Can you hear us now?

25Apr08

The problem with Public hearings is determining if anyone is listening. So far, all we can see is that there is an elected stand-in for the mayor and he can’t veto resolutions. There is simply no sense of whether this commission will tackle the major problems in this Charter or simply leave the spoils system in place for the next “winner”.

Stratford urged to keep full-time mayor
RICHARD WEIZEL
04/24/2008 11:44:16 PM EDT
STRATFORD — Being mayor in Stratford is a full-time job and the office holder should not be employed anywhere else or take part in any private business endeavor while serving, residents told the Charter Revision Commission Thursday during the second of three public hearings at Town Hall.Under the current charter, the mayor is prohibited from working in another job, or in his or her own private company.

Residents also urged the commission Thursday to strip the mayor of his sole authority to hire and fire department heads, and make appointments to town boards and commissions. Some residents want the commission to involve the Town Council in both processes.

“Being mayor should be the only employment an individual elected to the position should have,” said Jonathan Best, who is seeking the Republican nomination for mayor in 2009. “It requires focus, attention and thought. We have seen the [past] impact of part-time government in Stratford and many other communities in the state. Being mayor is not a part-time job.”

Best also said the mayor’s $90,000 salary should not be raised. Susan Sulier urged the commission change the charter to involve the Town Council in the hiring and firing of town department heads and other “key” employees. Currently, the mayor has the sole authority to hire and fire town employees.

“Due to what I believe is an unprecedented amount of firings and terminations among town department heads and key personnel within the last two years, the mayor [should only be able to] fire key employees, department heads and administrative aides for just cause and with council approval,” she said. Sulier suggested strict hiring guidelines be established.

“In light of the recent historic and humiliating hiring practices in our town, no one can be hired and or promoted unless they meet all qualifications for a position, including, but not limited to education, experience, psychological and physical requirements and a background check by an outside agency,” Sulier said.

Some residents suggested the charter be changed so that the mayor cannot solely make appointments to volunteer boards and commissions, several proposing the council have final approval, others recommending a council super-majority be required to stop a mayoral appointment.

Mayor James R. Miron told the panel several weeks ago that when the former Charter Revision Commission he served on recommended changing from a town manager to mayoral format, its intention was to create a “strong mayoral system.” Miron, however, led the dissenting minority view on that panel, and was an outspoken opponent of the commission’s recommendation to change to a mayor system.

Commission Chairman John Florek said Thursday, “We have heard very strong arguments on both sides of many issues, and now we have to make some decisions.” Ya think, John?

The commission has already decided that the Town Council chairman would serve as acting mayor when the mayor is “absent or unable to perform his or her duties,” and that the mayor cannot veto Town Council resolutions — though he can veto ordinances and break tie council votes.

The commission must issue a final report to the Town Council by June 2 so that recommended changes can be placed on the ballot in November.

Advertisements


49 Responses to “Can you hear us now?”

  1. 1 jonbest

    I thought you would like to see the comments I made last night to the Charter Revision Commission.

    Comments on Charter Revision

    I would like to speak today regarding some of the topics the Charter Revision Commission has discussed. First and foremost I want to thank you all for your service and commitment to this Charter Revision project. I have listened to the conversations over the last several weeks. I know whether I agree with you or not all of you are acting in what you believe are the best interests of our town. As a citizen that is all I can ask for. This is citizen government at its finest. Hopefully the final product you propose will make the Stratford Town government stronger, more responsive and effective.

    The governing of a community by citizens was intended to allow all members of a community the ability to have direct input into the future of the Town. It is not a responsibility to be taken lightly. It is a responsibility that requires focus, attention and thought. We have seen the impact of part time government in Stratford and many other communities and our state. Being Mayor is not a part time job.

    I believe that the position of Mayor should be the only employment an individual elected to that position should have. To have another business interest, whether professional or not, would set up a scenario that would invite corruption. For instance should an individual own a consulting practice, law firm or coffee shop, I believe people would purchase services and/or products in the hope of gaining the Mayor’s ear. On a national level
    I remember when the Speaker of the House Jim Wright wrote a book and people bought many more copies than they needed in order to gain favor. Whether a stock holder or direct member of a private business, the potential to be distracted and enriched causes me great concern. Distracted, because the Town is not getting the full attention of the person elected to run it and enriched because some persons might believe that doing so gives them more access than a taxpaying citizen. This is preferential treatment that causes the need to return the favor, so know it as Quid Pro Quo. If the potential exists that the Mayor might benefit from this it should be avoided.

    One of the things I like about Stratford is that it still acts like a small town. The reality is that it has a very complex governmental process that requires undivided attention. When someone decides to run for Mayor it is a decision to place all other things aside to serve the community. This is not a decision that should be made quickly; it should require care and be well thought out. Deciding to run for Mayor and lead the Town of Stratford should have no built in distractions or opportunities that might tempt an office holder. I urge you to maintain the position in the charter as it is stating the Mayor should have no other employment.

    I believe the current Mayor’s salary is sufficient. I cannot fathom paying a Mayor more that twice what the average town income is for its citizens. Taxes are too high already and the Mayor needs to set the example. That means that an annual salary should be set by the outgoing Town Council. It should include cost of living increases by an index identified by the Town Council. The salary needs to be capped so that it does not allow the Mayor’s salary to exceed two times the average household income in the Town of Stratford. Therefore as the Town citizens do better and incomes increase so might the Mayor’s salary during the next term. It is incumbent on the Mayor to make things better and this is an additional incentive to do so. When you have to look taxpayers in the eyes you have to be able to say I am in the same situation and let’s do something about it.

    Why do people run for Mayor and how do we attract the best candidates? They must have a commitment to public service and this community. The best candidate is the one who makes a total and complete commitment. They are enthusiastic about what they do. A member of a SEAL team I was training once told me that it is not your size or ability but more your level of commitment once the bullets fly that ensure safety for all. I agree with that. That is public service. People do not enter public service to get rich, they enter it to serve. Citizen government requires sacrifice and a willingness to do so is a leadership quality that our Town needs. The salary should not be the enticement to run for office. Neither should the ability to maintain your present employment circumstance.

    The job of Mayor requires enthusiasm, vigilance, commitment and leadership. It requires that the individuals who step up do so because they believe, like our forefathers did that there is no higher calling than public service. That serving your fellow citizens is the right thing to do. And that their careers in the private sector can be resumed at the end of their term.
    If they were successful in the past then they will be successful in the future. If they are unwilling to sacrifice and do that then perhaps they are not the right people to govern our town. You cannot give this mantle of mayoral responsibility to individuals whose focus will be divided by public and private welfare. To allow individuals to make large salaries and maintain business stock ownership and attempt to serve our Town does not appear to fit together. The focus of all we do in government is to make our town better, more responsive and the place everyone in Fairfield County wants to live.

    Maintain the four year term

    Maintain the singular employment responsibility for the Mayor

    Cap the mayoral salary
    Allow the Town Council to set the salary at the beginning of the term

    Create a minimum salary range that is reflective of the responsibility and percentage of the budget that eliminates politic influence over salary

    I appreciate the opportunity to address you. Thank you for your time and your service.

    Jonathan Best

  2. 2 freedomofspeach

    I agree in part the Mayors salary should not be raised other than by COLA. It’s public service. It should be his/hers only paid employment. I believe volunteer work for a non profit type organization should be allowed. Also I believe that paid speaking engagements, such as for educational, should be allowed as long as there is full discloser of those fees and arrangements. I am not sure if I would let the TC set the salary, or approve the funding for it, as I feel it interferes with the separation of Mayoral and Legislative powers,and allows the TC to have undo leverage over the Mayor. I think its set now, just COLA it. It is what it is.

    As far as outside employment, I totally agree with some exceptions. If the Mayor has rental apartments, then that’s a business, does he has to sell them off? If he owns a candy store should he have to sell it?

    I do agree that it could invite a form of graft when you’re a member of a professional firm and serve as the Mayor. Just look at the issues Bridgeport has with Steel Point and the ongoing alleged corruption between the former Mayor and the law firm he is a member of. That says it all. It will cost the taxpayers of Bridgeport millions to get that settled.

  3. 3 jezebel282

    Mr. Best,

    Thanks for sharing once again your qualifications as mayor. I find it a bit disturbing, however, that you neglected to mention:

    1. An Independent Town Attorney
    2. Removal of Town employee “at will” status
    3. Employment policy oversight (no show jobs, unqualified personnel)
    4. Budget transfer oversight.
    5. Run off elections

    Perhaps by not mentioning them you meant to say they are not necessary changes? It is obvious due to their absence in the speech that they were not worthy of mention.

  4. 4 freedomofspeach

    “Residents also urged the commission Thursday to strip the mayor of his sole authority to hire and fire department heads, and make appointments to town boards and commissions. Some residents want the commission to involve the Town Council in both processes.”

    I have to say I am not sure about this one. The Mayor needs to be able to have his management staff at his/hers sole discretion, and they must serve at his/hers pleasure. I believe that anyone under the department head level should be subject to a just cause termination, however, the Mayor, as the Chief Elected Official must have the authority to hire and fire his department heads.

    Commissions should be subject to the Mayor who submits to the TC names and qualifications for hearings and consent, or the Mayor gets a percentage of each board or commission, and the TC gets the rest. I have sat on town boards and city commissions and it was by recommendation of the Mayor, with approval of the town manager or TC.

    I feel that the people involved feel that the TC is their only representative, and legislatively that’s true, however, they elect the Mayor to be their Chief Elected Official and have to give him/her some autonomy to make his/her management team an arm of his/her administration. They must do the bidding of the Mayor (unless you have a psycho for a Mayor) and that’s what recall is for.

  5. 5 freedomofspeach

    Jez:

    All very good questions to Mr. Best.

    One thing is very clear is that run off elections are not legal by statute in Connecticut; it’s a plurality of vote. As you know, you cannot change State Statutes by Town Charter, and thus the question, as well as the waste of time of the TC, CRC, and everyone else in this matter, is moot.

    In Stratford’s case, before anyone moves forward on the CRC it has to be determined if the Charter was revised and amended to the Special Act Charter that was put in place, then the possibility of recall exists (although will be litigated) or if it was a new charter, accepted by statute, and thus that righty is gone. At that point I would look into the legal eagles that screwed that up and look to their malpractice insurer. Certainly the will of the people was not followed. But it has to be clear that before someone screws it up again by opening up the charter this question must be answered, and if the CRC wont do it, then an independent group must intervene on the taxpayers behalf.

  6. 6 jezebel282

    Freedom,

    You may have missed the last 28 months around here. 33 people in 27 months have left or been terminated from Town employment. Including, but not limited to, award winning employees, every woman over 50 and anyone whom the mayor just didn’t like. We now have no show jobs, barely or unqualified employees and almost anyone who the mayor is related to or had profitable dealings with.

    We’ve had punitive audits of employees that stood up to this mayor, we’ve had discrimination complaints filed against this mayor, union arbitration hearings, the list goes on.

    We have a mayor who requires two “aides”, 3 secretaries,one CAO for a job that used to be done by two people. Of course, less gets done now than ever.

    We’ve had budget transfers from Economic development and other departments to the town attorney, transfers from parking fees and park revenue…this list just goes on too.

    This mayor took a $500,000 local capital improvement grant and renovated his own offices with it, complete with soundproof walls and electronic self-locking doors. We affectionately call it the “Secure Bunker”.

    We are simply looking for protection from the next psychopath. You obviously weren’t standing in Town Hall when the mayor screamed, “I’m the F*****G Mayor! I can do whatever the F***K I want!”.

    Oh and then there’s the gun he carries into Town Hall…….

  7. 7 jezebel282

    Sue Sullier had the most accurate speech and call to action. Sadly, David Blumstein could not attend due to family medical problems, but the Post published his “speech”:

    http://www.connpost.com/letters/ci_9015552

    The latest headline/scandal involving Stratford Mayor James R. Miron’s brother and the Stratford Police Department underscores the importance of the work being conducted by the Charter Revision Commission.

    Although its meetings are sparsely attended, the Charter Revision Commission is working diligently to overcome the flaws in the current charter that has allowed Mayor Miron to run amok in Stratford. Two of the key areas under consideration are the “at will” status of town employees and the Town Council’s supervisory control (currently none) of town hiring practices. The sole authority for both now rests with the mayor. In the 27 months he has served as mayor, 33 people have been terminated or quit. Obviously, something is amiss. Miron recently testified before the CRC and stated that his most important criteria in hiring was the ability to move his agenda forward. Unfortunately, his agenda seems to be to have as many relatives, close business associates and clients draw a town of Stratford paycheck as possible, sometimes risking the safety of Stratford citizens.
    I urge the Charter Revision Commission to move deliberately toward rectifying this problem. We need town employees who are free to disagree with policies and pursue the best practices for the citizens of Stratford without fear of losing their job on a whim. We need oversight in the hiring practices of new employees to ensure that we have the best-qualified candidates, not the most subservient. Had we had adequate policies in place, we would not have had to endure the Mark Haddad fiasco or this present scandalous episode. More than 3,200 registered voters saw the urgent need for charter revision. If the Charter Revision Commission takes resolute and deliberate action to put a system in place that protects the citizens instead of the political parties, Stratford has a chance to become a shining example of voter participation and responsibility.

    David Blumstein
    Stratford

  8. 8 freedomofspeach

    “You may have missed the last 28 months around here. 33 people in 27 months have left or been terminated from Town employment. Including, but not limited to, award winning employees, every woman over 50 and anyone whom the mayor just didn’t like. We now have no show jobs, barely or unqualified employees and almost anyone who the mayor is related to or had profitable dealings with.”

    I have been watching things from the sidelines, and yes it’s pathetic. The town elected an unqualified person, with possible antisocial personality disorder tendencies, whose family history is pathological, and who misrepresented his intention to run while sitting on the original CRC. But he’s an attorney, son of the Registrar, and got his way in. I don’t think he knew this was a real job, as I don’t think he has ever had one.

    I never said that he should have the right to fire every employee of the town at will, and if that’s the case, then what the heck is the TC doing about it? Change the town hiring ordinance, it’s that simple. Anyone without a contract or a statute/regulation to protect them in CT is “at will”. Does the charter allow him to fire anyone and everyone at will? His power should be for department heads, who are his solders of the administration, everyone else should be by collective bargaining or contract. The things that he has done may open the town up to litigation, and I am sure after looking around, the town has spent millions in paying off terminated employees, and it is my thought there are a few cases going to move forward.

    He can hire his own staff, but if there is a no budget control for the Mayors Office, then your at the mercy of him. Your right, he does not need all that unqualified help, but the fish rots from the head, and it’s not unexpected. I saw how much he budgets for education and training, a lot of people going to school at the Mayors office. When do they have time to work?

    “We’ve had punitive audits of employees that stood up to this mayor, we’ve had discrimination complaints filed against this mayor, union arbitration hearings, the list goes on.”

    Yes you have a sociopath in office. He thinks he’s Capt. Jack Sparrow. He is out of control and clearly is a vindictive person. Just wait until his father goes to jail. I pray every night that the Chief States Attorney gets going on this.

    The audits are harassment, and there are ways to deal with that. As for discrimination, yes you are going to lose those cases and the town will pay, but the town attorney will make a lot of money. As far as arbitration, then collective bargaining clauses are working. The Mayor does not care; where do you think he is going to work when he’s done playing Mayor. The only places he can go is Blumenthal’s office as a big Democratic supporter, or to BM&D where he appears to be, by uncontrolled legal fees, is feathering his nest as we speak. Unless he gets those positions, or the Black Pearl is ready to sail, he has no place to go other than to litigate all the problems his family is in, but they don’t have any money.

    “We have a mayor who requires two “aides”, 3 secretaries, one CAO for a job that used to be done by two people. Of course, less gets done now than ever.”
    Not sure what the office would be, but if you had someone with corporate management experience then it would be what it needs to be.
    “We’ve had budget transfers from Economic development and other departments to the town attorney, transfers from parking fees and park revenue…this list just goes on too.”

    If the TC won’t do anything about it, or cant, then you have to relay on the quality of person that gets elected. Just looking at Jim Miron and his family, did anyone think in their hearts think he was qualified to be Mayor? If so, get to the hospital immediately as your delusional and need medication.

    “This mayor took a $500,000 local capital improvement grant and renovated his own offices with it, complete with soundproof walls and electronic self-locking doors. We affectionately call it the “Secure Bunker”.”

    And how did he get away with that? Somewhere there is a grant application that says what your going to do with the money, if he did not do what he said he was going to do its fraud. I am sure there are many who would be willing if that was documented to make that case.

    “We are simply looking for protection from the next psychopath. You obviously weren’t standing in Town Hall when the mayor screamed, “I’m the F*****G Mayor! I can do whatever the F***K I want!”.”

    You said it clearly, I agree. But you also cant take the problems that have arisen from hiring an unqualified person and tie the hands of the next Mayor. Well you can, but then you might as well as go back to a different form of government, and you saw how that works, it gave you Team Stratford for 10 years and lost the town millions.

    As for his trash mouth talk, again, he’s the Capitan of a Pirate ship, so he talks like a drunken sailor. The problem is he’s the laughing stock of the state, and so is Straford. When I talk to people in CT and Fairfield County comes up, we all get a big laugh about him. I feel sorry for you. Maybe he needs a conservator appointed.

    From what I read in the charter years ago, the Mayor is a powerful Mayor, that’s what the town wanted, but they elected a megalomaniac, with genetic sociopathic tendencies. It’s very sad. Next time elect someone that has integrity and is stable. But again, you cant tie the hands of the next one or the whole reason you changed the form of government is moot.

    “Oh and then there’s the gun he carries into Town Hall…….”

    I don’t have a problem with that. Unless there is a statute against it he has the right to carry. Guess it beats a sword. I am sure he carries more than one in town hall. I do think that because everyone knows, it makes him look more foolish. Here is a question. Do you think with the gun, the bunker, surrounding himself with incompetents to make him look smarter, firing those who challenge him, showing his tattoos to the new media, and tourette syndrome type outbursts, that he might have some sort of paranoid sociopathic disorder? I will look in the DSM but I am sure I can find it.

  9. 9 jonbest

    Jeze:

    1. An Independent Town Attorney
    I think I addressed this on the SPT blog. I believe the Town attorney should be a full time employee. This is the model used by many communities. The should be appointed by the Mayor and serve a parallel term. Specialty law issues might still have requirements for Attorneys with special skills but that is on a case by case basis (no pun intended).

    2. Removal of Town employee “at will” status
    In every organization there are some employees that have at will status. How the executive utilizes that status is the issue not to wheter they should be at will. A system with no at will employees will create an environment of complacency that would also not make taxpayers happy. It is the application of the rule that is an issue not the rule.

    3. Employment policy oversight (no show jobs, unqualified personnel)
    This is just a issue of good management. There is no reason to have no show jobs or unqualified persons. It will not be to anyones advantage in the long run.

    4. Budget transfer oversight.
    I believe this is very clear in the charter.

    5. Run off elections
    A run off election if you had kept the top two in the race would not have changed the result in Stratford. I think we need to get people involved and active in voting to decide elections. I think the majority wins and that is it. Win and lose has no percentage of votes you either have the most votes or you do not. I thought the commission addressed this.

    Hope this gives you a thumbnail view of these issues and where I stand on them.

    Thanks
    Jonathan Best

  10. 10 jezebel282

    Mr. Best, Freedom,

    “1. An Independent Town Attorney
    I think I addressed this on the SPT blog. I believe the Town attorney should be a full time employee. This is the model used by many communities. The should be appointed by the Mayor and serve a parallel term.”

    Agreed. Sort of. Appointed by the mayor and approved by the Council. The Town Attorney must represent the Town. That means the taxpayers, not the mayor nor the Council.

    “2. Removal of Town employee “at will” status
    In every organization there are some employees that have at will status. How the executive utilizes that status is the issue not to wheter they should be at will. A system with no at will employees will create an environment of complacency that would also not make taxpayers happy.”

    Removal of “at will” does not mean “never”. It means “for cause” like incompetence, insubordination, absenteeism…etc. I had never seen an air of complacency in the Town Clerk’s Office, Economic Development, Health, Finance (under Ed Gomo)…in fact they were singularly talented people.

    “3. Employment policy oversight (no show jobs, unqualified personnel)
    This is just a issue of good management. There is no reason to have no show jobs or unqualified persons. It will not be to anyones advantage in the long run.”

    Agreed. But you cannot have the person in charge of time sheets approving time sheets, y’know? It is what it is now because there is no control.

    “4. Budget transfer oversight.
    I believe this is very clear in the charter.”
    Yet, here we are transferring tons of $$$.

    “5. Run off elections
    A run off election if you had kept the top two in the race would not have changed the result in Stratford. I think we need to get people involved and active in voting to decide elections. I think the majority wins and that is it.”

    Unfortunately a plurality is not necessarily a majority. The reason there are run-offs anywhere is to ensure the elected official has a mandate. With a plurality you get this: a mayor that 2/3 of the voters did not vote for.

    Freedom,

    “The town elected an unqualified person, with possible antisocial personality disorder tendencies, whose family history is pathological, and who misrepresented his intention to run while sitting on the original CRC.”

    Ted Bundy looked perfectly normal too.

    “then what the heck is the TC doing about it? Change the town hiring ordinance, it’s that simple.”

    The current Charter states that all employees not in a bargaining unit are “at will”. Of course that doesn’t stop Miron. 6 department heads were in a bargaining unit. Gone anyway. Along with secretaries and clerks. Those he couldn’t fire he bought off with pension deals; The “Golden Boot”.

    “And how did he get away with that? Somewhere there is a grant application that says what your going to do with the money, if he did not do what he said he was going to do its fraud.”

    There was this councilman named Bob Camillo see…..If you collect a Town paycheck you learn QUICKLY you don’t piss off the mayor. By, say, doing your job.

    “But you also cant take the problems that have arisen from hiring an unqualified person and tie the hands of the next Mayor. Well you can, but then you might as well as go back to a different form of government, and you saw how that works, it gave you Team Stratford for 10 years and lost the town millions.”

    Nothing I have proposed does anything other than protect Citizens. It does not tie anyone’s hands. It DOES make them work to get what they want.

    “But again, you cant tie the hands of the next one or the whole reason you changed the form of government is moot.”

    I’m not sure that those who wanted a so-called “strong mayor” wanted what we have now. I personally don’t care if it’s a mayor or Town Manager or Burgermeister. In my private sector life if you cannot demonstrate why an investment should be made, generally investors don’t invest. If a mayor can’t explain why he wants taxpayer money spent, he shouldn’t be able to spend it.

    “I don’t have a problem with that. Unless there is a statute against it he has the right to carry. Guess it beats a sword.”

    I have a big problem with that. It is a workplace (or should be). You just don’t carry concealed weapons into the workplace. It is also within 50 yards of a school. Maybe closer. If the mayor needs protection, he’s in charge of the whole Police force….wait, just lately that might not be such a good idea.

    “I will look in the DSM but I am sure I can find it.”

    Don’t forget Bi-Polar….

  11. 11 jonbest

    “1. An Independent Town Attorney
    I agree but I also recognize that a Town Attorney had an obligation to defend Town officials operating in their official function. The taxpayers should be represented by their Mayor, Councilmen and other elected officials.
    “2. Removal of Town employee “at will” status
    I agree all terminations should be for cause and not political reasons but a Mayor should have the ability to develop a team who will work for him and some of those positions should be at will. At will always existed. It is just how it is exercised.
    “3. Employment policy oversight (no show jobs, unqualified personnel)
    I agree
    “4. Budget transfer oversight.
    The Town Council has oversight responsibility I think they can work to get a better handle on this.
    “5. Run off elections
    I believe the majority wins. The law based on what I see here agrees. It is a voter responsibility to insure the right person is elected. I took my stand last time and if you had asked me I would have suggested who you should have voted for.

  12. 12 jezebel282

    Freedom,

    In answer to your previous question

    “In Stratford’s case, before anyone moves forward on the CRC it has to be determined if the Charter was revised and amended to the Special Act Charter that was put in place, then the possibility of recall exists (although will be litigated) or if it was a new charter, accepted by statute, and thus that righty is gone.”

    This is what we voted for:

    QUESTIONS ON THE BALLOT FOR THE NOVEMBER 4, 2003 MUNICIPAL ELECTION

    STRATFORD

    1. “Shall the Town Charter be amended to change the form of town government from the present Council/Manager form to a Mayor/Council form as recommended by the Charter Revision Commission in its final report dated June 23, 2003?”

    5964 (Yes) 5293 (No)

    2. “Shall the proposed corrections regarding grammar, spelling, terminology, consistency and other corrections of a technical nature, which include revision of outdated provisions of the Town Charter,
    be approved as recommended by the Charter Revision Commission in its final report dated June 23, 2003?”

    6926 (Yes) 2091 (No)

  13. 13 jezebel282

    Mr. Best,

    We can argue the other points for a while (not a horrible fate, I actually enjoy it).

    This one is not arguable:

    “I believe the majority wins. The law based on what I see here agrees. It is a voter responsibility to insure the right person is elected. I took my stand last time and if you had asked me I would have suggested who you should have voted for.”

    A plurality is not a majority. If 10 candidates run and they each get 9% of the vote but one gets 18% then he/she becomes the mayor with an 18% mandate. Which means, just to dumb it down a bit more, 82% of the voters didn’t think this person would be a good mayor. Clearly, that is NOT a majority.

  14. 14 jonbest

    I understand your point. But the process should allow anyone to run who wants to and the voters need to be selective to decide who the Best Mayor would be. (sorry small commercial) I do not have a good solution because I do understand your concern but I do not think a run off unless it had been a three way run off would have gotten you a different result. It is not that simple to say that everyone who voted for the third party candidate would vote for someone else or once they saw the first results would not follow the frontrunner. I do not think we are arguing or disagree I just do not believe the solution is as simple as it appears. That being the case at this point I will stay with majority wins regardless of numbers or percentages of votes cast. I am always willing to continue discussion and perhaps another option will come to me.

    Thanks

    Jonathan Best

  15. 15 1george1

    Good back and forth between Jon, Jeze, F.O.S., with D Blumstein note.

    I have posted my positions, which agree with some of Jon’s and disagree
    with others. FACT: Any system can work with the right people.

    I have to smile about Jon’s mentioning a need for a Mayor to be committed.
    Several people would like to have him committed, right now. 8)
    Some also think I should be committed? 😉
    Some even have praised my committment! 🙂
    I love it when the Bush-Cheney / Clinton / Obama / McCain / Kerry / Gore level
    of people blather about their CONVICTIONS. 8)
    If only they were PROSECUTED and CONVICTED, it might eliminate problems?

    David > My best wishes for Pat’s medical situation.
    To jewish viewers: Best wishes for a healthy happy passover.

    F. O. S. > Some personal perspectives of a very anti – Miron perspective
    colors your recent remarks. Until then (not totally disagreeing) your high
    road perspectives were very respectable.
    Jeze, also is very capable, when not near the Miron HOT BUTTON.

  16. 16 gforrester

    Jez – thank you for posting the questions. As a result I would say that the charter was amended and corrected but was not a new charter so home rule remains intact. Again I am not a lawyer but unless there is some other provision that I am missing it’s not a new charter.

  17. 17 pcsperling

    All ~

    Correct me if I am wrong, but thought the charter – before amendments – was a Special Act Charter and and after the amendments were voted on – it became a Home Rule charter. At least that’s what I got from some of Buturla’s opinions, which may or may not be correct.

  18. 18 pcsperling

    Here is a link to a report by the Connecticut Office of Legislative Research which seems to explain the differences in the two:

    http://www.cga.ct.gov/2002/olrdata/pd/rpt/2002-R-0863.htm

  19. 19 gforrester

    Ok Jon let’s get a more indepth take on these issues.

    1. An Independent Town Attorney
    I agree but I also recognize that a Town Attorney had an obligation to defend Town officials operating in their official function. The taxpayers should be represented by their Mayor, Councilmen and other elected officials.

    Would you support a corporate council or bid process rather that the Mayor naming the Town Attorney and his or her law firm who controlls all of the case files? Does the spoils still go to the victor or the biggest campain contributor?

    “2. Removal of Town employee “at will” status
    I agree all terminations should be for cause and not political reasons but a Mayor should have the ability to develop a team who will work for him and some of those positions should be at will. At will always existed. It is just how it is exercised.

    So if elected how would you determine who stays and who goes from the current administration and would the turn over be immediate? Would you agree to limit at will to the Mayors Administrative aids or would at will include people like the finance director, health director etc.?

    “3. Employment policy oversight (no show jobs, unqualified personnel)
    I agree

    Do we have no show jobs now? Who will determine who is qualified – you as Mayor – a committee – civil service commission. Anyone can write a job description to fit a persons qualifications. Will you agree to sign off on an anti-nepotism policy that is stronger than what we have in place today?

    “4. Budget transfer oversight.
    The Town Council has oversight responsibility I think they can work to get a better handle on this.

    John as I recall the last council did not vote to approve last years budget transfers but the charter doesn’t give us any teeth to do anything about it. So we refused the transfer and the line in the budget is overspent (which was not reflected in the year end reports because, again, the council has no punitive powers to mandate complance from the Administration.) so can you explain to me how, under the current charter, we can get a “better handle” on this? Maybe the Charter should include in it that no account can be overspent without the consent of a majority of the Town Council?

    “5. Run off elections
    I believe the majority wins. The law based on what I see here agrees. It is a voter responsibility to insure the right person is elected. I took my stand last time and if you had asked me I would have suggested who you should have voted for.

    Run-offs work in other states for elections to Congress and the Senate let alone locally. Why expand a run off to the top three? Everyone has the same playing field and if no one gets 50% then the top two run off in between the 2nd Tuesday in November and the 2nd Monday in December. It could work except that our State Legislature has their own self interest to preserve. I relent that the law is against run offs in CT but that doesn’t mean it’s the right way to go. We have seen what happens when we elect Presidents with less than 50% of the popular vote and how difficult it is for them to govern without a clear mandidate.

  20. 20 jezebel282

    George,

    Thank you. Everyone has their hot button. With Yankee fans it’s the Red Sox (and vice versa), with husbands it’s Dr. Phil, with women it’s ESPN, ESPN2, SPNY, YES network…With you it’s the CIA.

    With me, it’s Mayor Moron.

  21. 21 jezebel282

    Errr…Gavin?

    “Do we have no show jobs now?”

    Have you seen either Heather Habelka’s or Ashley Heydu’s job description or qualifications? Do you know where Ashley is most of the day? Or what she is doing? Do you really want to pay TWO tuitions? I doubt anyone pays your daughter to sit in class.

  22. 22 gforrester

    Pat these are excellent questions. I don’t believe that the simple act of amending a special act charter automatically changes it to a home rule charter. This is one for the legislative scholars to take a crack at. If we are special act then I don’t believe we have to follow CT statutes regarding recall – referendum – and term limits but if we are home rule then maybe we do. The last CRC concentrated on he form of governement more so than the form of charter. Thankfully this body still has time to get an answer to the question and the Council can refer the report back to the CRC for an extended 30 days for clarification on any issue so they might be working until July 2nd rather than June 2nd.

  23. 23 pcsperling

    Jeze ~

    How do you really feel…. ;>D

  24. 24 jezebel282

    I really can’t say, Pat…there may be children reading this.

  25. 25 pcsperling

    Gavin ~

    Here is a paragraph from the report I linked above:

    “A 1969 constitutional amendment banned the legislature from enacting special acts regarding the powers, organization, form of government, and terms of elective office for any single town. The amendment did not repeal special act charters but did block the legislature from amending them. As a result, towns operating under these charters can amend them only by converting them into home rule charters. ”

    It seems pretty clear in this report – of course, if I am reading AND INTERPRETING this correctly, the last sentence in particular. It seems pretty clear, but I don’t have an MBA, so for some my interpretation may not be considered educated.

  26. 26 jezebel282

    Pat,

    You’re beating Ms. Wanamaker by a mile in the survey. Without an MBA!

  27. 27 freedomofspeach

    First, I want to say I don’t have anything personally against Mr. Miron; I am sure he’s great to have a beer with and swap war stories. He is just exhibiting such bizarre behavior, and since it is Friday I wanted to add some brevity. I am not anti Miron per se, I am anti nutcase in positions of power. I have worked for incompetents in both the public and private sectors. In both places they are annoying.

    Regarding the Special Act v. Home Rule Charter.

    PCS, I believe your right. To better understand I think you have to read

    http://www.cga.ct.gov/2002/olrdata/gae/rpt/2002-R-0076.htm

    This shows that in some cases you may have to amend the special act charter to a home rule charter to amend it at all. Not sure, I have to look at legislative intent; however, the OLR says it might be mandatory. This should have been brought up by the gaggle of attorneys, or at least by Miron Esq. and the town attorney, during the first CRC. Also as a Special Act Charter, or chartered by the act of the legislature, does that mean (and I am not sure) that only the legislature of the state can amend them, unless converting them to home rule?

    Easy way to figure this out is before the Secretary of State (I think this may be possible), the OLR, as an opinion, or a Judge. But to have the people who are being lead by opinions of the people who might have screwed up the rights of the town the first time giving the sole legal opinion is just damm crazy. Either way you got nailed in a bait and switch, and had no informed consent.

    As far as run off elections, they are categorically illegal by State Statute. Period. Cant have them under CGS Chapter 147 Section 9-173. You have to change the statute to get run off elections. I would debate if you legally amended your Special Act Charter if you could legally add that provision.

    As far as recall of elected officials. Unless you have a legal amendment to the Special Act Charter, you cannot have that either, its been declared unconstitutional. The Connecticut Supreme Court has upheld as constitutional only those five where recall was established by a special act prior to enactment of home rule (Bristol, Milford, New Haven, Stratford, and Westport). With that if you had to amend to a home rule charter, then recall is illegal by action of law.

    Gavin, I think you need to go to Hartford, as you have the right idea on this.

    Some thoughts:

    Sec. 9-7. Charter provisions not affected. No provision of this title or the sections listed in section 9-1 shall be construed to repeal any charter provision in existence on May 14, 1953, relative to the election, term of office or powers or duties of any municipal officer or to the manner of warning or conducting any municipal meeting or any election, but the powers and duties of such officers shall remain as provided in such charter.

    Sec. 9-173. Plurality required for election. In the election for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of the State, Treasurer, Comptroller and Attorney General, the person receiving the greatest number of votes for each of said offices, respectively, shall be declared elected. If no person has a plurality of the votes for any of said offices, the General Assembly shall choose such officer. In the election for senator in Congress, the person receiving the greatest number of votes for such office shall be declared elected; but, if no person has a plurality of the votes for said office, the Governor may make a temporary appointment of a senator in Congress to serve for the ensuing two years unless the General Assembly directs a special election for a senator in Congress, to be held during said period, to fill the vacancy occasioned by such failure to elect. In all elections of representatives in Congress, state senators, state representatives and judges of probate, the person having the greatest number of votes shall be declared elected. Unless otherwise provided by law, in all municipal elections a plurality of the votes cast shall be sufficient to elect.

    (1949 Rev., S. 514, 1084, 1088, 1089, 1098, 1102; 1953, S. 656d; 1967, P.A. 557, S. 2; P.A. 00-99, S. 25, 154.)

    History: 1967 act added “state representative” to list of offices for which the candidate having greatest number of votes shall be declared elected, deleted provision in case of state representatives for moderator to declare elected person having greatest number of votes and if town is entitled to two representatives, the two top vote getters to be declared elected; P.A. 00-99 deleted reference to sheriffs, effective December 1, 2000.

    As applied to office of selectman. 75 C. 460. Cited. 135 C. 150.

    Without a bipartisan restriction, a plurality of votes cast elects. 10 CS 258.

    Just some food for thought.

    Jez, I know you and others are looking for a mandate from the people for the position, thats why you want a run off, however, the state law does not allow it. Yet. Get Gavin to Hartford!!

  28. 28 jezebel282

    Freedom,

    Getting Gavin to Hartford might have been simpler if his daughter had chosen UCONN (Only $16K, Gavin!) or Yale instead of NYU.

  29. 29 freedomofspeach

    Well its time to be a good parent and help the child along. Also, don’t state employees get a discount?

  30. 30 jezebel282

    I think she’s staying at NYU. The knishes and canoles are better there anyway.

  31. 31 freedomofspeach

    yes they are, and you can get a knosh anytime.
    I want to comment on some of your points.

    “The current Charter states that all employees not in a bargaining unit are “at will”. Of course that doesn’t stop Miron. 6 department heads were in a bargaining unit. Gone anyway. Along with secretaries and clerks. Those he couldn’t fire he bought off with pension deals; The “Golden Boot”.”

    Then those who need protection need to get Union representation. And of course litigation is the only way to go. No one should be upset at any town employee protecting their legal rights.

    “Nothing I have proposed does anything other than protect Citizens. It does not tie anyone’s hands. It DOES make them work to get what they want.”

    How does the change of “at will” employment for department heads NOT tie the hands of the Chief Elected Official?

    “I’m not sure that those who wanted a so-called “strong mayor” wanted what we have now. I personally don’t care if it’s a mayor or Town Manager or Burgermeister. In my private sector life if you cannot demonstrate why an investment should be made, generally investors don’t invest. If a mayor can’t explain why he wants taxpayer money spent, he shouldn’t be able to spend it.”

    Very true, however in the public sector more value is raised on how it will socially affect something, and a voting block, rather then a real return on investment. In other words, if you looked at the return on say a park or open space purchase, frankly there is no tangible rate of return it’s all speculative and cannot really be measured using things other than fuzzy numbers.

    “I have a big problem with that. It is a workplace (or should be). You just don’t carry concealed weapons into the workplace. It is also within 50 yards of a school. Maybe closer. If the mayor needs protection, he’s in charge of the whole Police force….wait, just lately that might not be such a good idea.”

    I would see if there is a Statute on possession of a Firearm within so many feet of a School. The only person as far as I know who is exempt is a Law Enforcement Officer. And luckily in Connecticut, you cannot just be appointed as one unless your are certified by the state, and only after the police academy. In addition, all potential law enforcement officers have to have psyche exams and polygraphs. Think he would pass them?

    As far as the workplace, I believe, and this in my opinion, that there is no real issue with carrying firearms in the workplace, properly permitted, concealed, and secure. I have a female family member that had been attacked in the workplace, but due to her job she was unable by law to carry her permitted concealed weapon in her workplace. This attacker went to cause serious injury to my family and others, and eventually was shot by a police officer. All of the victims have lifelong disabilities that could have been prevented if she was able to carry her permitted, and concealed weapon, that by law she had to be trained to use.

    “Don’t forget Bi-Polar….”

    As we say, bi-poler is a lesser and included diagnosis.

    “A plurality is not a majority. If 10 candidates run and they each get 9% of the vote but one gets 18% then he/she becomes the mayor with an 18% mandate. Which means, just to dumb it down a bit more, 82% of the voters didn’t think this person would be a good mayor. Clearly, that is NOT a majority.”

    A majority by most definitions is a vote in the affirmative of over 50%. State law does not allow for that, right or wrong. Doing anything else does not allow for independent candidates to run, as they will need to get 50% to win, and in most cases they could not get that amount of the vote, but with a plurality they do win.

  32. 32 jezebel282

    Freedom,

    This is enjoyable.

    “Then those who need protection need to get Union representation.”

    One of the hardest things imaginable is telling your family their home, food, clothing, education and health is in jeopardy because your are going to stand up to a bully. I know it has been done, but the usual reaction is to wait for Miron to leave. Loyalty to Stratford has a limit.

    “And of course litigation is the only way to go.”

    The CHRO takes an average of 24 months or longer. The Wage and Labor division takes almost as long. It is also extremely difficult to retain council in civil litigation when you have just been “at-willed” by Miron.

    “How does the change of “at will” employment for department heads NOT tie the hands of the Chief Elected Official?”
    Glad you asked. They key to EFFECTIVE management is leadership not intimidation. Why would a chief executive’s hands be tied by not being able to fire anyone at will? If he can’t figure out how to get the job done without firing someone, maybe “mayor” is not a good career choice.

    “Very true, however in the public sector more value is raised on how it will socially affect something, and a voting block, rather then a real return on investment.”

    In some ways it is much easier in the public sector. Occasionally in the private sector it comes down to plain numbers. “Here is your ROI and here is when you will achieve it.” More often than not, it is much more complex than that, but I’m not going to use up the space here. Again it is a LEADER’S ability to persuade and generate support. Not to twist arms and threaten. The last business metaphor I will use is; nobody fires the salesman who brings in the most revenue with the highest margin.

    “In addition, all potential law enforcement officers have to have psyche exams and polygraphs. Think he would pass them?”

    Why would that stop him? It didn’t stop his brother. (Thanks for that softball.)

    “As far as the workplace, I believe, and this in my opinion, that there is no real issue with carrying firearms in the workplace”

    You are entitled to your opinion. I have worked with many people in many countries and there are quite a few people I would not want carrying a gun at anytime. Especially in the workplace.

    “I would see if there is a Statute on possession of a Firearm within so many feet of a School.”

    And who would arrest him? The Chief of Police, John Buturla? (You know, Rich Buturla’s brother?) To be honest, if I were Irene Cornish I’d be screaming my head off (right after the Council restored Miron’s cuts).

    “Doing anything else does not allow for independent candidates to run, as they will need to get 50% to win, and in most cases they could not get that amount of the vote, but with a plurality they do win.”

    This may be so. However, historically, run-offs tend to favor Independents. We already know that the craziest candidates can win with a plurality. My point is that if we are to give someone this much influence over our money and services it should be a bit more stringent and require a mandate of the voters.

  33. 33 lauradobosz

    “One of the hardest things imaginable is telling your family their home, food, clothing, education and health is in jeopardy because your are going to stand up to a bully. I know it has been done, but the usual reaction is to wait for Miron to leave. Loyalty to Stratford has a limit.”

    Ok. enough. I beg of you Jez, where is Mayor Miron forcing people to tell their family that they will now have to do without food, clothing, education and healthcare? Those issues are solely on mr bush and his horrific administration. Lieberman-benedict-arnold included.

    I get that you hate him, for your own personal reasons, but Mayor Miron is NOT a bully. I am very experienced in HR policies and he did not do anything that was against the law in his staffing procedures. I also know that as a lawyer himself, he would not have fired anyone “unlawfully” or “without cause”. Be it budget reasons, tenure, retirement or just plain people who cannot admit that they were no longer star stellar employees. I know enough about human resources to know that any alleged ‘wrong firings’ by Mayor Miron would have been addressed by the state labor department.

    I guess I am fairly ‘fed up’ with this ridiculous argument that Jim came into town hall and ‘cleaned house’ unlawfully. That is total Bull. Every single “firing” has legitimate backing. I will not go person to person on this blog, not only because of legalities, but because I respect the persons who were let go enough to not speak about them in a forum such as a blog. I have worked in HR for enough companies where I know that you cannot just fire someone because they are not a democrat, or because they are ‘old’. It is naive to think that Mayor Miron was able to do that to over 25 people. The town would be shut down with law suits if that were true and I know that will not happen.

    I do suggest that those of you here who continue to complain that there was this huge, unwarranted firing actually speak to town hall and post actual facts. I understand that people are upset. The loss of a job always causes pain. I think we need to be careful though, as to how we perceive the process and the motivation, when it comes to a Mayor.

    I still believe that a Mayor, (republican, democrat, independent or other) should have the right to designate commission members and to hire his/her own staff. I realize that if a member of an opposing party to my belief becomes Mayor, that my belief system would not win out or perhaps be very productive, but I still support my opinion that whomever is elected, should have certain rights. I also believe, while we are at it, that a mayor should have 4 years as his term. I am 100% plus, against the 2 year term. I find that to be a waste of money and not realistic in the expectations of what any mayor could accomplish in just two years.

    So there. lol

  34. 34 jezebel282

    Laura,

    Now I remember why I always disagreed with you.

    “I beg of you Jez, where is Mayor Miron forcing people to tell their family that they will now have to do without food, clothing, education and healthcare?”

    This is what happens, Laura, when you LOSE YOUR JOB. He threatens this almost daily.

    “I am very experienced in HR policies and he did not do anything that was against the law in his staffing procedures.”

    Go back and get some more experience, Laura. The supervisor’s union has an arbitration procedure in process and there are at least two discrimination complaints that the State deems have merit. Then there was Gugliotti who won his case.

    “I also know that as a lawyer himself, he would not have fired anyone “unlawfully” or “without cause”.”

    Honest to goodness, Laura! You can’t be serious can you?

    “Be it budget reasons, tenure, retirement or just plain people who cannot admit that they were no longer star stellar employees.”

    Oh no! You ARE serious! Sigh…please let us know which one of the people listed below left the Town willfully or were dismissed because they were incompetent:

    Fired:

    Ben Branyan
    Judy Heigel
    Pat Blumstein
    Al Dubois
    Elaine O’Keefe
    Mary Tiernan
    Eileen Murphey
    Diane Toolan
    Pat Naylor
    Sue Nicholson
    Brian Thomas
    John Carroll
    Steven Danzer
    Ken Kellogg
    Beth Stremple
    Patrice Sulik
    Len Buehler
    Kim Correia
    Diane Maurice

    Retired (with pot o’ gold)

    Ron Natrass
    Mike Imbro
    Pat Ulatowski
    Mark DeLieto
    David Evans
    Tom Rodia
    Robert Skrutsky
    Richard Yeomans
    Chris Marino

    Quit:
    Mark Haddad
    Marilyn Flores
    Kent Miller (Fired, rehired, quit)
    Angelo Stavola

    “Every single “firing” has legitimate backing.”

    Laura? No offense, but how the Hell would you know?

    “I have worked in HR for enough companies where I know that you cannot just fire someone because they are not a democrat, or because they are ‘old’.”

    Miron has a his own coffee cup with his name on it at the CHRO office. Obviously, you have never talked to Marylin Flores..Oh wait, too late, she quit.

    “The town would be shut down with law suits if that were true and I know that will not happen.”

    Do you? May I refer you to Mr. Mulligan for a projection of how much the pensions of Pat Ulatowski and Mike Imbro will cost the Town long after Miron is gone? Or the union settlements or the multiple CHRO complaints?

    “I do suggest that those of you here who continue to complain that there was this huge, unwarranted firing actually speak to town hall and post actual facts.”

    I ask that you do the same thing, Laura. These are facts. You are just regurgitating Miron’s “reasons”. The next thing you will tell us is that Ben Branyan quit voluntarily.

    “I realize that if a member of an opposing party to my belief becomes Mayor, that my belief system would not win out or perhaps be very productive, but I still support my opinion that whomever is elected, should have certain rights.”

    Huh? Care to reword that one into English?

    Laura, I’m not sure what your motivations are, but Miron has replaced talented, experienced, dedicated and award winning employees with…well, Mironistas. And let’s not forget the little detail that while he was campaigning he looked people in the eye, shook their hand and said, “I wouldn’t make any staff changes.”.

  35. 35 1george1

    Gavin
    Excellent posts

    PCS
    Excellent posts

    Freedom
    Excellent posts

    Jeze
    Very good posts

    Laura
    Political Creatures in USPS Management & Union attacked me and my USPS
    coworkers were ATTACKED in what was created to be a GOING POSTAL
    ENVIRONMENT, which was FAR, FAR, FAR WORSE than the MIRON CURTAIN,
    yet COMPLETELY ANALYGOUS, since it is the SAME POLITICAL PARTY which
    uses DEPENDENCY in inner cities and PATRONAGE / EXTORTION throughout
    the POLITICAL inJUSTICE SYSTEM to maintain their THUGGERY.

    I agree when Jeze posts about people livelihoods being jeopardized by
    terrorizing the municiple workers with an ambiance of fear and intimidation
    by using the SPOILS SYSTEM to reward his cronies and POLITICAL WHIM to
    SWOOP onto the LIVELIHOODS of mostly respected people, who do their jobs
    with a high level of competentce (and some awarded with recognition).

    Creatures like the Miron / Burturla / Schirillo / Miller group swooped into
    where I worked and forced out the top 9 of 13 workers of 1984 (+2 mgrs),
    by April 1984.
    Our workers were so inefficient, it took 22 people by April 1988 to replace
    those 9 people and allow the 4 junior people to retain their jobs.
    Many were veterans, including COMBAT VETERANS. None have ever been
    subjective to the AMBIANCE of FEAR, INTIMIDATION, HARASSMENT, and outright
    CRUEL and UNUSUAL treatment, taking away CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS and a
    reasonable expectation of human decency in USPS chains of command.
    > This was in SOUTHPORT CT., not SO VIETnam or IRAQ!
    > Similar conduct during the Reagan years happened, whereas GOING POSTAL
    joined the USA LEXICON.
    >> Republicans gained anti-union powers
    >> Democrats gain DONATIONS, where the terrorize funded relieve attempts.
    >> UNIONS MANAGERS gained control and consolidation of LOCALS & the DUES
    PAID, to INCREASE thier SWAG.
    >> MANAGEMENT placed lower paid / less benefit / less safe workers and more
    of their RELATIVES / FRIENDS of the PARTY / SYNCHOPHANTS into JOBS.
    >>>> Most of the replacements were minority, gay/lesbian, and younger/more
    dependent/more fearful, willing LIARS & LABOR Whor…s, and F. O. P.
    >>>> Those in Management point positions were mostly JEWISH, with being
    closely backed by IRISH / ITALIAN / Minority. And most people would have
    become PREJUDICED by ill treatment by MASONRITES / SHRINERITES, lurking
    in the SHADOWS, however I had seen this before, due to ILL TREATMENT to
    my WW II COMBAT VETERAN DAD, who became PHYSICALLY ILL, from the
    PSYCHOLOGICAL MALTREATMENT at the direct cause by his DAILY COMMUNION
    RECEIVING IRISH POST MASTER (under equal duress from above management),
    which I absolutely found went past IRISH sectional / regional managers into
    a cess pool in the D. C. Cauldron, which included multigenerational PLANNING
    and OPERATIONS for POLITICAL OBJECTIVES predicated on:
    Nomenclature (or NomenKlatura)
    Numerology
    Iconology
    Cryptology
    and Psychology of justifications

    While readers will get on me about “conspiracy,” they have not lived in my
    shoes, have not had my experience (I can identify with holocaust/slavery),
    and NONE OF YOU KNOW, WHAT I KNOW!

    I hate to mitigate the Miron / Burturla maliciousness, but they are amatuers
    compared to what I EXPERIENCED and my EXPERIENCES are NOT in the LEAGUE
    with HOLOCAUSTS, WAR, and CRIMINAL SEDITIONIST, who I recognize…

    NATIONAL / INTERNATIONAL:
    I have COMPLETE and TOTAL DISDAIN for the CHENEY-BUSH-RUMSFELD White
    House’s PATRIOTISM, CRIMINALITY, HUMANITY, and CREDIBILITY.

    However, I feel they HAVE MORE of EACH than the CREATURES CONTROLING
    the DEMONcratic PARTY.

    I have ABSOLUTE RESPECT for:
    1) the people in the Military actually fighting for what they (and mostly us) believe in!
    2) legitimate police, which is the vast majority. I hate to agree there is NO INTENT in things like the SEAN BELL & DIALLO Case, and PROBABLY there is NO CRIMINALITY, however when there are 50 shot incidents like those, to an unarmed person and there is NO CRIMINAL CONVICTION of ANYTHING, including NOISE POLLUTION, one may have reason to wonder if there a POLICE / PROSECUTOR / JUDGE Blue Wall which is a
    DE FACTO mutual protection relationship (especially in light of DRUG TRAFFIC and the
    PRISONIFICATION of the UNDERCLASS)
    3) legitimate workers in Civil Service, Municiple workers, Union workers, and the
    General Work force, as well as business owners and legitimate people in Corporate
    USA.

    And I absolutely believe that the igNOBILITY of EUROPE and the LEVANT have
    “DOGS (of War) in the HUNT and COMPLETELY controls the USA Military intelligence
    Community, which COMPLETELY controls the USA Industrial / Scientific Elites,
    which COMPLETELY controls the USA / World (IMF / World Bank) Financial and
    Political inJUSTICE systems.

    The EMPIRICS of Britain’s Home Office are well practiced at turning people to
    act against their own interest.
    It is seen in the Mid – East
    It is seen in the USA
    It is seen in the stagnation of British population and underclass
    It is seen in the utilization of parts of the British Empire towards Geo-political
    goals, where english speaking places like Canada / Austrailia / New Zealand /
    Ireland / India / etc. have gained from Trilateral Offshoring USA verbal jobs,

    and the INDUSTRIALIZATION of Anti-union CAR Jobs from Michigan to Japan,
    Germany, and Korea, where the U. S. Military Command and Control used the
    Korean war for post WW II Marshall plan RETOOLING.
    > Notice the Phillipines and Taiwan were excluded in NON UNION CAR BUILDING.
    Only CONQUERORED and Military occupied WAR ZONES.

    and the British controlled HONG KONG was used to LEVERAGE opening CHINA’S
    cheap LABOR, which TAIWAN was BAD COP, and allowed LITTLE LEAGUE baseball
    domination.

    Prescott Bush Jr. was the Chair of the U. S. CHAMBER of COMMERCE to CHINA
    during his brother’s Presidency. Their father was a member of Brown Brothers
    & Harriman, a Rockefeller / Standard Oil subsidiary, as is WAL MART, which is
    the NUMBER ONE importer of CHINESE Products.

    As Clausewitz wrote, WARS are an EXTENTION of POLITICAL POLICY.
    > Korea, Indochina=SO VIETnam/Laos/Cambodia/Thai/Burma, India/Pakistan,
    Israel/Egypt, Afgahanistan, Israel/Syria/Lebanon/Gaza, Yogoslavia=Bosnia/H/?, IRAN/IRAQ, Somalia, Iraq/Afghanistan, SoViet stans, China/Tibet
    are all part of the COVER from the KEENAN LONG WIRE, for JUST CAUSE to
    have a RING of CONFLAGATIONS around the SINO – SOVIET, PACIFIC RIM
    conquored countries as the EURO – LEVANT War Colleges used the COLD
    WAR and anti religeous NEO MATERIAL Philosophies from Adam Smith, Karl
    Mark, Neicheism, Hitlerisms, (among others) to install proxies & puppets who
    are empty hearted and empty headed, knuckle draggers and knuckle heads.

    They do it around the world.
    They can do it in Stratford.

    But then George is a conspiracy nut.
    But then NO BLOG READER will challenge the FACTUALITY of my GESTALTIST
    perspective, eminating from my Tin Foil Hat, will you?

  36. 36 jezebel282

    Ask a simple question…..

  37. 37 gforrester

    Laura:

    The proof is in the pudding and if well qualified people are not appointed to commissions, regardless of party affiliation, very little positive can come from it. As an example I attended the 1st meeting of the ECDC for 2008 and when the new members were introduced and asked what they bring to the commission on more than one occasion they said, paraphrasing “I have no idea – the mayor appointed me”. Your right that as a strong mayor they should have the ability to appoint, but every four years the citizens get the right to “ratify” those appointments ate the ballot box and I venture to say that it will be a hard sell on ratification in 2009.

  38. 38 jezebel282

    Now, Gavin,

    Everyone knows Miron’s mom is well qualified for any Commission.

  39. 39 1george1

    One may ask a simple question, however it might actually be more complex,
    than what it appears.

    Wasn’t Shalespeare famous for subplots and multiple issues within his plays?

  40. 40 jezebel282

    George,

    Oh no you don’t! Once a day is enough. No more simple questions for you.

  41. 41 1george1

    AVCO & SIKORSKY are ARMY MILITARY SITES.

    I know bloggers have access to absolute proof that CIA & ARMY
    Intelligence have personnel on site.

    Logically, would either Agency / Department personnel allow the
    electorial process to be completely unfettered, OR is it MORE
    LIKELY they would actively be involved in political, legal, and law
    enforcement selections?

    Who is the fairly recent new security person in Avco?
    A certain former Stratford Police Captain?

    Have ranking Fire fighter rank & union personnel moved from Sikorsky
    to Stratford and visa versa?

    And if USA & British Intelligence created OPEC and various puppet
    dictators on both sides of WARS and internally control substances
    and “gangs,” do we have Traitors and Criminals acting against your
    interests, since your children and yourselves can be victimized……?

  42. 42 mikereynolds

    Uh oh…

    TIN FOIL HAT ALERT!!!!!!

  43. 43 1george1

    Uh oh!
    Moron Alert.
    Troglodite.

  44. 44 1george1

    In the past, many people shared the view of the 17th century philosopher Thomas Hobbes that the life of a human being without civilization was “…solitary, poore, nasty, brutish and short”. The modern scientific perception of prehistoric lifestyle is now that of the hunter-gatherer.

    Caveman is traditionally portrayed as being hairy, clothed in animal skins, armed with bone or wood clubs, intelligent, and aggressive. Furthermore, cavemen are often shown as living in caves; but this stemmed from the ritual paintings found in caves: it is more probable that the caves were religious gathering places or temporary shelter, and not the actual dwellings of the supposed ‘cavemen’. Thus, expressions such as “Balrog” or “living in a hole” have become cultural metaphors for a modern human who supposedly displays traits of brutishness or extreme ignorance. See also troglodyte

    Hey M. R. (See allegory of the CAVE)

  45. 45 mikereynolds

    Actually those cavemen in the Geico commerical are pretty funny.

  46. 46 gforrester

    Jez I was not referring to the Mayor’s Mother as she is not on the ECDC.

  47. 47 1george1

    Mike,
    I agree that the GEICO commercials occasional are funny.

    The TV show missed.
    Some of the commercials don’t hit my funny bone.

    My most recent post was going up, as you were posting.
    This was a good / fair post and not the TIN FOIL …

    ->

    Gavin,
    Do you know of ANY substantive contributions made by any ECDC, including those
    on which my friend Jim Orlowe and his buddy Maury Johnson, were on?

  48. 48 1george1

    Last Thursday I had an afternoon power outage. So I took a late lunch.
    When I came back, I fell asleep on the couch (still no power).
    I awoke to be a little late for the Charter Revision Public Forum.
    Unusual (for me) I had no prepped notes, nor handouts.

    I spoke my 6 minutes and then 3 minutes later.
    I praised the C. R. C. for being capable & putting in a lot of time / effort.
    I detailed SOME of my misgivings about the direction. I left.

    I awoke about 2:00 am, and posted my comments in this blog.
    I copied and pasted information about the handouts of opinions from the
    Town website. No details.

    That afternoon, I saw Rich Fredette, who appeared to not have been happy
    with my C. R. C. comments, as he gave me a wave hi.
    At least, it was all of his hand and fingers, and not the 1 finger salute.

    It is my understanding that Saturday morning, Ben Proto made a RESOLUTION
    that the SPECIFICS of ALL of the TOWN ATTORNEY OPINIONS and the other
    items mentioned as HANDOUTS DISTRIBUTED, would be POSTED in PDF on the
    TOWN WEBSITE.

    My Thursday comments had gone to lack of Transaparency of the C. R. C.
    (What was on the Town website, was ONLY a LIST of HANDOUTS with NONE
    of the DETAILS, for interested people to review.)

    I strongly suspect Mr. Proto saw my post in this blog and was caring enough
    to look at the Website, and smart enough to realize the actual handouts
    should be posted (in PDF = avoids gremlins changing items)

    So, I have to tip my hat to Mr. Proto.

    The C. R. C. immediatedly and unnanimously voted for the Resolution.
    So, I have to tip my hat to the entire C. R. C.

    Further, I have UNCONFIRMED INFORMATION that someone turned the results
    of the REVISED Town Charter to the State of CT., but as a NEW CHARTER.

    If so?
    1. Who was the person who turned the REVISED CHARTER to the STATE?

    2. Was it someone at the STATE LEVEL or at the TOWN LEVEL, who entered
    the REVISED CHARTER as a NEW CHARTER?

    3. Who is responsible for CORRECTING this?

    4. What is the procedure for CORRECTING this?

    5. If it is NOT CORRECTABLE >

    A) Should the C. R. C. disband?

    B) Do we have an ILLEGAL form of government?
    B1) Should the Mayor and Town Attorney give back their pay?

    C) What are the ROLES of
    C1) The Town Council, which created the CRC # 1 for the REVISED
    (not new) TOWN CHARTER?
    C2) The prior CRC for the REVISED (not new) TOWN CHARTER?
    C3) The VOTE / VOTERS for the REVISED (not new) TOWN CHARTER?
    C4) The Mayor acting under the REVISED (not new) TOWN CHARTER?
    C5) The Town Attorney acting under the REVISED (not new) TOWN CHARTER?
    C6) The Town Council acting under the REVISED (not new) TOWN CHARTER
    & the act of CREATING the NEW C. R. C.?
    C7) The C. R. C. # 2 acting under the REVISED (not new) TOWN CHARTER
    & the act of CREATING the NEW C. R. C.?
    C8) The prior to existing State Legislatures and Secretary of State’s personnel
    acting under the REVISED (not new) TOWN CHARTER & the actions of the NEW
    C. R. C.?

    I am going to PAT myself on the BACK and PAT the BACKS of the ENTIRE C. R. C.,
    especially Esq. Proto.
    I challenged them. They took notice and acted.

    A special thanks to my (so far) unnamed source of information. (if correct)

  49. 49 1george1

    I miss ED HARGUS and the unselfish service given to the community.

    I miss Diane Buda & Eleanor Burke actively contributing to the process.
    I was not a 1991 participant.

    In most instances, being a gadfly is less about keeping people honest and
    more about making them aware there are oversights and dangers from the
    oversights, for future problems.

    I very strongly suspect that Ray Voccola never, never expected the abuses
    now found in the Pension program. While I believe many of the people who
    want to give extra to family and friends, felt it was well affordable when the
    go-go 1990s stock market was going STRAIGHT UP, never concieved of the
    effects on the MIL RATE, TAXATION, and FINANCIAL well being of the Town
    of Stratford and the long time citizenry / residents, who found cause to move
    or were adversely affected.

    Now there are people entrenched with a feeling of entitlement to gain what
    I believe is unsustainable.

    If there were more people like Ed Hargus, Diane & Eleanor, and other critics
    of party politics, does any view believe we would have a BETTER or WORSE
    financial situation.

    Final thought.
    The bloggers have reviewed the FINANCIAL and EMPATHY activies of the HEAD
    of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY. Further, the blogger blast the irresponsibility of
    TEAM STRATFORD and ESQ. BURTURLA, in our opinions.

    Yet, who created and pushed through the Computations for PENSIONS?
    Aren’t the same people we blast for local economic irresponsiblity the very
    one who (I believed) bribed the various Department heads to not blow whistles?


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: