Video: East Hartford Budget Meeting – Public Works
Town Council Calls Special Meeting on Garbage Tax
The East Hartford Public Notices system sent me an email a little bit ago informing me that a special meeting has been called relative to the Pay As You Throw garbage tax that the Mayor and Public Works director Billy Taylor presented to the Council this past Monday.
The meeting will be on Monday, March 8th at 7PM, directly against an important meeting of the Republican Town Committee at which the Republican Town Committee members will elect officers for the 2010/2011 term. This will force the Republican Town Council members and other Republican Town Committee members such as myself to either not participate in an important RTC meeting or skip the special meeting and perhaps be excluded from an opportunity to prevent this new garbage tax from being implemented.
Perhaps the Council will reschedule. Hopefully.
FOI Proposed Final Decision: Town Held Secret Meetings
During the campaign, while this blog was suspended, a hearing was held on the FOI complaint I had filed against the the Real Estate Acquisition & Disposition Committee. The hearing was my first experience in such a setting and I’m happy for the experience.
I received notice from the FOI commission that a final decision will be made on the complaint on December 2nd. As I expected the the proposed decision finds that the Real Estate Committee did hold illegal secret meetings on May 14th and 19th and failed to post the minutes of the May 14th meeting. As I also expected the decision will not void the meetings on the 14th & 19th. Perhaps I could have pressed for that a bit more strongly by filing a written brief following the hearing, but in light of the way business is conducted in Town Hall, and reflecting on the statements made by the Town’s legal representation at the hearing that the Real Estate meeting on the 14th didn’t matter, I felt that particular piece of fruit was not worth climbing for.
Here is the proposed decision.
Redevelopment Approves Daley Court Contract
The East Hartford Redevelopment Agency approved the sale contract at a Monday morning special meeting as expected. The video below is interesting. When asked about Chuck Koteen’s involvement in the deal the Chairwoman, Robin Pearson, acted as if she didn’t know who he was. Jeanne Webb, Development Director for East Hartford, on the other hand addressed the question stating that Mr. Koteen is no longer involved and had no role in the project aside from referring the RFP to Sheldon Oaks. Considering that the position Mr. Koteen was penciled in for, Local Housing Consultant, pays $50,000 of federal funds on a redevelopment deal this size I think there is something to think about here. Influence peddling? Political favors? Not in East Hartford. That section of the video is around the 12 minute mark I think.
I managed to talk to Corp. Counsel Gentile in the hall where he stated his belief and that of 2 other unnamed attorneys is that the Redevelopment Agency under C.G.S. 8-137 is allowed to sell property below it’s current use value with the approval of the Town Council. He declined to discuss that particular issue further, perhaps wisely, since it is unlikely we would agree on the interpretation. Interestingly he also acknowledged my complaint from back in June that the the Burnside Redevelopment Plan is expired having not been renewed within 10 years of it’s approval back in 1997 as required by state statute. That means that the Redevelopment Agency no longer has power under the Burnside Ave. Redevelopment plan. It is void and without force which leaves us in a very dangerous situation of uncertainty in whether we can enforce the past Redevelopment Agency agreements which fell under the Burnside Ave. Redevelopment plan. It certainly gives great question to whether the Redevelopment Agency has any authority over this deal at all.
From the contract:
(i)
As an inducement to Redeveloper to acquire, redevelop and improve the Property, the Agency has agreed to sell the Property at a discount to present fair market value.(a) ·1 the terms, covenants, and conditions of the Agreement, the Agency will sell the Property to the Redeveloper for, and the Redeveloper will purchase the Property from the Agency and pay therefor, the amount of Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000), hereinafter called “Purchase Price”
Property Assessment as of 06/08/09: $490,870 difference = $440,870
http://brainflation.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/property-card-2009.pdf
I bring up that value because in the absence of any form of appraisal that is the most recent valuation data available. Federal standards now place FHA appraisal validity at 120 days and in that light our officials ought not even consider a 7 year old appraisals as a reputable source of valuation.
From C.G.S. 8-137, emphasis mine:
The consideration paid for the sale, lease or other transfer of the real property shall be determined by the redevelopment agency, provided, if the cost or carrying charges of such real property to the redevelopment agency are greater than such consideration, the redevelopment agency shall first have specific authorization from the legislative body of the municipality for the sale, lease or other transfer at any lesser consideration, and the municipality may appropriate and authorize the expenditure of money to compensate for any portion of the difference between the acquisition cost of such real property and such sale, lease or other transfer price of such real property at a lesser consideration to a redeveloper, but in no case shall such sale, lease or other transfer price be lower than the use value of such real property.
Daley Court Redevelopment Contract
Investigation Wanted, Concerns Remain on Daley Court
With almost 2 weeks having passed since the public hearing and subsequent action on the Daley Court property I am becoming concerned that the investigation which was promised at the meeting may have concluded before it was announced.
I have sent a request for a meeting, on the record, to the Mayor in hopes that the lingering questions can be resolved.
Melody,
I still have some concerns regarding the process by which the East Hartford Town Council came to their decision to transfer the title for 582(590) Burnside Avenue to the East Hartford Redevelopment Agency on Tuesday the 16th of June 2009. I can’t seem to find a singular or combined set of ordinances or state statutes that describe the process taken and the ones I’ve found seems to contradict the process employed by the Town Council.
I was encouraged by your statement on the 16th that you were going to look into the claims I made at the hearing starting on the morning of Wednesday the 17th. Unfortunately I have not heard anything more on this investigation and the as yet unresolved questions could have a serious impact upon the ability of the citizens to trust their government. Such a mistrust would be entirely undesirable.
I would like to meet with you, and any others who you feel may be helpful, on the record to discuss the specific legal process followed in the disposition of the property to the East Hartford Redevelopment Agency.
Also, I received and reviewed the discussion agenda for the Green Committee meeting I was unable to attend. I would look forward to a tour of the recycling facility. The last 2 weeks of July would work great.
Jon Searles
(860) 930-4149
The JI, Reminder and Gazette have mentioned the Daley Court events. Unfortunately due to the JI’s relatively recent subscriber model I can no longer link their stories.
http://www.remindernews.com/node/7/&town=easthartford&url=EASTH-2009-06-24-2-Ar00200
I received a response to my request from the Mayor on 06/26/09 at 7:21 PM.
I am awaiting word from the state's attorney concerning next steps. Depending on his reply, I will be in touch or his office will on this issue. Mayor Melody A. Currey (860) 291-7200 Town Hall 740 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 06108 mcurrey@ci.east-hartford.ct.us www.ci.east-hartford.ct.us
Council Subcommittee Held Secret Meetings – Complaint Filed
As I researched the chain of events that led to the Real Estate Acquisition & Disposition Committee’s recommendation to the Town Council regarding Daley Court I found something odd. The committee never gave such a recommendation… or at least according to the town website they didn’t. After visiting the Town Council office I learned that the Real Estate Acquisition & Disposition committee had held two secret meetings in May in which they made decisions on Daley Court and the Kilty Farms property.
According to the FOI act the town is required to give at least 24 hours notice on the town website whenever a special meeting of any of it’s bodies are called. This is to ensure that the public can attend if they so choose. After all, the public comment section of the agenda is pointless if the public isn’t notified.
No notice was filed for either the 05/14/09 or 05/19/09 Real Estate Acquisition & Disposition Committee meetings on the town website and minutes for the 05/14/09 meeting, in which the Daley Court recommendation was made, were not even posted until 06/11/09, the day after I made a trip to the council office to figure out what happened.
In response I have filed an appeal (complaint) with the State FOI Commission in response to these violations of the FOI act seeking an order against such secret meetings and a nullification of any business conducted in those meetings.
Here is the complaint.
Real Estate Acquisition & Disposition Committee FOI Complaint
My public comment for Tuesday night (assuming this doesn’t kill the agenda item) is still being written and so far is far too long and hasn’t covered all the bases. There is a lot wrong with how this project is being moved along and sadly it appears that nobody even knows it’s wrong because it’s how things are done in East Hartford… wrong.
A Tour of Daley Court
Follow me on a journey through Daley Court, AKA 582 Burnside Ave., AKA 590 Burnside Ave. I will show you that Daley Court is not some falling down slum development but instead a structurally sound, if in need of modernization, development. Our town officials are lying to us and it’s going to cost the taxpayers of East Hartford millions.
This past Tuesday the town council held a public hearing at which point it became apparent that the council and development department had not done their homework. In response they have scheduled a second hearing for June 16th at 7PM in the town council chambers. Please come and voice your opposition to selling a 2.2 million viable commercial residential development to a non-profit developer of subsidized housing projects for a mere $50,000. Tell them you aren’t willing to give up millions on this property so they can have an election issue. It will take a minimum of 10 years for the new development to offset the loss on the property alone that this deal would create.
Shame on the East Hartford development department and shame on East Hartford Mayor Melody Currey for recommending this transfer to the Town Council.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PwtgP7v9uU]
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc2SBABneG8]
LTE: Papier-Mâché Elections
As yet another election approaches for East Hartford this November it’s important that we steel ourselves against the onslaught of rhetoric and look-at-me politics which threaten to swallow us whole like a Connecticut River flood. Inevitably those officials already in office will parade papier-mâché accomplishments as evidence that they deserve another term while challengers will attempt to prove they have something new, or perhaps old and ignored, to offer. We have a duty as the electors of East Hartford to demand truth and seek honest answers. We must hold those who are not forthcoming with these accountable at the polls and in the chamber hall.
One of the papier-mâché accomplishments we’re sure to see this year will be the new budget which maintains the mill rate at the same level as the previous year. While it seems like an amazing accomplishment in comparison to previous budgets by the current office holders it’s nowhere near where we need to be and appears to be the best we can ever hope for from this council and this Mayor. Sadly this zero increase budget was not balanced through serious and sustainable reductions or efficiencies. Instead it was balanced on the elimination of town maintenance items such as police vehicle replacements which will in turn need to be double funded next year, or triple funded the year after and temporary union concessions. Certainly these are enough to get the Mayor and Council through this election if unchallenged on the facts but the reality is that we will all pay heavily for this next year and the years after when these false savings have to be paid for. The Mayor and Council have made no progress whatsoever in halting the freefall of our grand list, one of the two major drivers of our ever increasing taxes.
Interestingly prior to the 2007 municipal election the Mayor and Council played the same trick on us proclaiming they had shrunk the budget only to make up for it in 2008 giving grand speeches defending an increase in the Mayor’s salary and condemning the acts of previous councils, which most of the council members conveniently forgot they were a part of, in failing to fund maintenance spending. That year we let them get away with it. This time let’s not fall for it again.
By the way, have you thought of running for office? Maybe it’s time.
Jon Searles
East Hartford
LTE: "Yes we can" or "Because I can"?
So many times this election season I’ve heard the slogan “yes we can”. I’ve heard it sung, chanted and spoken with authority. It’s been spoken by the young and the old, rich and poor. It’s truly a unifying message. Yes we can.
It’s easy to get lost in the positive of ‘the yes’ or the ‘can’, but the real power is in us, the ‘we’. Now that the election is over it’s vital that we, there it is again, don’t forget the power and meaning of what this election represented to both parties. It’s vital that in the days, weeks, months and years ahead each of us remain part of the ‘we’. Without exaggeration our country, our state and our town depend on it.
With Nov. 4th behind us I believe “yes we can” has come to mean “yes we will”. Yes we will start paying attention. Yes we will hold elected officials accountable. Yes we will actively seek better solutions. Yes we will see an end to decades of gradually increasing imposition from government at all levels.
Because I believe these things I was greatly offended when I learned that two of our recently reelected incumbents seem to have misheard “yes we can” as “because I can”. Henry Genga and Gary LeBeau when faced with a question of integrity and principal, whether or not they should take taxpayer funds to run a campaign against nobody in their unopposed reelection bids, chose the path of selfishness and greed. Instead of saying “yes we can” and honoring their duty to ‘we’ their constituents they said “because I can” and stole food from our tables and gas from our cars for no reason other than self promotion to aid their political climb. Shameless, greedy, unapologetic self promotion. Can we hold them accountable? I say yes we can. Tell Mr. Genga (860) 240-8585 and Mr. LeBeau (860) 240-0511 what you think and don’t forget it in 2010. Tell them to give back our money.
Senator LeBeau & Rep. Genga – CENSURED
Last night the East Hartford Republican Town Committee took decisive action on the abusive participation in the Citizens Election Program by incumbents Genga and LeBeau during their unopposed races.
The Republicans were unanimous in a call for the return of CEP funds and an apology to the taxpayers.
From the press release:
East hartford, ct, november 11, 2008: East Hartford Republicans have censured State Rep. Henry Genga and State Senator Gary LeBeau for exploiting the Citizens Election Program, which was intended to foster political competition, and betraying taxpayer trust by exploiting taxpayer dollars in their unopposed reelection bids and have called on Genga and LeBeau to return all Citizen Election Program funds received. Jon Searles, Chairman of the EHRTC 6TH District, said “This is the opposite of what the CEP was intended to accomplish. These two believe that when faced with a choice of self promotion or responsible stewardship of our tax dollars the former is always the better choice. It put a sour taste in my mouth to see them wasting taxpayer dollars before the election was even over. I’d like to see them give that money back.”
Here is the text of the motion.
It’s about time we start seeing activity like this from the R side of the aisle.
