town Attorney’s Office is spending Money?
    If a Stratford Town Charter is revised to another format for Town Attorneys, as a Financial Review Board candidate, wouldn’t the Mayor and Town Council want to know answers to questions like these?

    What are the “going rate ranges” for “IN HOUSE” and then “INDEPENDENT;”
    1. Paralegals

    2. Legal Secretaries

    3. Receptionist / Secretaries

    4. Lawyers (factoring in costs of all Benefits vs. Independent) (Part time Attorneys can be new or semi retired, for stipend night coverage or specialty needs?) (PT: Town / Education / Housing / Remediate / Land = Stipend $ 222)

    Generally, how long does it take to produce a “legal opinion?” I have 3 Burturla legal opinions (on Berchem Letter head) and they run about 2 – 3 pages, with “ONLY ONE” Case quoted. There are indented excerpts.

    I posted this question & why a whole new Charter is being typed, to a paralegal on a blog, who answered:

    A: Let’s see, 39 pages at my speed, about 98 WPM, could be done in about an hour and a half, maybe two.
    So, why is BMD involved in the re-typing of this charter? (GOOD QUESTION, asked at C.R.C.?)
    It should already be in Word format some where and shouldn’t take an exorbitant amount of time or expense to get it done. We shouldn’t be paying the Town Attorney’s law firm for this. (DITTO)

  8. 8 1george1

    April 14, 2008 Stratford Town Council Public Forum (page 2)
    George Mulligan, 429 Housatonic Ave. Stratford, CT. 06615 (203) 378-1888 georgeemcom@yahoo.com


    > I also poster these on the BLOG:
    Burturla stated the person writing the Charter has been having “some issues” and the C. R. C. should not expect a finished product quickly. Either Mr. Fahan or Eric asked: “Why don’t they just make adjustments to the existing Town Charter?” (I could NOT HEAR BURTURLA’S answer) (Orlowe said “he had a hard time hearing Burturla, overall.”)

    > That leaves me with questions????
    1. Why isn’t GAIL doing the Town Charter CHANGES?

    2. Is BURTURLA having SOMEONE in BERCHEM’S OFFICE write a WHOLE NEW TOWN CHARTER??

    3. If so, is BURTURLA laying FOUNDATION to have the GRANDFATHERED RIGHTS to be ELIMINATED and/or INVIOLATE, by deciding to write a whole NEW Town Charter?? (Is that Ethical or even Fraudulent?)

    4. If so, is BURTURLA creating BILLABLE HOURS and WORK for BERCHEM @ $ 150 per HOUR? (Again, why isn’t GAIL doing this work? (NEW > Would it be cost effective to subcontract a pt Paralegal?)

    5. If so, who on the Town Council AUTHORIZED the SPENDING on a WHOLE NEW TOWN CHARTER?

    6. If so, why is this Commission and the last Commission called the CHART REVISION COMMISSION and NOT the WHOLE NEW TOWN CHARTER COMMISSION?

    7. What are the EXACT NAMES of the several OPINIONS rendered by the BERCHEM OFFICE?

    8. What is the EXACT COST, per OPINION of the aforesaid OPINIONS?

    9. What is the EXACT COST of other work being done by BERCHEM OFFICE?

    10. What is the EXACT STATUS and LIST of ISSUES DISCUSSED by the C. R. C.?

    11. Where is the LIST of those ISSUES DISCUSSED? Are the Public and Town Council intentional kept in the dark?

    12. If the PUBLIC does NOT have a LIST of ISSUES DISCUSSED, general DIRECTION, probable DISPOSITIONS, and ISSUES to be discussed, how can ANY MEMBER of the PUBLIC (except Madelyn & Walt/Rita Runkunis) INTELLIGENTLY COMMENT on the C. R. C. @ PUBLIC HEARING?

    13. At what point will the C. R. C. vote and decide on ISSUES? WHEN, SPECIFICALLY?

    A) Before the Draft due, prior to the May 22, PUBLIC HEARING, with uncommitted NOTICE for the PUBLIC to REVIEW, for COMMENT?

    B) Before the May 29, FINAL REPORT, after the FINAL PUBLIC HEARING, May 22?

    14. Unless there are specific notations of BEFORE and AFTER CHANGES / AMENDMENTS, how would LAY PEOPLE know the differences, of what was EXISTANT, and what is now proposed?

    A) And if there was a whole NEW Town Charter created, would that be FRAUD & willful ABUSE of TRUST, in order to eliminate the GRANDFATHERED RIGHTS?

    B) If Attorney Burturla is correct that the prior Charter was NOT REVISED, why was that C.R.C. and VOTE called a REVISION and why is this Commission called REVISION, instead of WHOLE NEW TOWN CHARTERS?

    BIG QUESTION:

    15) Why do the Town Clerk and Town Attorney Secretary NOT have electronic copies of Town Attorney Opinions?
    ADDED 4/17 > Tax Payers PAY for these, why aren’t they WITHIN TOWN COMPUTERS
    (Which supposedly will not be altered?)

    – I have ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT in the ABILITIES of the C. R. C. personnel. As I told Eric and Mr. Fahan, the direction I see this C. R. C. going is ANTI-THETICAL to my OPINIONS of what constitutes Good Government and Public Interest! I have ZERO PROBLEMS with a differences of political priorities and political opinions.(#15 = NEW)

    These are some OPINIONS of Esq. Burturla and very partial LIST of what the C.R.C. has discussed:

    > the Town Council does NOT have Subpoena Power. (RED added in the attachment for affect)

    > RUNOFF has never been allowed by State Statute.

    > Town Council RECALL is illegal, because the Revision Committee and Town Council did NOT AMEND the Town Charter, since the electorate voted for an entirely NEW CHARTER.

    > The RIGHT to PETITION could be declared INVIOLATE, if challenged in court. (see the reasoning above)

    > The RIGHT to REFERENDUM could be declared INVIOLATE, if challenged in court. (see the reasoning above)

    > The Attorney General purportedly ruled that who ever runs a Police Dept. has to be certified, taking that power from the Mayor. (What is the Police Chief is the only one certified and what if he died or was incapacitated?)

    – – – The C. R. C. has discussed:

    > Ending Term Limits

    > Increasing Council Terms to 4 years (with NO recall)
    (Will the Mayor title become unelected Dictator for LIFE?)

    > Paying the Town Councilors > Paying expenses of Elected
    (Does this eliminate the Volunteer government?)

    > Having the Council set the NEXT Mayor’s PAY RATE in the last year of
    ANY Mayor’s 4 years.
    (it only took them 1/2 hour to get to what I tried to signal, since
    NO PAY RAISE can take place, during a MAYOR’S 4 Year Term.)

    > Proto favored Stfd buying Feehan Fire Trucks & giving the Mayor
    a raise. (Miron wants raise & Feehan backed it!)

    > Proto also claims the INDICTED POLITICIANS are the EXCEPTIONS
    (in CORRUPT-icut). Who are his clients?  🙂 😉

    > Ending the “term” INVESTIGATION from the Council Powers to investigate.
    >> Proto & August want to use Bridgeport as a shining example of GOOD
    VERBAGE in their CHARTER for GOOD GOVERNMENT. (See Resumes of C.R.C.)

    > The Stratford Ethics Commission
    (appointed by the Council and now the Mayor)
    will honestly oversee Town Ethics.

    (Yeah, and I have a Bridge and Swamp Land to sell –
    Oh Wait LBW, has a burnt Bridge & now burnt Cottages!
    And the prices of LBW & AVCO are much lower than
    $ 40,000,000 offered for LBW & $ 80,000,000 AVCO assessment)

  9. 9 freedomofspeach

    This is already in some sort of document format, as they had to have it to print the thing in book form. To have it retyped is another gravy train for someone.

    Unbelievable.

  10. 10 1george1

    F O S

    I spoke to Florek about this after Thursday’s meeting.
    He stated (verbally) that the town attorney office is NOT writing the
    Town Charter from scratch.

    Neither Florek, nor Gail knew how much the avalanche of Town
    Attorney opinions were costing the Town.
    Esq Florek stated the Town Council did NOT give the C. R. C. a BUDGET.
    > So why / how are they costing the Town Tens of Thousands of $$

    Esq. Florek stated the opinions would be under the Town Attorney
    intra Budget.
    > But did the Town Council authorize the Town Attorney to act on the
    C. R. C. requests, for opinions?
    > But did the Town Council authorize the C. R. C. to seek Town Attorney
    opinions?
    > Is the Town Attorney’s office a LAW unto itself & create billing opportunity?

    I spoke to Esq. Florek about the fact these Town Attorney opinions were
    coming on Berchem Letterhead and not on Stratford Town Letter head.
    > He said ….. (not put words in his mouth – i forgot exact answer)

    I spoke to Esq. Florek about the fact these Town Attorney opinions were
    NOT AVAILABLE in e-copies / attachments from
    > Town Clerk
    > Town Attorney’s Secretary Gail
    They are created and stored at Berchem & Moses
    The Town only has hard copies.
    I blogged my suggestion that all work PAID for by the TOWN should be within
    TOWN COMPUTERS, in part to
    1 – PROTECT the INTEGRITY 😉 of the RECORDS;
    2 – be able to access far faster than Hard Copy filing cabinet, via multiple
    alternatives of KEY WORDS to find information
    Esq Florek said my idea was NOT without Merit, but up to the Mayor & Town
    Attorney.

    Florek wants to contact the press about the C. R. C. Public hearing.
    I strongly suggested he list the opinions given and items discussed,
    as a vehicle to inform the public. He sounded amendable?

    I spoke to Florek about the lack of e-records and availability.
    He countered that when he was town attorney, he created a filing
    system by subject. They stored by subject!
    I countered that if there were e-copies, they could be looked up by:
    – subject
    – date
    – file / case number
    – attorney
    – dept
    – etc
    Esq. Florek said my idea was NOT without MERIT, but that is up to
    Miron / Burturla.

    Because of the low turnout to C.R.C. Florek was going to schedule
    a special meeting after the PUBLIC HEARING, in case of LOW TURNOUT
    not to waste a day.
    I pointed out that Town Council recently had a F. O. I. issue where they
    had to post a TIME, for a Special Meeting, and then had to wait close to
    1 hour, due to a surprizingly fast prior meeting.
    There solultion was to POST an earlier time for future meetings,
    > then put the existing meeting into veery brief recess,
    > then convene the new meeting to conform to F. O. I.
    > then immediately recess the new meeting
    > then reconvene the other recessed meeting.
    Esq Florek’s opinion was that was NOT necessary to conform to F.O.I.
    for his desired Special Meeting, after the PUBLIC HEARING, where he
    appears intent of not posting a specific starting time?

    COMMENT from Freedom of Speach?
    Others?

  11. 11 gforrester

    Oh my – Another State uses Run-off Elections to decide a Congressional Race. Maybe it’s time CT work up.

    MISSISSIPPI. The CD-1 special election contest appears heading towards a run-off on May 13, in what is a major embarrassment for the Republicans in this overwhelmingly GOP district. In an upset, Prentiss County Clerk Travis Childers (D) finished ahead of initial frontrunner Southaven Mayor Greg Davis (R). The numbers: Childers – 49%, Davis – 47%, Others – 4%. The folksy Childers fell just 700 votes shy of an outright win in his surprise first place finish. Both men are social and fiscal conservatives, but they differ sharply on the Iraq War. Davis strongly supports the war, while Childers advocates a swift withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. While the NRCC and DCCC both spent money here in the primary, look for both to dump even more money into this suprisingly close race.

  12. 12 jezebel282

    As Freedom and George had requested:

    Letter dated March 27, 2008 from the Office of Berchem, Moses & Devlin P.C. by Richard Buturla, Esq.

    “Dear Commission Chair Florek:

    At your request, as Town Attorney, I have reviewed your inquiry concerning “instant runoff elections”, wherein voters rank mayoral candidates in a municipal election in order of preference on a single ballot, and, if no candidate receives fifty percent of the votes cast, the candidate with the fewest first choices is eliminated, and ballots submitted by voters who ranked the eliminated candidate first have their ballots counted for their second choice. The process continues until one candidate receives a majority.

    Section 9-173 of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in relevant part, that “Unless provide by law, in all municipal elections a plurality of the votes cast shall be sufficient to elect.” The phrase “otherwise provided by law” has been interpreted by the Connecticut courts to mean state and/or federal statutory law. See, ie, Sansone v. Board of Police Commsioners, 219 Conn. 179 (1991). There is no Connecticut statute which allows municipalities to elect mayors, selectmen or other such officials by means of an “instant runoff voting” election, should there be less than a plurality of votes cast.”

    The rest of the letter cites Buturla’s own previously written opinions. Nothing like double billing for the same work.

    And with that, the petition was declared invalid!

    Umm…who said “Instant runoff election”? The petition requested a simple runoff election after the voting determined no one had received at least fifty percent of the vote.

  13. 13 pcsperling

    Jeze ~

    That opinion may have been requested after some material I sent to Rich Fredette and Karen Rodia. Not sure, the timing of the opinion seems to fit.

    There was a SOS candidate in the last election, Mike DeRosa, who supported IRV. IRV is becoming a popular electoral process in local elections and has been inplemented in various cities and towns across the United States.

  14. 14 1george1

    Gavin & Jeze,

    I am NOT qualified to speak to this being EFFECTED in the C. R. C.

    I hope either of you and/or designees speaks to:

    1. RUN OFF ELECTIONS, being DESIRED and IMPLEMENTED, regardless of FOUNDATIONAL Town Attorney opinions and / or precedents.

    2. Grandfathered RECALL being retained

    3. ALL Grandfathered RIGHTS being retained, regardless of FOUNDATIONAL Town Attorney opinions and / or precedents.

    Further, I shall raise issue about the Town Attorney accounting for the last
    two years billing @ over $ 500,000 per year to Berchem, and having ALL Town
    Attorney work, cost justified from then (and beyond) to the future and to
    be on the website, for the future.

  15. 15 1george1

    The more things change …..

    Among the first blos posts …

    At least I am consistent


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: