After Posting our some fiver years ago that Alderman Catanzaro continue to persist as long has he holds his two positions and that is being an Alderman and a city employee.
Brian Said: The Conflict being committed By Alderman Catanzaro has been pointed out a number of times by Frank Smith Says NB with his pointing out the appearance of conflict for a city employee to serve on the City Council exists.
The Democratic Council members were extremely quick to defend The Alderman’s indiscretions with the Ethics Commission of the City because they are aware that other members are also afflicted with the same exposure of conflict and are afraid that these exposures will become public.
The State of Conn. does not allow its employees to serve in the state Legislature while being an employee due to the conflicts it presents.
Why Does New Britain allow this appearance of conflict to occur?
So I do agree with Frank Smith Says NB that the Alderman should resign at least one of the positions Also be reminded that the conflict of interest charges directed to this Alderman by the HUD Agency has not been resolved or at least if it has; it has not been made public.
Just another example of why a city employee should not be allowed to serve on the council because of the conflicts of interest. The State got it right on this issue.
Subject: The saga of Code of Ethics...filing Writs of Mandamus in Court to enforce your legal rights dealing with political corruption...
The Government Elections and Administration Committee took a step forward toward eradicating political corruption at the municipal level when it approved a bill that would force cities and towns to adopt a code of ethics by 2007. The substitute bill calls for municipalities to establish procedures to investigate allegations of misconduct by its public officials, public employees, and paid consultants.
The state has yet to pass its own contract reform package. The General Assembly has passed legislation toward that end three times, but Governor M. Jodi Rell vetoed all three attempts. State Rep. Christopher Caruso, [D-Bridgeport], said that municipalities, like the state, routinely award multi-million dollar contracts and in most towns there is no process for the public to address the behavior of public officials.
Two Glastonbury residents, Karen Emerick and Dana Evans, know what Rep. Caruso means all too well. Earlier this week they were in Hartford Superior Court filing writs of mandamus to enforce their legal rights. Since 2003, Emerick and Evans have been asking the Glastonbury Ethics Commission to specify how the public may initiate complaints alleging a violation of code, or how the public might request access to the commission's advisory opinions.
They say they have yet to receive an answer, though Karen Emerick says she was told on one occasion, in letter from the ethics commission chairperson, that the commission would not accept complaints directly from the public. Evans said she had wanted information on a code that would allow public officials to represent a developer and others doing business in the town, but was told advisory opinions are not for the public. If it becomes law, the substitute bill approved by the committee today will change that.
After filing and winning numerous state Freedom of Information Commission complaints and non-compliance actions against the Glastonbury Ethics Commission, Emerick and Evans said they felt they had exhausted all other avenues.
After filing the writ, Emerick said there should be a regional ethics commission, so that people on the commission do not hear cases from residents in their own town. She said she would support a statewide ethics code that doesn’t require public officials to disclose the contents of their bank accounts, but they would have to disclose all financial interests in property and list the names of their limited liability companies and private employers.
The substitute House bill that the committee approved prohibits public officials and public employees from representing private interests against the interests of their employer municipality, and closes the loophole in the revolving door policy so public officials can't take jobs with private companies that do business with the town.
Before it can become law, the bill still must be approved by the House, the Senate, and Governor Rell.
Susan G. Kniep, former East Hartford mayor and President of The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayers Organization (FCTO) said that every time a public official writes a local ethics code for a town so that in the future he may, as an elected or former official, do business with the town - then the taxpayer loses his/her shirt again.
Without strong ethics laws on a local level, common sense tells you that local elected officials cannot police their own, and taxpayers have to file Writs of Mandamus in Court action to gain their legal rights to enforce Ethic Laws...said Susan Kniep, President FCTO.
Didn't this guy only win his election by something like 50 votes? It should be a cake walk for someone to "take him out" in the next election, especially with the growing list of scandals and controversies he is involved in. Mickey Mouse would prolly get more votes.
Anonymous says: Catanzaro is a sad case. He doesn't know that being in the liberal majority doesn't award you with brains, only votes. Anybody that doesn't see that? Check out Eva, Adam, ToniLyn, Rocha, Cruz, Black, Hermanowski,Gerratana,Sherwood,Centeno, Trueworthless and Chatty Cathy Bielinski - what do you have? Nothing! And you liberals, entrust your taxes to this group? Get down on your knees and be thankful for Stewart and his administration.
About four years ago, in a letter to the editor, Frank Smith wrote that Alderman, Paul Catanzaro held three positions concurrently that presented potential conflict of interest situations for Paul, namely, alderman, City employee, and Pres. of The Board of HRA.
Catanzaro thought he was untouchable. It has come to pass that Catanzaro has violated the public trust in each of the three positions he holds and has been called to answer for his indiscretions.
In life and under normal circumstances, nobody can make anyone knowingly do something that the individual knows is wrong. The State Office of HUD has judged that Catanzaro has a conflict of interest situation as HRA Pres.
The New Britain Ethics Commission is investigating conflict of interest possibilities arising from the Catanzaro’s positions as alderman and city employee. Lou Salvio is not responsible for Catanzaro’s actions and owes Catanzaro nothing!
After Posting our some fiver years ago that Alderman Catanzaro continue to persist as long has he holds his two positions and that is being an Alderman and a city employee.
ReplyDeleteTHAT IS THE CONLICT IN ITS SELF!
Brian Said: The Conflict being committed By Alderman Catanzaro has been pointed out a number of times by Frank Smith Says NB with his pointing out the appearance of conflict for a city employee to serve on the City Council exists.
ReplyDeleteThe Democratic Council members were extremely quick to defend The Alderman’s indiscretions with the Ethics Commission of the City because they are aware that other members are also afflicted with the same exposure of conflict and are afraid that these exposures will become public.
The State of Conn. does not allow its employees to serve in the state Legislature while being an employee due to the conflicts it presents.
Why Does New Britain allow this appearance of conflict to occur?
So I do agree with Frank Smith Says NB that the Alderman should resign at least one of the positions Also be reminded that the conflict of interest charges directed to this Alderman by the HUD Agency has not been resolved or at least if it has; it has not been made public.
Just another example of why a city employee should not be allowed to serve on the council because of the conflicts of interest. The State got it right on this issue.
ReplyDeleteSubject: The saga of Code of Ethics...filing Writs of Mandamus in Court to enforce your legal rights dealing with political corruption...
ReplyDeleteThe Government Elections and Administration Committee took a step forward toward eradicating political corruption at the municipal level when it approved a bill that would force cities and towns to adopt a code of ethics by 2007. The substitute bill calls for municipalities to establish procedures to investigate allegations of misconduct by its public officials, public employees, and paid consultants.
The state has yet to pass its own contract reform package. The General Assembly has passed legislation toward that end three times, but Governor M. Jodi Rell vetoed all three attempts. State Rep. Christopher Caruso, [D-Bridgeport], said that municipalities, like the state, routinely award multi-million dollar contracts and in most towns there is no process for the public to address the behavior of public officials.
Two Glastonbury residents, Karen Emerick and Dana Evans, know what Rep. Caruso means all too well. Earlier this week they were in Hartford Superior Court filing writs of mandamus to enforce their legal rights. Since 2003, Emerick and Evans have been asking the Glastonbury Ethics Commission to specify how the public may initiate complaints alleging a violation of code, or how the public might request access to the commission's advisory opinions.
They say they have yet to receive an answer, though Karen Emerick says she was told on one occasion, in letter from the ethics commission chairperson, that the commission would not accept complaints directly from the public. Evans said she had wanted information on a code that would allow public officials to represent a developer and others doing business in the town, but was told advisory opinions are not for the public. If it becomes law, the substitute bill approved by the committee today will change that.
After filing and winning numerous state Freedom of Information Commission complaints and non-compliance actions against the Glastonbury Ethics Commission, Emerick and Evans said they felt they had exhausted all other avenues.
After filing the writ, Emerick said there should be a regional ethics commission, so that people on the commission do not hear cases from residents in their own town. She said she would support a statewide ethics code that doesn’t require public officials to disclose the contents of their bank accounts, but they would have to disclose all financial interests in property and list the names of their limited liability companies and private employers.
The substitute House bill that the committee approved prohibits public officials and public employees from representing private interests against the interests of their employer municipality, and closes the loophole in the revolving door policy so public officials can't take jobs with private companies that do business with the town.
Before it can become law, the bill still must be approved by the House, the Senate, and Governor Rell.
Susan G. Kniep, former East Hartford mayor and President of The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayers Organization (FCTO) said that every time a public official writes a local ethics code for a town so that in the future he may, as an elected or former official, do business with the town - then the taxpayer loses his/her shirt again.
Without strong ethics laws on a local level, common sense tells you that local elected officials cannot police their own, and taxpayers have to file Writs of Mandamus in Court action to gain their legal rights to enforce Ethic Laws...said Susan Kniep, President FCTO.
Sounds like this time Catanzaro went too far. Even Susan Kniep is watching this time!
ReplyDeleteHow did Rick Guinness get Sherwood's permission to print an article like this about Sherwood's good buddy Catanzaro?
ReplyDeleteis the ethics commission looking into how he spends his workday eating at different restaurants while on the clock?
ReplyDeleteDidn't this guy only win his election by something like 50 votes? It should be a cake walk for someone to "take him out" in the next election, especially with the growing list of scandals and controversies he is involved in. Mickey Mouse would prolly get more votes.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous says:
ReplyDeleteCatanzaro is a sad case. He doesn't know that being in the liberal majority doesn't award you with brains, only votes. Anybody that doesn't see that? Check out Eva, Adam, ToniLyn, Rocha, Cruz, Black, Hermanowski,Gerratana,Sherwood,Centeno, Trueworthless and Chatty Cathy Bielinski - what do you have? Nothing! And you liberals, entrust your taxes to this group? Get down on your knees and be thankful for Stewart and his administration.
Among that entire list, you would be lucky to come up with one half of a brain! What a list of losers!
ReplyDeletethat's giving them a lot of credit. its more like a quart of a brain. to call them pea brains would be insulting to peas.
ReplyDeleteIs Michael Trueworthy on medication of some kind? There have been times that he seems a bit 'spaced out'.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous says:
ReplyDeleteAbout four years ago, in a letter to the editor, Frank Smith wrote that Alderman, Paul Catanzaro held three positions concurrently that presented potential conflict of interest situations for Paul, namely, alderman, City employee, and Pres. of The Board of HRA.
Catanzaro thought he was untouchable. It has come to pass that Catanzaro has violated the public trust in each of the three positions he holds and has been called to answer for his indiscretions.
In life and under normal circumstances, nobody can make anyone knowingly do something that the individual knows is wrong. The State Office of HUD has judged that Catanzaro has a conflict of interest situation as HRA Pres.
The New Britain Ethics Commission is investigating conflict of interest possibilities arising from the Catanzaro’s positions as alderman and city employee.
Lou Salvio is not responsible for Catanzaro’s actions and owes Catanzaro nothing!
Ms Carbone, WAKE UP!