Council mtg 6/12
Wow.
This meeting was a doozy... way more than I expected.
Most of the agenda was relatively straightforward, but there were a few points that stuck with me. I think the "Neighborhood program," CYB ballfields, the Dodd gym reconstruction contract and transfer of uncollectable taxes all passed unanimously... although I and other voiced a number of concerns over the CYB ballfields... my main concern there is reducing the use of Macnamara/Legion field. As well, I'd like to take down all the fences and return it to being a regular "all purpose" field... for fun stuff like Thanksgiving football games!
I thought the meeting got interesting when we got to the "ERT" proposal. As I mentioned earlier, I asked my questions about the need to "authorize" the Town Manager to facilitate a dialogue among interested stakeholders. Or as Matt Hall put it... if the Council "authorizes" the Town Manager to do something... then it would seem as though there is a "presumption of prohibition."
I tried to be blunt... if we're simply having a discussion... where is the prohibition on having a discussion? Is it in the Charter? Is it in a Council resolution? All I heard was crickets. And for some reason, no legal opinion was sought on this... it was just presumed. As I said during the meeting... that made absolutely no sense to me... none whatsoever. I thought it was very poor judgement on the Town Manager's part. Then to have a resident (Kim Stoner) come to the microphone and basically say that public input had been stifled by Town Hall staff?!?! Huh? As I then said... this whole thing was very troubling to me... after all... it was just supposed to be a discussion. What's wrong with that?
The meeting progressed to the Town Manager's report:
Of particular interest to me was the Town's participation in the Energy Star program... and hey... it took only 14 months (and numerous reminders from me) between the Energy Commission recommendation and the Town's participation in the Energy Star program! Whatever... it's done. And I think it's extremely worthwhile.... and last time I checked, only about five CT towns were participants... so we're among the first and leading the way in energy conservation!
Also of interest to me, but not included in the report... the town's policy on the use of town-owned property for political fundraisers. As I explained during the meeting, I planned a political fundraiser last fall... and it was to be held on town-owned property (the Historical Society-occupied Hitchcock-Phillips House). But I was told that I could not hold that political fundraiser and I needed to look elsewhere... this notice came after I had sent out the invitations. So what could I do? Nothing. I knew that I could not ask for an exception. So what happened with the recent "lifting of the rules?" Well, according to the Town Manager, he screwed up... I agree. He screwed up... big time.
Finally, we got around to committee reports. And the one thing that I had forgotten to mention earlier to Elizabeth Esty (Ord Rev Chair) was my dad's idea that we should end pensions for crooks. That is, if town employees turn out to be crooks, then they lose their pensions... fortunately, Cheshire hasn't been cursed with the problems facing so many other towns and the state... but why wait for problems to arise? Let's just put everyone on notice now... if you do wrong... there will be consequences. I still can't understand why former Gov. John Rowland will be getting his $50,000/yr pension starting at age 55.... oh wait... I forgot... the legislature would do that... and... Comity reigns supreme Under the Gold Dome!
There was a big hullabaloo when we got to appointments to boards and commissions. (There was a question of the WPCA seat that had been occupied by Tim Pelton for quite some time.) And while I thought David Schrumm made some good points, I voted in recognition that the majority party decides who gets appointed.
Then the real fireworks broke out... Chairman Matt Hall advised the Council that at the next Council meeting, there will be a vote to begin an investigation (as defined by Charter) into what was described as "shenanigans." lol. The word seems a bit lighthearted for what seems to be afoot...
Anyway... more on that later. And I'm hittin' the sack now... really, really tired.
Tim White
Town Council, 4th District
52 comments:
Maybe we need an ethics commission to investigate shenanigans, conflicts of interest, developer influence over what gets inforced, special favors, why some party was allowed to use town property for fund raising and another denied.
Just having an ethics commission, free of ties from the council, would reduce these types of problems and give the public more confidence.
Maybe Matt can also investigate developer influence on law enforcement. A crackdown on signs because some were against the mall?
I agree that a committee for ethics is needed in town. However, unless you are a "friend" with the appointment committee, you do not have a chance. It is clear that this town is a "friendly" town.
When is this going to stop? The town of cheshire requires more control with spending monies, committess, ethics, developments, etc.
It seems that we are not addressing the main issues in town. We can start with the pool, move through the developments and then onto ethics. Many things in town need adjustment - what is it going to take Tim?
Not sure what is going on anyone know?
The Republicans tried to manipulate the term of a WPCA member got caught and now certain members of the R council are trying to run for cover-bad ethics on the part of the men who sit on the left side of the table.
It starts with Bush then goes to Rowland now it goes to the R's in town
"The Republicans tried to manipulate"
Stop posting wild accusations about things you know nothing about. Why do you make up this crap?
Watch and observe my friend and you shall learn of the terrible and outragous scandal that will come out-this is the truth and you shall learn it in due time
Yes I heard that they tired to get the term of one of their r members extended by not being honest and that is not ethical. But lets see what happens-it all comes out in the end
Ethical? How does one find out that the town has land available to build fields? Why do some town meetings not get televised? How did W/S find out land in the Northend was available? Why isn't the public made aware of this huge change to our present zoning laws? Many Questions. Few details.
I watched last night's meeting and 10:56 is leaving a bit of the story out. Seems the WPCA chair was told by the Dems that he'd keep his seat if he tossed out another person on the commission. He refused to throw out this other apparently well qualified person and the Dems decided to take him off the commission because of it. Not a wise move. And for anyone wanting to say that this is speculation, then so is the comment that some rep tried changing the term of a commission member. Until a fair investigation is done and the facts are proven, the Dems shouldn't have even appointed a new commission member.
"Shennanigans"?? Who even uses that word anymore? Besides Esty who seemed to make all the accusations.
And Tim, I agree the Dems should have been told, "sorry" you'll have to find a new place for your fundraiser. That deal stinks too.
The town manager explained that the Friends of B. Knoll were excluded from that meeting because he didn't want to give an unfair advantage since other groups/people have an interest in all that land. Why didn't he just ask all the groups to the meeting or at least inform them of it to give them the opportunity to show up. Bad decision there too.
The r's have alot to explain bc they had one of their lackys try to get the terms changed-unethical and really sneaky. They are in a corner and now they think they can change the subject-not gonna happen in this case.
There is simply NO WAY to change a term on a board or commission other than by Council action.
The accusation by Esty and Hall of "Shananigans" is simply a lie....a bald-faced lie.
There is NO WAY to change the dates.
If there was confusion it came out of the Town Clerks office......typo's? clerical error? who knows?
But the dust up and the "investigation" is a smoke screen by the Dem's to cover the fact that they are throwing the chairman of a very important commission out at a critical time. There was no reason to do this other then cynical politics and they got caught. Kudo's to Shrum for nailing them for doing something that can really hurt the town.
Come to think of it...maybe they want more "D" (stands for the Developers) members of boards and commissions to grease the skids for future projects in the north end and elsewhere.
Watch out Cheshire....this is starting to smell funny......
The chair of the nominationg committee of Republicans told the town clerk to change it. Funny he never told anyone else. That is not ethical and is dishonest. This will come out soon and the R's are going to have a chicken farm of eggs all over their face for this one.
11;45
You are out of control. This isn't a Watergate matter even Cheshiregate for that matter. Matt even suggested his yet to be announced investigation may result in nothing. Don't think one party is about to take out another on ethics violations. The town has very strict conflicts of interests rules for its boards and commission. If you have a concern make a complaint to the town manager or the town attorney. Yours is nothing more than a ridiculous assertion from your drinking way too much Kool-aide.
As for anon 1:15...whether you are for or against the WS application what self respecting owner of a developement property wouldn't attempt to market it. Those properties have had "For Sale" signs on them forever. They are now greened over but none of that property was "town" open space. Its privately owned and if you owned it you would be peddling it at some point too. The town has it zoned for industrial so your really displaying a lot of your shortcomings.
Watch the tape of the 6/12 TC meeting...way at the end. You will see Mr Schrumm making a case for the Dems reappointing Mr Pelton. You will see Mr. Orsini backing him up in a professional way and noting in his comments how important it is to get good appointees...D, R' & U's. He did not want to reflect any ill will toward the Dems nominee to replace Pelton at all.
In rebuttal you will hear Elizabeth Esty state allegations of "shenanigans" on the part of the "R's". She made her carefully chosen words with her eyes cast downward toward the dius...a common body language signal when dishonesty is on display. Matt Hall, also measured in his carefully orchestrated call for an investigation displayed much of the same body language. There is nothing more than theater on display here.
You may wait with baited breath but you will never see anyone implicated in intentional wrong doing in the Pelton matter.
Dave it's over, your going down.
Not sure what this is about, please explain?
Tim Slocum usually posts here-what do you say Tim did you really do all that they say?
Why would someone want to change the date of the term? If they wanted Pelton so much, why not just have him take over someone else's term? Isn't that what they argued was best for town...having Tim over someone else?
"The town has very strict conflicts of interests rules for its boards and commission. If you have a concern make a complaint to the town manager or the town attorney."
Really? This is too much power in the hands of one person. The town manager can by himselt determine to investigate or not?
What do they have to say about Matt Bowman tearing down opposition to thw W/S mall flyers? He's torn them down wherever he's found them, including off of trees on private property. And, he sits on the Inland Wetland Commission? This isn't a conflict of interest?
How cozy.
Anon 1:15 asks. Did the town, realty company or the owners approach W/S? Did W/S find us on the internet or drive by on their way to Canton? I know it's not public space and privately owned. Just curious. Thank you
1:15
Our town has an Economic Development Coordinator. It is in the community interest to welcome interested business parties to investigate the town as a place to do business.
Who cares who asked W/S to make an application in town? This is a free country. They're spending their money and letting many of us bitch and moan, cheer and jump for joy about it for nothing. By the way. I hope the thing doesn't fly but who the hell are any of us to say they can't ask.
tim you need to dedicate a bolg space to the shenanigan that you described as it is front page story in the Meriden record journal
The r's are gonna blame the town clerk for their sneaking around the rules
Sad day for the sad elephant
Here in Crazyville
I couldn't believe it, it was better than most soaps. Is Matt Hall auditioning for some TV program? If so, he put on a remarkable show of indignation that the term date of Tim Pelton's was nefariously changed, unbelieveable shenanigans. He declared that it required a complete investigation. Thank Matt he put Cheshire on the map.
We should also give credit to the best supporting actress Lizzy Esty. As lead investigator, Lizzy through due diligence, unearthed the scheme by unknown agents, could be terrorists, to alter this one date, but why would anyone want to do this?
In an Oscar winning role, she said, "It's bad behavior and abuse of the system". She was adamant about her support of Tim and she said, "I'm extremely sorry he got caught up in this and he would have been reappointed were it not for the shenanigans."
Although Matt and Lizzy probably didn't want to punish Tim for what the terrorists did, they had to in order to teach the culprits a lesson.
The investigation will start with the water boarding of the town clerk. This should make national news.
Wow is the MRJ artical correct, is that what really happened? Oh boy I thought that things like this did not happen in Cheshire. I wonder what the fall out will be? This could be a major development in our political environment.
Why did she so this? Did someone push her into it? As with any matter like this it never the what she did, it is the why and who, those will be very interesting answers.
Why did she do this?
I'll bet Hall and Esty got a call from the developers to change the chairman. Tim is too professional for their project. The steamroller rolls on. Get out of the way or you'll be run over.
"Lizzy" Esty? Come on, that is an old Karl Rove trick..making fun of people in order to get the attention away from the real issue. The real issue is...did someone try and change the term of office of Tim Pelton? If so, why?
Don't blame WS for your problems-you done a bad thing and ya gonna pay
Bad boys Boys what ya goonna do
What ya gonna do when they come for you!
or as Beretta used to say
If you can't do the time don't do the crime
"Termgate" Who is responsible and why?
Read this, yes "termgate" is real!
Town council will look into record changes
By: Leslie Hutchison , Staff
CHESHIRE -- The Town Council will launch an investigation to determine why public records for a committee appointment were changed by the town clerk without "any notice or consultation" and "without approval of this council."
Advertisement
Chairman Matt Hall notified the council during a meeting Tuesday night that records for the tenure of a member of the Water Pollution Control Authority were "changed twice" by the town clerk. The alterations extended the term of the WPCA chairman beyond the actual dates of his tenure.
"I will call for an investigation as to how that happened and who asked (the town clerk) to do it and why she did it," Hall said. Town Clerk Carolyn Soltis is an elected official who has been in office since the early 1990s.
WPCA Chairman Tim Pelton, who has served on the authority since 2004, was not re-appointed Tuesday, a decision that directly relates to the records being changed, according to several council members.
The records in question were located on the town Web site, where a list of appointed officials and their terms is displayed. Pelton's term officially expired in January. However, the Web page was altered to show that his term expires in January 2009; and then, 10 days later, the records were altered again with the term expiring in January 2008.
The matter requires further "investigation because there's a process here that's at stake," Hall told the council.
"Quite honestly, to be silent on this is to reward, at best, questionable judgement and, at worst, bad behavior." He noted that the change to the records "was caught only by the due diligence of Mrs. (Elizabeth) Esty" a council member, who had been reviewing term dates in preparation for appointments in February.
Esty said Wednesday that the Web page change means the appointment process "was subverted by back-door activity to torque the system." She noted, "It's bad behavior and abuse of the system." However, Esty was adamant in her support of Pelton.
"I'm extremely sorry he got caught up in this," she said.
To replace Pelton, a Republican, the council voted 5-1, with two abstentions, in favor of appointing Michael Solomon, a Democrat, to serve a three-year term ending in January 2010. Republican David Schrumm voted against the appointment, while fellow party members David Orsini and Thomas Ruocco abstained. Republican Tim White joined the Democrats in voting for Solomon.
The Town Council has a Democratic majority for only the second time in Cheshire's history. Until Pelton's replacement, the WPCA had been represented by three Republicans, three Democrats and one unaffiliated resident. Hall said,
"No one should interpret any comments that Tim Pelton has acted as anything but an upstanding gentleman and a man of integrity and honor."
Esty added, "We were prepared to do something other than what is now happening." Pelton "would have been re-appointed had the shenanigans not gone on."
Pelton couldn't be reached for comment Wednesday.
Hall said a resolution to call for an investigation would be acted on at the next council meeting on June 26.
He added that Town Attorney Dwight Johnson "will set the parameters on how this investigation will happen." Hall noted that Johnson is aware of the situation and was asked for his legal opinion "on the authenticity of the terms as they were on record at the time they were changed by the Town Clerk."
Soltis, who wasn't at work Wednesday, was reached at home for a comment. Asked about the changes she made to the town's Web page, she stated, "I know there were some questions about it. But at this time I don't know anything else."
The Town Charter gives the council "the power to investigate any and all offices and agencies of the town ... (it) shall have the power necessary to subpoena or call witnesses to appear before the council to testify on any matter under investigation."
Soltis said she will voluntarily attend the June 26 council meeting, where she is expected to answer questions that will include, according to Hall "who asked her to do it and why it was done."
Ridiculous:
The whole thing has been blown out of proportion.
I don't see anything changed on the Webb Site and it looked the same last week. Tim's to-date showed 1/31/07 and everyone else's expiration date is before that.
If everyone's date is expired, why weren't they either reappointed or replaced? Why are people allowed to serve after their expiration date and if that is the case, why would anyone want to change a date on the Webb. It's not like the Webb is the official town record and if it is then people should start going through all the information to make sure it is correct and not outdated.
It's time to calm down and use a little reason.
None of this makes any sense.
I am not sure that this is nothing, what is the penalty for trying to influnace a public official?
5:02 you asked a question about "why" someone did something?
Considering the seriousness of this matter, do you know that to be true with absolute certainty?
If so, please email me immediately:
timwhite98@yahoo.com
with your name or I'm going to have to delete it. Sorry... if we're getting into a formal investigation... this whole issue goes beyond name calling and such.
"I am not sure that this is nothing, what is the penalty for trying to influnace a public official? "
There is no penalty if you support the W/S application or you have the right name. You certainly sound like a W/S supporter. How are you going to gain from it?
I sure that I did not bring up the North End project are you trying to say that Termgate and the North End are related? If so how?
My name is being implicated in this "termgate" blog by anonymous sources. Any accusations stating I told anyone in town hall to do anything for the purpose of extending a commissioner's term is absolutely false.
I am a volunteer and serve in interest of the entire community. I am also a Republican and not about to do anything to bring shame upon me or my party. It is laughable that anyone would posit that I could exert any authority over a town official to change a document because I thought it would serve a political interest.
I am very glad the situation has provided some of you the opportunity to speculate on the terrible deeds undertaken by Republicans but it just isn't so.
I look forward to the Town Council session of June 26. I will be there with my stack of stuff. Anyone who knows me knows I keep good records. The "hearing" will provide an opportunity for responsible folks to better understand how the matter came about in the first place, myself included.
I was contacted by Leslie Hutchison of the Record Journal today and shared my understanding of the issue with her today. I understand that she also talked to Tim Pelton. I would expect that the second half of this story will remove idle speculation about any the underhandedness in this process.
So Tim you had nothing to do with this and you never had any converations with the town clerk?
Is that your story?
Anon 3:18 I agree the webb page is not the official town record. With overlapping terms and some commissions not meeting on a regular basis this could be confusing and difficult to tract. What is the official record?
Matt Hall and Elizabeth Esty made some vague (but serious) allegations, without providing any supporting evidence, without naming names, only saying enough to imply that someone had committed an under-handed act. If Hall and Esty knew this to be true, they should have provided the facts upon which they based their allegations. If their allegations turn out to be nothing, then they are the ones guilty of acting irresponsibly.
So let me get this straight - Mr. Pelton was basically thrown off the WPCA commission by the dems who accused the town clerk of changing the term dates. These vague accusations were made by Elizabeth Esty who in the same breath said she fully supported Pelton and would have reappointed him. Instead she finds him guilty before all the facts are presented. Obviously she does not have the best interest of Cheshire in mind with her decision. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Then after the dems voted and threw him off and appointed their own dem to the commission, Hall announces that there will be an investigation (to see how the term dates shown on the website were changed).
If the investigation proves no intentional wrong doing, the council and the public should demand that Esty step down.
Esty should resign? Or should Solcum? Not sure at this point.
"Instead she finds him guilty"
She did not find Pelton guilty of anything. She said someone else had the town clerk change the date. Still don't know what date or that a date on a web site has any official meaning at all.
It does look like she punished the town and him for someone else's alleged shenanigans.
Where did shenanigans come from? Will someone be charged with a 606, 747, 101, 423 or 909?
Only time will tell where this will lead. But Schrumm talked about the North End in the paper not sure how they were tied. I never head that Pelton was against the project did any of you?
Is this a criminal offense? Can someone be arrested? This is wild.
12:56 "It does look like she (Esty) punished the town and him for someone's alledged shenanigans."....That's what I meant. She in essense is saying all are guilty and Pelton is being voted out before a fair investigation is made. This could all likely be attributed to a mere clerical error on the website.
The dem council is doing things ass backwards.
Republicans are upset because they thought that Pelton was their ace in the hole for defeating the North End. This has nothing to do about what is right or wrong it just has to do with stopping the North End. Would the leadership of the party lie, cheat or steal to stop the project, of course, they already have, this is just another case. I hope the real truth comes out.
Oh I see the new story is a clerical error that Slocum found
Ok ha ha ha
ha ha ha
I believe you
No I do
Really
Not!
MR. Pelton's term expired in 1/?/07? It is now 6/12/06 and they are now getting around to replacing him. Why so long? Usually the majority party can't wait for the terms of the minority party to expire and fill the seats with their own. I can't believe this.
Has election mud slinging started already or is this an attempt to over shadow the ousting of Pelton due to the fear that he might give an honest appraisal of the sewage capacity. He doesn't have to be for or against it, but are they afraid of the truth? Remember the lead up to the Iraq war?
Have you noticed that anyone that questions sewage capacity is attacked? Somebody says that to properly upgrade the system will cost millions, they are attacked. When we are near capacity, does it make sense to simply ask DEP to cross out our old capacity and pencil in a capacity 10% higher. How many time can we do this? Is 10% enough for the good old boys at W/S and the Tristar boys, Paul Bowman and Doug Calcagni?
Don't we need capacity for other projects in the rest of Cheshire?
The sewer capacity problem didn't go away. The D's made a big issue of it in '05. Has anything been done to expand it? If not, we still have a problem only it's on their watch. Who are they going to blame now? Stop pointing fingers.
Post a Comment