.jpg)
PLEASE PLACE YOU’RE VOTE AT THE UPPER RIGHT OF THE SCREEN!
SHOULD 13 ALDERMEN BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE? On February 25, in direct violation of the city charter, Alderman Catanzaro spoke against and then voted to reject the bipartisan, unanimous ethics commission ruling which was issued against him by the commission.
Both speaking on and voting on an Alderman’s own issue are both separate violations of the same charter section that provides the penalty of expulsion from the council as the punishment for violation of that section.
Since the other Aldermen swore an oath to uphold the charter of the City of New Britain, does this not violate the oath of their office? Remember this is a blatant violation of the city charter that was committed in their presence, and not only did each of them witness the offense, they participated in it by joining Alderman Catanzaro in voting to reject the unanimous finding of the ethics commission.
Even more incongruous, is that the self proclaimed champion of ethics, Alderman Sherwood, not only witnessed this outrageous defiance of the charter, but also joined his fellow aldermen in voting to ignore the unanimous decision of the city’s ethics commission.
What do you, as a voter, a taxpayer, or a citizen think of this unethical behavior by the council?
4 comments:
Ruth Vazquez Centeno confirmed the property was in her name, that she was legally married to Roy but that as to why the taxes hadn’t been paid was no one’s business.
MAYBE THE REST OF US SHOULD JUST NOT PAY OUR TAXES AND TELL THE TAX COLLECTOR IT IS NONE OF HER BUSINESS! AFTER ALL, THAT APPARENTLY WORKS FOR AN ALDERMAN, SO WHY SHOULDN'T IT WORK FOR ALL OF US?
Catanzaro said he has always paid his tax bills but with money being tight he thought it was OK to wait and pay this month.
“I’m not rich,” he said. “I plan on taking care of this next week.”
HERE WE HAVE AN ALDERMAN WHOSE EXCUSE FOR NOT PAYING HIS TAXES IS THAT HE IS NOT RICH AND MONEY IS TIGHT, EVEN THOUGH HE WORKS FOR THE CITY AND HAS WHAT WOULD BE FOR MOST RESIDENTS OF NEW BRITAIN, AN ABOVE AVERAGE SALARY AND BENFITS PACKAGE SECOND TO NONE.
THIS SAME GUY WHO CAN'T PAY HIS OWN TAXES, BECAUSE HE IS NOT RICH, HAS NO PROBLEM SUPPORTING HUGE INCREASES IN THE BUDGET, WHICH WILL RAISE EVERYONE'S TAXES.
LET US ALSO NOT FORGET THAT DUE TO HIS CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RECENTLY WITHHELD BADLY NEEDED FUNDING FROM CITY PROGRAMS.
ON ELECTION DAY, LET US ALL REMEMBER THE ARROGANCE OF AN ALDERMAN WHO CAN'T PAY HIS OWN TAXES EVEN THOUGH HE IS PAID A SALARY THAT IS HIGHER THAN MOST RESIDENTS IN TOWN, AND PAID THAT SALARY DIRECTLY FROM YOUR TAX DOLLARS, BUT IS OK WITH RAISING YOUR TAXES AND EXPECTING YOU TO PAY THEM.
HAVE YOU HAD ENOUGH YET?
Rumor has it that Paul Catanzaro lives in his father's house. I wonder if he lives there rent/mortgage free? If so, why can't he afford to pay his mortgage? Is his pay going towards supporting the many restaurants he dines at?
Anonymous said...
At least six current or proposed members of Obama's Cabinet - some of whom sreve yet - were caught not paying their taxes that in some cases amounted to over hundreds of thousands of dollars. If and when they did pay, no penalties were assessed - politicians get special treatment.
When Frank Smith exposed four NB Common Council Democrats for being tax delinquents and the Herald picked up on the problem, these Democrats and their allies did what they usually do, namely, blamed the Herald and the
Republicans for an election year trick/gimmick. One of the delinquents when questioned about why by the Herald said, "...it's none of [anybody's] business..." I hope voters remember this in November.
Frank Smith forgot to mention that some elected Democratic office holders pay no taxes and some pay only personal property taxes.
Perhaps they shouldn't be removed from office but, let's not reelect them.
Post a Comment