The Assistant Minority Leader of the City Council speaking to the Board of Education at their Monday night meeting presented the best warning to the existing Board members not to resign prior to the end of their existing terms.
We all know how the democratic members of the council don’t plan to listen to the recommendations of the Republican Party and in order to show their power over the wishes of the electorate they may even ignore their own party’s recommendation.
The board meeting started at 7:14 PM subsequent to the opening pledges and the public participation had been completed the board meeting had been into some fifteen minutes of their normal business when Ms. Leslie Jacobs arrived carrying pre-mailed board meeting packet.
This of course telegraphed the sure intention of the democratic council member’s intention to override the mayor’s veto.
Why would the board of Education go through the expense of providing the documents together with the mailing cost if the word hadn’t been passed on by the democratic leadership that the veto override will occur?
Let them appoint that lunatic to the board of ed. That will just help the Republicans sweep into city hall in the next election because they are the party that is trying to do right by the children.
ReplyDeleteIf she had half a brain, she would be ashamed to show her face in public with all the nasty comments people are making about her. It is apparent that she either doesn't care or is totally ignorant to the fact that she is viewed as a laughing stock, brainless puppet servant of Phil Sherwood.
So Leslie Jacobs started her new chance at working on the BOE by arriving late! No surprise at all Can't she get herself organized to be on time.
ReplyDeleteNow that I have had time to evaluate the anonymous’ comment that I should change my party registration;
ReplyDeleteI would like to kindly remind this so called party leader, that I am currently an elected official of the party, and that I plan to serve out the current term in office.
That shows you how serious that Leslie Jacobs takes this appointment and how little that she cares about the children that she can't drag her butt there to be at a board meeting on time.
ReplyDeleteFormer Board President Jim Sanders testified before the council that Ms. Jacobs' attendance was atrocious when she was a board member before. If I heard him correctly, she only attended 60 something per cent of the meetings, and when she was there, did nothing much but cause conflict and disrupt the process.
These were all legitimate and valid reasons for the mayor to veto this attrocious appointment.
Next time Phil Sherwood should find a puppet who is actually willing to do the job and doesn't have such a tainted record following her.
Frank: The Democrats like to pick on everybody so don't let it bother you!
ReplyDeletePerhaps if the leaders of the Democratic council would focus more on resolving the conflicts of interest that exist on the council and forget about spending so much time trying to manipulate a Republican appointment and attempting to run the Board of Education by remote control, this city wouldn't have quite as many problems as it has.
ReplyDeleteThe public is watching closely, and the current leadership has clearly taken their eyes off the ball.
You would think that the fact that Democrats, including other elected officials, are speaking out against the appointment of this puppet would resonate with these council members, but this is just an example of how consumed with power these elitist arragant people are. They are totally out of touch with reality. The public is watching very closely and will hopefully feed them a taste of reality on November 3rd.
ReplyDeletePush us around with all your arrogant power now, but don't cry when we push back on November 3rd, so have all the fun you can with the few months of unchecked power that you have left!
NEW BRITAIN - Pinnacle Heights Deal Is Positive Move Forward as
ReplyDeleteLegislation passed in 2003 made redevelopment of housing property possible...
The $6 million in revenue for New Britain from the sale of Pinnacle Heights is the fruition of state legislation approved in 2003. The worsening conditions at the former Pinnacle Heights housing developments resulted from the severe financial troubles of the New Britain Housing Authority.
After a protracted process in search of a balance between the needs of residents in and around the developments and the economic opportunities for the city, the passing of landmark legislation (PA 03-6), allowing the City of New Britain to redevelop and sell the Pinnacle Heights property for non-housing.
In a city such as New Britain which has limited land resources for development, this act was a significant step in increasing commercial development and the Grand List, some Sixty-six acres of prime land with excellent highway access is a real asset to New Britain. The city of New Britain also secured an additional $1 million in bonding to assist the city in the demolition process for the existing structures at Pinnacle Heights.
Everyone I talk to in town talks about the need for "change" in city hall. It is clear that the time is now for change, and the change looks like it could very well be a Republican run town council. All I hear is how fed up everyone is with this politics as usual situation in town.
ReplyDeleteThe Democratic side of the council has one plan, and one plan only, and that is "screw everyone else" in the process of building their kingdom.
ReplyDeleteIt is actually hilarious how a bunch of Democrats can think they are so untouchable when we have a mayor who is Republican and has defeated every Democratic challenger by a healthy landslide each time. Why can't the same Democrats who keep voting for Mayor Stewart be pursuaded to vote for change by voting for his Republican ticket on the council? Could this be the reason for change? Am I missing something?
ReplyDeleteI guess she has no shame because if I were being run down in public the way Leslie Jacobs is, I would be ashamed to show my face in public!
ReplyDeleteWould love to hear from the mayor on this subject.
ReplyDeleteNew Britain - The CT State Bond Commission expressed its support for feeding hungry families in New Britain on 08/03/08 by approving $150.000 Bond for a centralized city food pantry at the Salvation Army Food Pantry site, 78 Franklin Square in downtown New Britain.
ReplyDeleteBut the operating budget for the Spanish Speaking Center, one of the primary organizations the state has been using to distribute food in the city at the same time had it’s budget cut.
Mayor Timothy Stewart said the city needed to establish a centralized food pantry with refrigeration and start tracking the people who receive services. Arnold Schwartz, co-chairman of the Salvation Army advisory committee, said the site would be in back of the Salvation Army at Franklin Square. The project was supposed to break ground after granted a variance by the NB Zoning Board of Appeals. The Salvation Army $150.000 Bond is only for renovations and acquisition of property.
Currently there are about 10 small pantries giving out food - none of the pantries can store perishable foods. They have to make runs to Food share in Bloomfield. The governor was quoted in The Herald saying, "Now more than at any time in the recent past, Connecticut families are being strained by the high costs of gasoline, energy and electricity and groceries. More and more of our families need the kind of help food pantries as The Salvation Army Food Pantry will help stretch their household budgets."
According to Mary Sanders who runs the Spanish Speaking Center, the organization serves 1,500 people a month. It was eligible to receive funding for a food pantry and was one of three possible sites for a centralized food pantry. There were three possible locations The Spanish Center, the Salvation Army, or Osgood Park, she said.
Mary Sanders, who has been meeting with people like Major Stanley Newton of the Salvation Army and with other relief organizations, said the current thinking is that New Britain may be better off with different sites rather than one location as the Salvation Army Food Pantry site.
Cute Elephant!
ReplyDeleteIf residents are ready to change the faces on the common council and
ReplyDeletevote republicans in to support their mayor, just who are they going to vote for? Where are the republicans to run for council?
Should we remind everyone what our mayor had to say about Jacobs:
ReplyDelete“Miss Jacobs did nothing to hide the arrogant, flippant attitude that earned her a reputation as an ineffective member during her earlier time on the board,” Stewart said. “I cannot stand by and let this appointment go through without giving the council the opportunity to rethink this action and put aside partisanship in favor of doing what is right for this community’s children.”
The mayor called upon the council to rething this postion, and they shoud do just that. Nothing but the welfare of our children is at stake.
Anonymous who asked "who are these Republicans who are going to run for the council," that is a question you should ask Paul Carver, Republican Town Chairman.
ReplyDeleteGreat, while the Mayor spends days talking about vetoing school board appointments and talking about food at the golf course, people doing God's work like "Food not Bombs" people; giving out free food to children and families are suffering harassment by the New Britain Health Department and Health Inspector Sergio Lupo.
ReplyDeleteLupo stated that any time you serve food it has to be regulated and a new Group in giveaways of food is like any other vendor, and must get proper City permits.
That's Great. More red tape?
Time will prove the stupidity of Phil Sherwood and Leslie Jacobs, as well as that of other Democrats on the Council...It was bound to happen sooner or later with the Democrats being shown their Gestapo tactics.
ReplyDeleteI suspect the November 3 election will bring out a larger than normal amount of voters, mainly to vote out certain Democrats on the Council...and these same Democrats have only themselves to blame.
The democrat members of the city council have not publicly announced a resolve of the conflict of interest that exist from the HUD complaint.
ReplyDeleteRepublican Town Committee chair urges block to veto override
ReplyDeleteTuesday, December 2, 2008 11:34 PM EST
By RICK GUINNESS
Herald staff
NEW BRITAIN — After taking stock of the routing his party received on Election Day 2008, Republican Town Chairman Paul Carver called on potential candidates to throw their hats in the ring as soon as possible for next year’s local election.
The reason to start this early, he said, is so that the party will be able to identify qualified candidates.
There are 27 positions to be filled that include 15 Common Council seats, three Board of Education seats, two board of Tax Review, four constables, treasurer and mayor.
Carver also urged people to turn out for next week’s Common Council meeting to block a Democratic override of Mayor Timothy Stewart’s veto of the Democrats choice to fill a Republican vacancy on the Board of Education.
Immediately after the last council meeting Nov. 16, the mayor vetoed the school board’s appointment of Leslie Jacobs to fill a Republican vacancy left by Marilyn Kraczkowsky.
The Democratically controlled Common Council had picked Jacobs by a vote of 13-2, even though the Republican Town Committee had decided to put forth Jamie Giantonio.
At Tuesday’s RTC meeting, Carver took a shot at Sherwood, saying he has flip-flopped with regard to his reasons for voting against Giantonio in favor of Jacobs.
Carver called on Republicans who support Giantonio and the mayor’s veto of his Democrat-endorsed replacement to show up at next Wednesday’s council meeting.
He said he wants to pressure Democrats to rethink their choice.
DOT Seeking Input On Slow-Moving Busway...
ReplyDeleteThe Busway is kind of stupid. The Waterbury to Hartford rail line makes much more sense long term.
All the options were studied for years. Inter-State I-84 is overly congested and dangerous between New Britain and Hartford. Rail and bus line were considered, but bus line was cheapest and deemed best option. New Britain has developers who want to build 2,000 new apartments, new shops, restaurants, pre-schools, and office space if a mass transit link is made between Hartford and New Britain. The Hartford neighborhoods, Newington, and Elmwood stand to benefit as well.
This is not and should not be highways versus busway/rail line. These are options which some people will choose to use, and will alleviate congestion, make our economy more competitive, and encourage development along the transit line.
Studies of mass transit lines have shown that they attract billions of dollars in development, because many people want to live and work in a walk-able, lively urban center. New Britain and Hartford can revive the link that was destroyed when trolley lines and rail service was discontinued years ago, now that our highways are overly clogged. Whether its rail or bus, it needs to happen for our economic future.
Personally, we prefer rail, but I understand why they chose the bus way over 10 years ago. Look at the demands on Metro North Rail and commuter rail lines into Boston. Granted, we don't have single cities as large as Boston, but combined, greater Hartford, New Britain, Bristol, Waterbury, Danbury, Meriden, Springfield, and New Haven have a population and workforce comparable to Boston.
Re-linking these cities via rail (remember, the free market railroad systems linked these cities and were profitable before the feds through billions of dollars into the highway system) is a step to ensuring we don't become an "economic cul-de-sac" because of our current transportation woes.
We just saw on Fox 61 News at 10 pm some of the people being served by the food kitchen at the Spanish Speaking Center in New Britain. They were wearing the latest gear, stuff we can't afford, IPods hanging from their ears ... don't have one of those. We guess they need food because they spent their money elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteThen we saw the other folks who clearly needed the free food support. The local government is Greedy to ask a not for profit organizations like "Food not Bombs" whom help others selflessly to have to pay $20 dollar fee to the city.
It's Time to Scrap the Hartford/ New Britain Busway project...
ReplyDeleteThere is already bus service to and from Hartford in downtown New Britain, where the bus picks up passengers. Also, there is a commuter lot where the bus picks up and drops off passengers at Hartford Road/Brittany Farms Road (across from Target), which is quite full weekdays.
Why would anyone want another bus line to Hartford? Would it be more practical to spend all that money in renovating/modernizing the Berlin train station for more commuter service to and from Hartford and New Haven? '
And local light rail train transportation is sorely needed, but is should be either electric or diesel light rail. In this case, diesel would be the less costly option, and it can be extended from Hartford to Waterbury.
Did Alderman Phil Sherwood ever acknowledge which of his contradictory statements about how he happened to get involved in selecting a Republican Party nominee was the true one?
ReplyDeleteParents and Grandparents of New Britain School Children:
ReplyDeleteOn November 19th our Mayor, The Honorable Timothy T. Stewart, issued his veto to the resolution passed by the Democratic Council members and his statement is as follows: [ re-print ] :
To the members of the Common Council:
Our forefathers had some lofty and admirable goals when drafting the Constitution of the United States. They envisioned a government where checks and balances among the three branches of government protected our citizens from abuses of power. They tried to build a system of government where legislatures would debate critical issues with civility and respect and those whose views were in the minority could still speak freely and be heard.
If those framers of the Constitution were somehow magically transported here to 2008 New Britain, I believe they would recoil at how far we have strayed from their vision and how petty, bitter and partisan our local government has become. While our City has always had a reputation for hard fought political battles, I believe last week’s Common Council actions hit a new low in political gamesmanship at the expense of good government.
The debate in filing a Board of Education vacancy should be about the needs of New Britain’s school children. But instead of a debate about children, we had a debate where the participants acted like children.
Council Democrats gave no clear reasons for rejecting a father of two young children with a long history of service to New Britain’s youth. Jamie Giantonio, a young professional who stepped up to take time away from his career and family to serve on the Board of Education, certainly deserved a better explanation than the poor excuse from Alderman Sherwood-that he picked the person who called him on the phone rather than Mr. Giantonio who only sent his a letter. This absurdity would be laughable if it were not being carried out at the expense of the education of our City’s children.
No member of the Council majority has denied that filing the vacancy with Leslie Jacobs is retaliation for a previous vacancy appointment and again, no qualifications other than her once having served on the Board of Education were given. During public participation, ten residents spoke on behalf of Mr. Giantonia---none spoke in favor of Miss Jacobs. In fact, several speakers mentioned reasons why her past service on the Board should be the reason NOT to appoint her to fill this vacancy.
In answering questions at Wednesday’s Council meeting, Miss Jacobs did nothing to hide the arrogant, flippant attitude that earned her a reputation as an ineffective member during her earlier time on the Board. I cannot stand by and let this appointment go through without giving the Council the opportunity to rethink this action and put aside partisanship in favor of doing what is right for this community’s children.
State statutes specifically delineate minority representation on school boards in an attempt to achieve that balance of power as envisioned in the Constitution. It is hoped that an almost even split creates a spirit if bipartisanship that allows Board members to concentrate on educational rather than political issues.
With the appointment of Miss Jacobs, the Democratic majority has only violated that spirit of bipartisanship, they have thrown a live partisan grenade into the New Britain Board at a time when resources are low and needs and tensions are high.
I therefore veto Resolution #30383 in the hopes that you reconsider the chilling message you are sending to people in our community: that political power is more important than sound public policy. Consider this appointment as if you own children or grandchildren’s education depended on it---the citizens of New Britain deserve nothing less.
Sincerely,
Timothy T. Stewart
Mayor, city of New Britain
I strongly urge all the parents to call the leadership of the PTO group for their child’s school and ask them to contact the parents of all the children to attend the Council meeting on December 10th in order to support the Mayor’s veto of the Democrat’s choice for appointment to the Board.
Frank Smith
When elected to serve the city in any capacity, those elected must take an oath to serve the City and its citizens according to the provisions in the City Charter and the city’s ordinances. It is also understood that as citizens of the state and our country we must all abide by State and Federal statutes and the U.S. CONSTITUTION. Anyone who needs more than this information about how to behave as an honest member of society should not run for office. Surely, there are times when for whatever reasons people make judgment errors. No amount of special rules written anywhere can erase human errors.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, while I applaud the effort by the “Freshman members...” of the Common Council to erase conflict of interest situations involving city officials from occurring, I believe that adding a whole new set of regulations to city ordinances regarding conflicts of interest is unnecessary especially when these regulations may be redundant with the city’s own regulations and State Statutes.
Since Mayor Stewart was first elected in 2003, Council Democrats have attempted to copy state government structure and regulations into our city ordinances. Efforts to mirror state legislature committee structure, FOI regulations, etc., have largely failed. Why, some are in conflict with our City Charter, some are not compatible with out city government structure or, as already pointed out, are redundant. Most of these actions taken by the Democratic Council Majority are attempts that have been made to usurp Mayoral prerogatives or to micromanage departments, boards, commissions or committees. Many times, important city business has been delayed or obstructed with debilitating results to the City and its residents. Recent examples, all involving conflicts of interest of some kind are: The Stanley Golf Course food service fiasco, the BOE replacement for Mrs. Kraczkowsky and the landscaping contract for the Badolato Garage.
Perhaps two thirds of Council members have conflicts of interest in their duties as elected city officials arising out of: personal, financial, and/or familial relationships. They are aware of these potential conflicts and the consequences for ignoring them. There is no need for a “fresh set of eyes.” Of the violations of laws and conflicts of interest that have been reported over the past five and one half years, “old eyes” have exposed them.
I remind our “freshman” Council members of an old saying, “ be careful what you wish for, you may get it.” Also, be careful that what what you hope to accomplish now doesn’t come back to bite you in the derriere.
If the state ethics commission has repeatedly ruled that it would be unethical for active state employee to serve in the legislature, how can it possibly be ethical for a city employee to be an Alderman?
ReplyDeleteIs it unethical to spend at least half of your shift stuffing your fat face at restaurant after restaurant when you are on the city "dime?"
ReplyDeleteRemember that Mayor Stewart was a city employee and an alderman before he was mayor.
ReplyDeleteThen shame on the mayor for the conflict of interest he once was involved in, but he has long since resolved that conflict, since he no longer is a city employee. When is Trueworthy or Catanzaro going to follow suit and resolve their conflicts of interest?????
ReplyDeletethe thorn said...
ReplyDeleteIt appears that these Democrats are planning to go down fighting, as I heard today from one of the Aldermen that they don't care what the parents or the people of this city have to say about the Leslie Jacobs appointment, they are planning to ram through her appointment by overriding the mayor's veto without regard for the impact this decision has on our children's welfare and education.
It is clear that this group cares more about partisan politics and pushing their liberal agenda, than they do about our children, otherwise they wouldn't have this flippant attitude about ramming through this appointment and the children be damned.
Since the aldermen are clear that they couldn't care less about the will of the people, you will be left with only one way to be heard, and that is in your decision on who to vote against in November.
December 4, 2008 7:03 PM
the thorn said...
ReplyDeleteIt appears that these Democrats are planning to go down fighting, as I heard today from one of the Aldermen that they don't care what the parents or the people of this city have to say about the Leslie Jacobs appointment, they are planning to ram through her appointment by overriding the mayor's veto without regard for the impact this decision has on our children's welfare and education.
It is clear that this group cares more about partisan politics and pushing their liberal agenda, than they do about our children, otherwise they wouldn't have this flippant attitude about ramming through this appointment and the children be damned.
Since the aldermen are clear that they couldn't care less about the will of the people, you will be left with only one way to be heard, and that is in your decision on who to vote against in November.
December 4, 2008 7:03 PM
The Big Dipper Says:
ReplyDeleteHoping that the conflict of interest problems with Aldermen Catanzaro & Trueworhty and Adlerwoman Collins are resolved prior to Wednesday's Council meeting of next week or maybe they should not show due to the conflicts.
To the anonymous individuals that are concern with the Mayor’s veto letter not being in the council's agenda.
ReplyDeleteSince I have printed a re-print of the letter in its entirety it would seem very difficult for the Majority Leader of the Council to remain oblique on this important issue.
Could he be planning to dump Jacobs by writing in a substitute name for the replacement?
It is a thought to ponder with.
+I rceived this for Posting:
ReplyDeleteWhen elected to serve the city in any capacity, those elected must take an oath to serve the City and its citizens according to the provisions in the City Charter and the city’s ordinances. It is also understood that as citizens of the state and our country we must all abide by State and Federal statutes and the U.S. CONSTITUTION. Anyone who needs more than this information about how to behave as an honest member of society should not run for office. Surely, there are times when for whatever reasons people make judgment errors. No amount of special rules written anywhere can erase human errors.
That being said, while I applaud the effort by the “Freshman members...” of the Common Council to erase conflict of interest situations involving city officials from occurring, I believe that adding a whole new set of regulations to city ordinances regarding conflicts of interest is unnecessary especially when these regulations may be redundant with the city’s own regulations and State Statutes.
Since Mayor Stewart was first elected in 2003, Council Democrats have attempted to copy state government structure and regulations into our city ordinances. Efforts to mirror state legislature committee structure, FOI regulations, etc., have largely failed. Why, some are in conflict with our City Charter, some are not compatible with out city government structure or, as already pointed out, are redundant. Most of these actions taken by the Democratic Council Majority are attempts that have been made to usurp Mayoral prerogatives or to micromanage departments, boards, commissions or committees. Many times, important city business has been delayed or obstructed with debilitating results to the City and its residents. Recent examples, all involving conflicts of interest of some kind are: The Stanley Golf Course food service fiasco, the BOE replacement for Mrs. Kraczkowsky and the landscaping contract for the Badolato Garage.
Perhaps two thirds of Council members have conflicts of interest in their duties as elected city officials arising out of: personal, financial, and/or familial relationships. They are aware of these potential conflicts and the consequences for ignoring them. There is no need for a “fresh set of eyes.” Of the violations of laws and conflicts of interest that have been reported over the past five and one half years, “old eyes” have exposed them.
I remind our “freshman” Council members of an old saying, “ be careful what you wish for, you may get it.” Also, be careful that what what you hope to accomplish now doesn’t come back to bite you in the derriere.
LOU SALVIO, REPUBLICAN ALDERMAN
--
“If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to
the music he hears, however measured or far away.” H.D. Thoreau
Jamie Giantonio has left a new comment on your post.
ReplyDeleteThe Council is exercising its judgment and responsibility in accordance with the city charter, according to McNamara.
I find it laughable that Mr McNamara is saying that the council is using judgement and responsibility. How does someone make a responsible decision without weighing both options?
I was NEVER contacted by ANY of the Democratic council members. Not only was I not contacted, but after the last council meeting, I was told by 3 of the council members that I NEVER had a chance and was NEVER EVEN CONSIDERED.
If you are reading this blog, and are unhappy by the way this is going down-
PLEASE, come to the council meeting tomorrow and let them know. 7PM City Hall- Council Chambers.
Posted by Jamie Giantonio to Frank Smith Says NB at December 9, 2008 5:37 AM
I read in today's paper that Catanzaro doen't know what the Hud edict entails.
ReplyDeleteWhat doen't the Alderman understand with the word resign.?
There were enough prevarications in today’s Herald Article about HUD by Rick Guinness to make one vomit. For Rocco Tricarico to say what he did is proof that he should not be running that agency. Surprised that the Herald didn’t call HUD for corroboration.
ReplyDeleteKnow this, nobody worked harder that Mayor Tim Stewart to gain the exemptions required by HUD in awarding the CDBG funds! Had the Mayor not intervened in the professional manner that he did, other CDBG Funds would have been denied. As it stands now, only about $100K was denied. Only after I suggested that no Democrats came forward to thank the Mayor for his efforts did Phil Sherwood offer a belated and “choking” thank you. So much for “class.”
It is apparent that when the liberal Democratic contingent is not getting its way, the group looks for someone –some group – to blame. Thankfully there are yet some responsible journalists and bloggers.
About the Hartford/New Britain Busway; a couple of years ago, our State Legislative contingent was out there on the former Greenfields’ property getting their photos taken with Gov. Rell, promoting the busway, all of them, DeFronzo, O’Brien, Geragosian, etc.. Now, all of a sudden there is an opportunity to throw a monkey wrench into New Britain’s Downtown Redevelopment Proposal. Another opportunity to thwart Mayor Stewart’s efforts to help NB taxpayers. Throw the busway under the bus and forge a $1 billion proposal to use trains instead. On whose side is our legislative contingent anyway? You be the judge!
Sincerely,
Louis Salvio
To Frank and The Thorn; Perhaps Frank should revise his list of those Council members without "conflicts." Suzanne Bielinski is the sister of former State Rep., Terry Gerratana. Terry is now a member of the State Elections Enforcement Commission. Terry's maiden name is Bielinski. Terry and Dr. Frank Gerratana are the parents of freshman Council member, Greg Gerratana (thus, his aunt is Suzanne Bielinski, Mayor Pro Tem of the NB Common Council). Dr. Gerratana has a long history of association with the city's Workers Comp. Claims. So much for untainted Council members.
ReplyDelete