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.
Secret Daley Court Contract Vote Tomorrow
A lot has happened on Daley Court since June which I have been unable to share thanks the the blog hiatus.
It was revealed that the developers lied to the Council about the urgency of the property transfer approval. They had said they had a HUD application deadline in July and yet the application period was not even announced by HUD until September.
My FOI complaint against the Real Estate Acquisition & Disposition Committee was heard with an interesting twist. The decision has yet to be released. In summary, the Town argued that it had in fact failed to follow the law but that the remedy I asked for, nullification of the meeting, shouldn’t be implemented because the meeting didn’t matter. Odd logic, we’ll see if the FOI Commission agrees.
I and others have been trying to get further updates on the process since June but the Development Department and Redevelopment Agency have gone into full secrecy mode in response to the public scrutiny.
Another interested party received this email on Friday in response to an inquiry on the contract:
DALEY COURT AGREEMENT
<jwebb@ci.east-hartford.ct.us>
Fri, 6 Nov 2009 10:28:39 -0500
<Fctopresident@aol.com>, <bfairbairn@ehmchm.org>
<RPearson@shipso.com>, <jryan06@snet.net>, <DanielMDube@aol.com>, <Ddube@ci.east-hartford.ct.us>, <ellenmcccpa@aol.com>, <emccreery@hartford.gov>, <gamaine@gmail.com>, <MCurrey@ci.east-hartford.ct.us>, <ewolfe@sheldonoak.org>, <RPGentile@ci.east-hartford.ct.us>
Mrs. Kneip; I have received your request of November 5, 2009 // 10:35 AM to peruse the draft contract regarding New Samaritan Corporation and Sheldon Oak Central. This contract is referenced on the Agenda of the Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency scheduled for November 9 at 8:30 am. The contract is still in draft form and terms are still being negotiated. Disclosure of the draft could impact the Agency's negotiating stance for this sale. Accordingly, pursuant to C.G.S. 1-210 (b) (i), we will not be releasing the draft. Sincerely, Jeanne Webb Director of Development & Planning Town of East Hartford 740 Main Street East Hartford, CT 06108 phone 860-291-7303 fax 860-291-7298 cell 860-305-5757 e-mail jwebb@ehworks.com website: www. ehworks.com
The Redevelopment Agency has a special meeting for approval of a contract scheduled for tomorrow morning and yet as of Friday was still claiming the contract was a “draft” and exempt from public disclosure under FOI because it might impede their negotiating stance. Hmm, I thought they had agreed to a deal back in June which is why the Council pre-approved whatever contract might come down the pike. Maybe the Council shouldn’t be so liberal in approving contracts it hasn’t seen.
It also came to light that the Redevelopment agency has failed yet again to file its minutes in a timely fashion. The 10/21/09 minutes were just published on 11/06/09. Considering the money Mr. Jeff Currey, as clerk, gets for the responsibility, $100 per meeting, you’d think it wouldn’t be such a problem.
The minutes had this to say:
MOTION by Mr. Ryan, seconded by Mr. Maine that on a recommendation from Corporation Counsel and in accordance with Connecticut General Statutes, the draft version of the agreement pertaining to 590 Burnside Avenue will not be released to the public until a final agreement is approved by the Redevelopment Commission.APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY
Why do they feel the need to hide this transaction from further public scrutiny? You decide.
I’d still like to know how the Redevelopment Agency can approve this sale for 50,000 and still be in compliance with CGS 8-137. There has been no appraisal done, other offers for more money were received and the town assessor just assessed the property at much higher than the selling price.
From CGS 8-137:
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 re-developer, but in no case shall such sale, lease or other transfer price be lower than the use value of such real property.
I hope with all sincerity that Councilman Thompson will be more vocal this term and the addition of Sue Skowronek will mix things up.
How do fees affect citizen participation?
I can’t help but wonder if town document fees, despite limitations imposed by CGS Sec. 1-212, and the necessity of a physical trip to town hall have a tangible negative impact on citizen knowledge and participation in town politics. I know for certain they have that result with me, but how many others feel the same way?
Just for reference the standard fee for a copy of any standard document not fortunate enough to be featured on the town website or unfortunate enough to have aged off the site is 50 cents per page. In the case of a double sided document that is 50 cents per side.
For a bit of reference the last P&Z meeting I attended had an information packet about 96 pages in length not including over-sized drawings and the minutes of previous meetings. For the math impaired that translates into a fee of greater than $48 for the average citizen to have access to the same information as the P&Z members. Granted the information is available for review in the Town Council office (I believe) and on site at the meeting, but it’s hardly practical for one person to review 96 pages plus drawings and minutes prior to a meeting or while sitting in the council office. It’s not expected that commission or council members should have to do so and it should not be expected for citizens to do so.
I took this a step further and investigated just how much money the town takes in through copy fees. According to data from the finance department since July 1st 2007 the town has taken in just $1,200 across all departments in copy fees. Weigh that sum against the capital expenditures in the budget that many called discretionary to say the least and it demonstrated just how minuscule that amount really is. There is clearly no risk of loss of a substantial revenue stream by making documents freely available.
Here’s what I’d like to see happen. I’d like to see every committee, commission and council document made available either online at the town website or for free at the council office.
I’d like to see the town website archive all electronic documents in perpetuity. There is no excuse for the events of last year to fall off the site eliminating the simplest way for residents to know what has happened in the past.
I’d like to see all EHCTV broadcasts made available on the town website and archived.
I realize all this takes time and money, but the technology is here and there is no excuse for it to cost the residents of East Hartford anything to exercise their right to be informed citizens.
There is nothing more vital to healthy government than an informed citizenry. Without transparency everything else is just a show.
That’s what I think. What do you think?
Budget Discussion, A critique.
Other than recording the event for future generations there was little reason for me to attend the Tuesday night special hearing meeting since there was no public comment period in the agenda and none of the council members moved to add one.
The democrats had a plan already in place and the republicans weren’t of a mind to offer any challenges more substantial than scolding words. There was a good hour of back and forth which begs the question why since none of the republicans were willing to go as far as putting a motion where their mouths were to actually amend the budget motion.
The most noticeable thing for me, despite Mr. Horan’s attempt to mitigate it in his commentary, was the partisanship dripping down the walls. It was clear that this was a divided and uncooperative council. The budget was not introduced as the council budget, but rather as the democratic budget. The democrats spent a considerable period patting themselves on the back for their work on the budget without even realizing that what they are saying is that they intentionally and without remorse excluded a third of the council from active budget negotiation and gave their written suggestions only a token notice.
As I said before this is not national politics playing out on CNN or with a presidential office at stake. This is our town these are our dollars and our lives, yet our elected officials are playing politics with each other without regard for our best interest. If the intention was for the majority party to exclude the minority party we never would have bothered to include minority party protection in the charter.
There were a lot of things that struck me as wrong, comedic or generally strange. I had a long drawn out review of the whole night written but in reading it I felt it was kind of pointless. You’ll either get it or you won’t when you watch it and a blow by blow from me isn’t going to change that.
All I really want to comment on other than partisan politics and the pointless response of the republicans was the following:
The democrats argued that the registrars didn’t deserve a raise, despite acknowledging that they are underpaid and work extremely hard, on account of them being elected officials who knew the salary when they ran for office and the town being unable to afford it. Then they went on to give the Mayor a raise with the argument that she works hard and deserves it. They conveniently forgot the part of their prior argument against raises that she is an elected official who knew the salary and the town can’t afford it.
Barbara Ann Rossi, Jason Rojas and Bill Horan each commented that taxes are not a significant factor in people losing their homes. They seem to conveniently forget that the average monthly tax impact is $383 per month. That’s hardly a small sum and more than enough to send a person to the poor house. Also, for Barbara specifically since she suggested the lack of tax lien foreclosures equaled a lack of tax impact, tax liens are a poor indicator of the effects of taxes on foreclosure. The mortgage companies who perform the majority of foreclosures pay the taxes if and when the owners do not so that their interests are protected and thereby prevent tax lien foreclosure while going on to foreclose on the owner who can’t afford the taxes (and therefore can’t keep the mortgage current) themselves.
The Republicans put their money where their mouths were and included a 5% reduction in their salary and a suggestion that the mayor and other councilors follow suit. Needless to say the democratic response was “that’s absurd”. So much for leading by example.
Barbara commented on the mill rate making the claim that it’s the lowest one since 1998 and representing that as some kind of landmark accomplishment of spending restraint. That made me smile since even a little common sense shows that the mill rate is attributable solely to the completion of the reval phase in. A testament to spending restraint will be keeping it where it is until 2018. Despite what the mill rate claim was supposed to prove, our tax bills will establish a new record high this year.
Almost last and hardly least, renovations for the town hall were overwhelmingly supported in the name of handicap accessibility and yet it seems most of the renovations have no such effect at all. Of all the renovations only two have that effect, a new elevator to the mayors office and a new motor for the existing elevator. The rest are purely cosmetic items. Apparently the mayor and council feel that those of us with handicaps have a lower tolerance for carpet and furniture wear than the rest of us.
As if the 118K or so for new granite curbs (that’s right, the same stuff you can’t afford for your kitchen) at the town hall weren’t enough the council voted to spend over 40K on just design for a new median on Rt 44 (which is owned and maintained by the state, read: their responsibility) and a built in promise to come back next year for about 500K to actually build the new median. Remember, we couldn’t afford the 3,500 or so that was requested for the registrars because of the state of the town and yet we somehow can afford a raise for the democratic mayor (who was smiling quite widely at the democratic defense of her raise and work dedication), luxury curbing and new medians for roads we don’t have the responsibility to maintain.
After watching the whole thing in person I must conclude that Pat Harmon, Bill Horan and Rich Kehoe were the big winners of the night. They each seemed professional amongst a back and forth that at times had little to do with East Hartford’s welfare. The most entertaining parts inevitably came from the “so what are you going to do about it” look on Rich’s face as he listened to Don’s arguments against the proposed budget motion though I fear I probably didn’t capture them on camera.
[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092096791352038550]
2008-2009 Budget Public Hearing
First off. Where was everyone? 49,000 citizens and only 4 (myself included) came to represent our views as taxpayers.
The whole deal was short and sweet since nobody bothered to show up. Video is below.
I can’t help but feel that this whole budget process is exclusionary to the general public.
The Democratic council members informed me that they have already gone through the budget and decided on changes, yet wouldn’t answer a direct question on what changes were coming. The Republican council members informed me they were excluded from the budget review the Democrats conducted and as such had no voice at all in whatever changes the 2/3rds majority is going to present on Tuesday though I’m told they have some ideas of their own.
It would be nice if the council members would let us (the public) know what their changes are going to be before they vote on them. Though what incentive do they have to share when only 4 people show up at the hearing to be heard.
Can’t there be at least an illusion of non-partisan politics for something as important to real people as our town budget? This isn’t a national presidential election and we are all neighbors.
[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2379006157315219581&hl=en]
Government On Demand – Town Council 03/04/08
The video of the Tuesday night council meeting is now available below.
So what happened?
Not a whole lot. We learned that East Hartford isn’t good enough for Notre Dame football, multiple community events are coming up this year and Mayor Currey doesn’t like when Councilman Pitkin asks about the treasurer.
[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-173123877292393546&hl=en]
In the interest of future historians…
New to East Hartford ON DEMAND. Check out the Things To Know column on the right. You’ll find a full listing of available minutes for town government and related documents and posts as they become available. Just choose the board/department/agency you are interested in and go. All Minutes are converted to PDF and hosted right here at brainflation to avoid revisionist history.
Marc Weinberg comments on citizen exclusion from fees committee.
At tonights Tax Policy Committee meeting (entry on that topic to follow) Marc Weinberg was good enough to comment on my exclusion (and yours as a result) from the fees committee meeting on Wednesday the 23rd.
Audio is here.
[audio=http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/1/29/1728949/weinberg.mp3]
Taxpayers not allowed? How about Honest Abe?
What the heck is going on with government transparency here?
Here’s the deal. The fee committee was meeting at 6:30 on Wednesday, an hour before the P&Z hearing. I thought I’d go, being a taxpayer and all, since I was there anyway.
Now I find it interesting that the official minutes list me as present when I was only able to enter the meeting through a misunderstanding of Marcia Leclerc and subsequently told I wasn’t welcome. The video below tells the story but here is a summary in any case.
Marcia Leclerc and Marc Weinberg were present in the town council minority office with Don Pitkin teleconferenced in. (Don was/is? recovering from illness.) I met a nice gentleman (Marc Nicol) in the hall who was there on behalf of Riverfront Recapture which manages our riverfront parks. He was giving a presentation on some new statues to be installed along the park and requesting a waiver of town fees for installation and planning. It appears that Marcia thought I was with him and so in an error of judgement (in her opinion) let me into the meeting. When she discovered I was not with Riverfront Recapture she informed me that I was only welcome for the presentation and not for the rest of the meeting which she said was closed.
Check the meeting minutes yourself. At no point was the meeting ever closed session.
I checked with other council members and commission members prior to the P&Z. They told me these meetings are always open to the public unless the committee enters executive session which they clearly didn’t. Why then did the Chair of the Fees Committee lie to me and tell me the meeting was closed session and refuse to allow me to remain? You decide, I think something stinks.
On a more positive note it seems that our riverfront park is scheduled to get a bunch of new statues depicting the life of Abraham Lincoln this spring/summer. The presentation, while having little to do with waiver of fees for the most part, was interesting and informative and makes up the majority of the video below. Check out the Lincoln Walk.
The part I like best is the cost to the taxpayers. $0, well except for the “up to $1,000″ in waived fees that Marcia didn’t want discussed while I was present.
[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8834369510597247984]
What's next?
Finally Done
Here’s what’s coming up soon:
Taxpayers not allowed? How about Honest Abe?
A story on closed government and bulk bronze.
Friday GOP Straw Poll.
I was the only video media present at the Friday straw poll. (You should be ashamed CT news networks.) As soon as the video finishes encoding I’ll be bringing you the speeches, the interviews, the works.
Saturday GOP Straw Poll.
Will I be covering the Saturday Straw Poll as well? It all depends.
Until then, anticipation is good for blood flow and I need to get to a birthday party.
