FRANKSMITHSAYSNB
EDITORIAL:
New Britain's
Common Council Democratic Membership meeting after meeting continually add
numerous items to their agenda at the start of each common council meeting without complying to the twenty four
hour public notice even to the point of having members on the other side of the
isle, voice a complaint that they have just received this information on arrival
to the council meeting and requesting more time to evaluate the matter, only to be
ignored by the Democratic leadership.
The
Republicans should file a complaint to the proper State Agency regarding these
improper actions by the Democrats.
The state law requires 48 hour public notice with the agenda being filed at least that far in advance with the town clerk and being published so that the public has advance notice on what matters are pending before the council.
ReplyDeleteI would think that any vote held on so called "secret" matters (matters that were not properly posted on the agenda) could be challenged as to their legality since the pending vote was kept secret from the public.
Our Common Council has abandoned all sense of honor and has forsaken their vows to do what's best for the citizens.
ReplyDeleteMany have been in their part time jobs for too long, and have come to depend on the income, they are not willing to rock the boat and reign in Tim O'Brien / Phil Sherwood.
They are making a complete mockery of the trust placed in them by the responsible citizens of New Britain.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete"Show no Mercy" Mercier? That is a creative one that I hadn't heard before. Not sure how it even replies, but it shows that your overall analysis is a bit unhinged.
ReplyDeleteWow Sherwood you must be real scared because you and your alias Dana are showing up everywhere.
ReplyDeleteOur critic didn't make any review of 6 term and longest ever serving New Britain mayor Tim Stewart, 45 year member of the board of Ed Jim Sanders Sr, or Constable Jim Sanders Jr, just to point out a few of a long list of Republican elected officials that were missed.
ReplyDeleteisn't Dana the little woman?
ReplyDelete(c) The agenda of the regular meetings of every public agency, except for the
ReplyDeleteGenera
l Assembly, shall be available to the public and shall be filed, not less than
twenty
-
four hours before the meetings to which they refer, (1) in such agency's regular
office or place of business
,
and (2) in the office of the Secretary of the State for any
such
public agency of the state, in the office of the clerk of such subdivision for any public
agency of a political subdivision of the state or in the office of the clerk of each
municipal member of any multitown district or agency. For any such public a
gency of
the state, such agenda shall be posted on the public agency’s and the Secretary of the
State’s web sites. Upon the affirmative vote of two
-
thirds of the members of a public
agency present and voting, any subsequent business not included in such filed agendas
may be considered and acted upon at such meetings.
1-225 Section C states "Upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of a public agency present and voting, any subsequent business not included in such filed agendas may be considered and acted upon at such meetings"
ReplyDeleteCouncil rules also articulate this.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete1-225 Section C states "Upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of a public agency present and voting, any subsequent business not included in such filed agendas may be considered and acted upon at such meetings"
Council rules also articulate this.
Which means the council must hold a public vote to decide whether to add those items to the agenda, and the vote whether or not to add those items must pass by 2/3 of the membership present. I don't recall there being a vote, which of course must be done during the public meeting and on the public record as recorded in the minutes of the meeting.
As I understand it, these items were added by who knows who in secret in what can best be described as a back room deal. If that is how it was done, then these matters were illegally voted upon and would likely not be upheld under any legitimate legal challenge, and making whatever was voted upon null and void.
If you are going to quote state laws and local ordinances, then you should first make sure you comply with them instead of trying put a spin on them to use them to support secret back room dealings.
So if the tax abatement for HRA was done in such an illegal secret format, then the tax collector would be 100% correct to simply ignore whatever the council thinks it passed in such a manner because it has the same value as toilet paper.
The democrats are hoping she goes after HRA. however she knows better. It would end her career. Even without angering the democratic base by going after HRA the current tax collector will probably not get reelected. going after hra would be the nail in the coffin on Election Day.
ReplyDeleteSince when did doing what is right to protect the best interests of the taxpayers become a nail in a coffin because the freeloading left who never pay a dime in taxes in their life might be upset that some of their free ride might get interrupted?
ReplyDeleteThis country is going in a very scary and dangerous direction.
Welcome to communist Connecticut!
Everyone seems to care more about getting elected then doing the right thing. That is why NB is messed up.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the naysayers going to do when the tax collector forces a sale of the property to exercise HER and ONLY HER rights under the tax lien:
ReplyDelete"Such lien, during its existence, may be enforced by levy and sale of such real estate if such person has complete title thereto or of his interest in such real estate if he does not have complete title thereto."