I don't have any additional hotWatergate meeting minutes yet. But in the meantime, I thought I'd follow up on hWg 28 (the Council liaison's June report) and offer you the July PBC report.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't feel like the June and July reports have given as complete a picture of hotWatergate as the public deserves. Tim White
Q: What were the events that led to CT Combustion's conclusion that documents (to be given to the Council) had to be delivered by a state marshall?
A: I still don't know.
But here's a couple of hotWatergate clips that, IMO, best address this question that remains unanswered:
followed by:
With the exception of CT Combustion specifically mentioning "Bid 1" (a July - October 2007 timeframe) and the August 2007 and October 2007 PBC meetings... is there any clear explanation on which PBC meetings are being discussed?
And who is the town secretary mentioned by CT Combustion?
Unfortunately, I don't expect to ever get any sort of satisfactory explanation for this because I'm sure "these aren't the droids we're looking for."
Tim White
UPDATE: In watching the video again, I noticed that PBC asserts that CT Combustion tried to provide information at a meeting... but PBC does not state which meeting. Nonetheless, CT Combustion agrees that they did try to hand deliver information at the August PBC meeting.
Regardless, CT Combustion further asserts that they tried to convey information to the PBC for the October meeting... (and if I still have this very convoluted situation right!) that point remains unaddressed by anyone.
So what happened in October?
Was information (delivered by CT Combustion to Town Hall, but) withheld from the PBC at their October meeting?
And how did I miss #13? I thought we were installing one boiler... for a total of two boilers? But now the PBC is installing two boilers for a total of three? And we're relocating the two year old boiler? Does that impact the warranty? Whatever... I'm sure if I ask any questions, I'll be told:
Tim White
In relation to hotWatergate, I believe this is the entire text of the June 4 PBC meeting:
Extending the completion date from August 15 to September 22 provides an additional 39 days.
Tim White
This is the unedited text of an email sent to the Council from Councilman Matt Altieri today. It is an update on hotWatergate the Norton boiler project:
Hello Fellow Council Members
Wanted to give you a brief update on the status of the Norton Boiler project.
I had a chance to speak to one of the managers from White Bowman today and he said the project is on schedule at this point. The boilers have all been assembled and they are awaiting the delivery of the control panel and burners. There have been several minor change orders having to do with the floor and one of the doors. Apperantly these change orders would have been done no matter who did the project. I will get more details about this at the Public Building Commission meeting which is Wednesday. But all in all, the project has been running along smoothly all summer.
Best Regards
Matt Altieri
Washington DC spin... Cheshire style!
Tim White
I'm too tired to write anything on hotWatergate tonight... sorry, just too busy. Please do make sure you tune in though tomorrow night... or even better... attend the meeting and ask questions. As I've been saying, while some Councilors felt the need to create a study committee to workaround the intellectually-challenging exercise of understanding the phrase "request for information," I fully expect little-to-no intellectual curiosity tomorrow night.
So if you're going to want answers to your questions, feel free to post them here. But I strongly encourage you to attend tomorrow's whitewashing meeting.
Finally, I haven't heard back from the COTC yet. Maybe we'll be able to speak at tomorrow's meeting.
Tim White
No time to write now, but stay tuned because...
In the dog days of summer, hotWatergate is heating up.
To paraphrase an American hero:
"The change orders are coming! The change orders are coming!"
Tim White
“If you will recall it was not an agenda item on April 8th and as a result of that there was no information submitted to the Council because it was not up for consideration.”
- Town Manager, Council meeting on April 22, 2008 – addressing my concerns about why the corruption memo was withheld from me.
“We received a letter from DEP informing us of the Bond Commission’s approval of funds for turf at Cheshire High School. A copy of the letter will be in your envelopes with the agenda packet for the June 24th meeting. Matt Hall has indicated that this item will be on the Council agenda for the July 8, 2008 meeting, and Superintendent Greg Florio and a representative from the Board of Education will be attending that meeting.”
- Town Manager, an email dated June 20, 2008 – offering information on the turf… even though “it was not up for consideration.” at the June 24th meeting.
So I guess there are times when it is appropriate to include information even though it was not up for consideration.
And to recap... the Town Manager did have knowledge of The Corruption Memo prior to the April 8 Council meeting… as did Chairman Hall:
And that information was withheld from me for more than ten days. And when the information was provided to me, it was buried in a stack of papers under this memo:
What’s happening in Town Hall? Will anyone question these people?
Tim White
When I originally posted the PBC minutes from June 4, I didn't include the last paragraph. Here's the full text:
Tim White
Here is the PBC Chairman speaking to the Council at the November 12 meeting: So is the Norton Boiler project finally done? Will the door finally be shut on hotWatergate?
To be continued....
Tim White
I got this letter from Norton Boiler Project's "consulting engineer"* yesterday:
I also have a copy of the punch list. I may add that tomorrow, but figured I'd let you start by digesting this.
Tim White
* I use the phrase "consulting engineer" to indicate that he's not a town employee.
I'm guessing that some of my Council colleagues won't appreciate me posting these public documents here.
I'm also guessing that President Bush doesn't appreciate people discussing the Scooter Libby case.
Some people dislike transparency and full disclosure.
Tim White
A legal question... if hotWatergate ends up in court... and people get called to testify... are the lawyers allowed to question the integrity of individuals? Are they allowed to question whether people make public statements that tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing, but the truth?... not so much in relation to hotWatergate, but just in general... if it is determined that people make public statements that are something other than the truth, the whole truth and nothing, but the truth... does that get considered in the trial?
What if it's demonstrated that someone makes public statements that are simply false? Again... this is not in relation to hotWatergate... I'm just wondering if an individual's integrity gets questioned in a trial.
If so, I imagine the proceedings could end up being quite interesting.
"The diffusion of information and the arraignment of all abuses at the bar of public reason, I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one of] those which ought to shape its administration." - Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural Address, 1801
Tim White
Alright... google video finally seems to have done the trick for me this time... sorry for the weeklong delay. Anyway... here's the first installment (1hr 18mins):After I get the whole video posted, then I'll probably start dissecting it in smaller youtube clips.
Tim White
From the AP:
Connecticut's 217 state marshals are required to file annual income statements with the Office of State Ethics. A review of those filings by The Hartford Courant shows that 61 marshals grossed more than $100,000 in 2007. Another 53 grossed between $50,000 and $100,000.
Elsewhere in the story:
One marshal, John T. Fiorillo of Bristol, grossed more than $2 million last year by serving legal papers to people being sued and homeowners facing foreclosures, state records show....Six other marshals grossed more than $500,000 last year....
That's great for the state marshals. And while I was initially surprised to see people grossing in the millions, I then recalled that state marshals get used for almost anything... particularly when there are problems and you get the feeling that someone wants to pretend like those aren't the droids you're looking for:
I'm still wondering why the TM and Council Chairman withheld the corruption memo from me for at least ten days. As I suggested yesterday... maybe we can add that to the strategic plan priorities for tomorrow - whenever corruption is mentioned, inform all nine Council... not just the "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" majority.
Tim White
I'm trying to do a post on hotWatergate, but can't upload images. Dunno why. I'll try again tomorrow.
It is interesting though to read the PBC meeting minutes and see project delay talk being approved this time. Does anyone happen to recall if Matt Altieri mentioned hotWatergate delays in his recent PBC liaison reports to the Council in June or July? Here's his June 10 report:
Maybe it's just me, but a 39 day delay (approved on June 4) seems significant... and something that Norton parents may find of interest as it crosses into the school year. But regardless of what he meant by "technical issues," I'm sure these aren't the droids we're looking for.
Tim White
I'm not getting into it now, but I just wanted to point out... hotWatergate continues.
It's pretty unbelievable, IMO. Maybe more this weekend.
Tim White
The MRJs Stacy Graham Hunt offers this take on last night's vote on hotWatergate:
"The whole process was garbage, and we need to go back and do something different," said Councilman James Sima, who voted against the proposal along with Tim White and Tom Ruocco.
Jimmy was absolutely right.
On the flipside though:
Councilwomen Laura DeCaprio and Elizabeth Esty attributed the long process to unintentional mistakes made in Town Hall.
With a closing:
Now that the project has been awarded, Town Manager Michael Milone, has identified the weaknesses in this process and hopes the new financial software system that the town is expected to receive, will prevent any more processes like this one.
And for anyone who missed it, here's my condensed version of the above:
Town Hall screws up the project. The Rubber Stampers say "tsk, tsk. There must be consequences for this... a-ha! We'll raise taxes!"
And taxes will go up because we:
1) wasted $70,000 between the lowest 1st bid and the lowest 3rd bid;But for some additional explanation on how to define Rubber Stamping, please read Nancy Pelosi's September 29, 2006 blog post that was published on The Hill. Cheshire's own Democratic Rubber Stamp Council would make the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress proud! Just look at some of their achievements:
2) will have unnecessary attorneys' fees ($??)
3) will buy new contracting software that we had not planned on buying ($3,000 for software + training + an opportunity cost of efficiencies missed by not buying the originally planned software)
1) From the unsubstantiated "fund balance policy" that costs millions of dollars over the past few years and an additional $90,000 each year (going forward)... to wasting $14,000 on another strategic plan...make no mistake... the administration says "jump" and the Democratic Rubber Stamp Council says "how high?!" And this won't change with the present Council composition. Going back more than a year, I tried to explain my concerns to the Council "leadership." But as was explained on April 3, 2008:
2) from the $34,000 to be spent ontravel & entertainmentconferences & seminars... to the $153,000 on "cratered" financial software...
3) from the $430,000 annual subsidy for the pool... to the inaction on performance contracting...
4) from their new found love of the linear park... to the continuing unfair and unequal treatment of non-major party political candidates...
Sorry I didn't post this a couple weeks ago with the original letter from the Consulting Engineer. Anyway, here's the Norton boiler punch list of outstanding items as of November 13 (per the engineer):
I'm no expert, but I guess the above list is what you call "an occasional punch list item."Finally, I want to reiterate two of my thoughts on hotWatergate:
1) I don't think there's corruption in Town Hall. However, considering the unbelievable sequence of events that created hotWatergate... I think any reasonable person could conclude there is corruption. Personally though, I conclude it's just total incompentence. But what's new? As I've said before, at the confluence of energy and engineering - this Council is entirely incompentent.
2) At least one Council member has said there is no corruption in Town Hall. I, on the other hand, say I don't believe there is any corruption in Town Hall. But I cannot speak with absolute certainty.
Tim White
