Thursday, April 12, 2012

Transparent Town Council



Observing the local political process and those that make (or don't make) it happen, I often wonder what goes in the minds of those newly elected on election night. Exactly when do they become  authorities or the experts that many become? When do they shed that pre-election humility and concern for those that look up at them and support them? When does their listening ability cease? 

 When the last ballot is counted or is a slower evolution? 

 On Dec 6, 2011 Windham's Town Council majority returned to their authoritive mode after the November elections. Election time is when most politicians pretended to listen to their constitutes  (Hard work but a fact of life at election time)
Councilmen voted 7-4  to change how it operates meet­ings, including the controversial elimination of the second public comment period.

Voting in favor of the change were Councilmen Charles Krich, Thomas DeVivo, Joe Underwood, Kevin Donahue, Arnaldo Rivera, Christel Donahue and Jerry Iazzetta, all members of majority party.

 Dissenting were Tony Fantoli, Lorraine McDevitt, Mark Doyle and Windham Mayor Ernest Eldridge.

 The rationale behind the proponents decision was to make council meetings more efficient, "we were finding people were coming to speak twice. This will encourage people to focus on what they have to say."

 Being a one party town  for years there has been no incentive to inform the town's civic society nor to listen.  "The less they know the easier to keep being re-elected."  Being re-elected guarantees the good old boys keep doing the same old thing--driving Windham to an unknown place.  Wherever that be.

 December of 2010 with our schools failing a report from The Nagg School of Education, commissioned by the State Commissioner of Education hit the streets.The Report on District Governance devoted  many paragraphs to the lack of or poor communication between the various town boards, the board of education and town citizens. They further  emphasize that this major problem could be fixed with little or no cost.  They suggested that communications was the route of Windham's troubles. 

 The decision to eliminate the second public comment is deeply disturbing when put into context of other  moves the town council has made in recent years.
  • The Granicus Proposal:  To replace the audio-video system, from the Philo Farnsworth  era, used to broadcast meetings on the town cable channel.  The proposal has been lost in sub-committee.
  • Ad-Hoc Open Government Communication Committee: To promote communications between government and citizens with a focus on enhancing interest and web based communications   The first meeting took place in Sept of 2010, 19 months have past without a second meeting. 
  • Meeting Minutes:  According to The Conn. Freedom of Information Commission all towns are required to upload the minutes of a committee or commission meeting within 48 hours of that meeting to their website.  If the town is unwilling or incapable of complying they must shut down their web site.  In 2010 when this law took effect many towns choose to shut down their sites including  neighboring towns of Scotland and Andover.  Windham flaunted the mandate.  If there was a FOI  jail many Windham officials would be behind bars today.  Of 140 meetings listed on the Board of Finance website. 65 have no minutes.  Interesting enough, most  occured under the  tutelage of previous chairman McGrath and most occurred during budget season. The Town Council has improved the timing of uploading minutes but are still non-compliant. Chances are agendas are uploaded after the meeting occurs.  The Adm. &Finance, Health & Human Service sub committee to the Town Council and Town Council-Willimantic Service Dist both fail miserablely informing its citizens. The Town Council-Public Safety, Recreation & Public Works Sub Committee has a commendable record
  • Political Caucus:   A closed meeting of party members within a legislative body to decide on questions of policy or leadership. Windham, being a one party town  has used this legal mechanism for decades to successfully control town boards.  It is a  method for party leadership to control their members through intimidation. Most party members who perceive themselves to hold a minority point of view will be less likely to speak out for fear of being isolated, thus a few control the party, hence they control the direction of town government. For the taxpayer following the council's process of changing the meeting procedures there was no need to offer an opinion or get excited. This particular legislation had been pre-decided in secret session. Eliminating the second council public comment option had been written in stone before the sham council vote.  Call it theatrics, call it smoke and mirrors, call it (houdinism or houdini-it ??) --- I call it distrust in the neighbors we elect.
  • The Upstairs-Downstairs Magic Show:  The renovated ballroom became available for overcrowded meeting in the 2010-11 budget season.  While this hall maybe great for social events it is not up to snuff  for meetings.  Acoustics are non-existent, lighting feeble, the setting sun blinds both spectators and meeting participants and best yet (for politicians) the room lacks both audio and video equipment.   Finance Chair, Barbara McGrath  used this room to her advantage.  When a hearing was expected to draw undo negative comments in her crusade to provide more funding to the school board she would move the finance board hearing to the ballroom,(No TV coverage) even if a sparse crown was in attendance.  Conversely when the school board filled the meeting room,  hallway and out the front door of town hall with  and those sympathetic to her cause she chose to remain downstairs forsaking the much larger hall on the second floor.  (TV coverage)
  • Playing Favorites:  We're splitting hairs here but why should an"important person" be allowed an extra 45 seconds to talk over "Just Plain Joe" or someone with "more stature" be allowed to interject his thoughts during a meeting.  It doesn't happen often but when a citizen is limited to exactly three minutes why are others accorded special status? 

 Going through Town Council minutes on the Windham web site proved interesting. Sixty two meetings, 124 opportunities to speak  ( Sept 21, 2009 -Dec. 6, 2011). Public hearing not included.The findings:
  • Total comments: 605 
  • Early comments: 391 (2/3) 
  •  Late comments: 224 (1/3) 
  • Most comments: July 20, 2010 54 first comment session, 10 second comment session
  • Heavy participation always occurred during the first comment session when controversial items were on the agenda:  Union issues, ballroom naming, drinking in town hall, wrestling club, Card St, senior citizens issues, magnet school concerns. 
  • Budget season 2011 saw a reversal in public comment.  More people spoke during the second comment session.  Budget season 2010, near equal citizen participation.
"We were finding that it was the same people coming to speak twice,” those councilors voting to eliminate the second comment period claimed. “ This will encourage people to focus on what they have to say.” In fact:
  •  (Nov. 2009-Dec. 2011), 81 citizen took advantage of both the first and second   comment period at least once. Familiar names such as Stone, Santucci, Lary, Crane, DeVivo, Hoxie, Niles, Galucci, Fantolli, Montalovo, Veins, D'Auteille, Millard, Giordano, O'Brian, Jeffers, Doyle, Council members Iazetta & Underwood (who voted to elimanate the second public comment,)  & Quercas. 
  • Of the 81citizens speaking twice, 64 offered different subject matter during late comment
  • 14 contributor's  repeated themselves to some degree.
  • Three speakers definitely repeated themselves.  
The most recent buzz at town hall is adding a third polling place.  Windham's voting results have sunk to embarrassing levels. The November 2011 municipal elections saw a turnout less then 15%, Education budget referendums, even less. Our authorities say the convenience factor is a detriment to voter turnout. Convenience has little to do with voter turnout:
  • Poverty and voter turnout go hand and hand. As poverty rates increase, voter turnout descends When you don't know where tonight's supper will come from or how your fuel bill will be paid voting is quite trivial.
  • When government shuts down citizen participation and stymies public engagement government suffers.  When government becomes hearing impaired and forgets how they got where they are, when government considers their position a God giving right we are on the brink of government breakdown and moral  bankruptcy. 
Maybe some day a third polling place will be required but first our  councilors must change their tune. The town council should offer citizens increased, not less, opportunities to participate in policy making and to provide town government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information.  Public engagement enhances the government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Government must be tuned toward a bi-lingual format.  We are currently shutting out hundred of voters and potential leaders.
For once politicians must serve the town first not their party. Our government cannot withstand power plays.  Yes, we know that one party controls town government, they always have.

 In 2009 then state representative,Walter Pawelkiwicz, concluded a speech for a Main Street substance abuse center dedication with these words: "Windham, the the second poorest town in Conn., but we have heart."
Heart ain't going to do it nor is closed government going to solve Windham's problems 
  • We need leaders with integrity and intellectual honesty.
  • We need politicians who respect their political opponents, treat their constituents like adults and promote openness and transparency in government.
  • We need leaders with compelling ideas---and the ability and vision to turn those ideas into action. 
  • We need leaders who can see beyond the next election cycle and who have the political courage to lay the foundation for Windham's future success--even if it means making unpopular decisions today.
  • We need leaders who are willing to work with those from across the aisle to get things done.
  • Most importantly We looked for men and women who are not afraid to challenge their party’s leadership when that leadership is putting politics and partisan mudslinging above what’s best for  us all.
And so,  Councilmen Krich, DeVivo, Underwood, Kevin Donahue,  Rivera, Christel Donahue and Iazzetta when did it happen?
When did  you  grown too big and now you don’t care about the people that elected you? When did you see them as a herd of the needy that comes to you to find purpose in life? Oh come on, if you keep up this attitude, the herds of people will soon start disappearing. And what are you without your little people or jerks that BOF member Jeff Smith calls us? Who will consider you an authority that you pretend to be if there is nobody to listen to you? 

Listen to us, respect us, we'll do the same.



Observing the local political process and those that make (or don't make) it happen, I often wonder what goes on in the minds of those newly elected on election night. Exactly when do they become the "authorities" or the "experts" that many become? When do they shed that pre-election humility and concern for those that look up to them and support them? When does their listening ability cease?
Do these things happen when the last ballot is counted or is it a slower evolution?

On Dec. 6, 2011, Windham's Town Council majority returned to their authoritive mode after the November elections. Election time is when most politicians pretended to listen to their constitutes. (Hard work, but a fact of life at election time.)

Councilmen voted 7-4  to change how the Council operates meet­ings, including the controversial elimination of the second public comment period.

Voting in favor of the change were Councilmen Charles Krich, Thomas DeVivo, Joe Underwood, Kevin Donahue, Arnaldo Rivera, Christel Donahue and Jerry Iazzetta -- all members of the majority party.

Dissenting were Tony Fantoli, Lorraine McDevitt, Mark Doyle and Windham Mayor Ernest Eldridge.

The rationale behind the proponents' decision was to make council meetings more efficient. "We were finding people were coming to speak twice. This will encourage people to focus on what they have to say."

Being a one-party town  for years, there has been no incentive to inform the town's civic society nor to listen.  "The less they know, the easier it is to keep being re-elected."  Being re-elected guarantees the "good old boys and girls" keep doing the same old thing -- driving Windham to an unknown place. Wherever that may be.

December 2010 brought our schools a failing report from The Nagg School of Education, commissioned by the State Commissioner of Education. The Report on District Governance devoted  many paragraphs to the lack of or poor communication between the various town boards, the board of education and town citizens. They further emphasized that this major problem could be fixed with little or no cost.  They suggested that communications was the root of Windham's troubles.

The decision to eliminate the second public comment is deeply disturbing when put into context of other  moves the town council has made in recent years.
  • The Granicus Proposal:  To replace the audio-video system from the Philo Farnsworth era, used to broadcast meetings on the town cable channel.  The proposal has been lost in sub-committee.
  • Ad-Hoc Open Government Communication Committee: To promote communications between government and citizens with a focus on enhancing interest and web-based communications  The first meeting took place in Sept. 2010, 19 months have passed without a second meeting.Meeting Minutes:  According to The Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission, all towns are required to upload the minutes of a committee or commission meeting within 48 hours of that meeting to their website.  If the town is unwilling or incapable of complying they must shut down their web site.  In 2010 when this law took effect many towns choose to shut down their sites including the neighboring towns of Scotland and Andover. Windham flaunted the mandate.If there was an FOI  jail many Windham officials would be behind bars today. Of 140 meetings listed on the Board of Finance website, 65 have no minutes.  Interestingly enough, most occured under the tutelage of previous chairman McGrath -- and most occurred during budget season. The Town Council has improved the timing of uploading minutes, but is still non-compliant. Chances are, agendas are uploaded after the meeting occurs.  The Administration & Finance, Health & Human Service sub committee to the Town Council, and the Town Council-Willimantic Service District fail miserablely informing their citizens. The Town Council-Public Safety, Recreation & Public Works Sub Committee has a commendable record.
  • Political Caucus: "A closed meeting of party members within a legislative body to decide on questions of policy or leadership." Windham, being a one-party town has used this legal mechanism for decades to successfully control town boards.  It is a  method for party leadership to control their members through intimidation. Most party members who perceive themselves to hold a minority point of view will be less likely to speak out for fear of being isolated, thus a few control the party, hence they control the direction of town government. For the taxpayer following the council's process of changing the meeting procedures, there was no need to offer an opinion or get excited. This particular legislation had been pre-decided in secret session. Eliminating the second council public comment option had been written in stone before the sham council vote.  Call it theatrics, call it smoke and mirrors, call it "Houdini-ism" -- I call it distrust in the neighbors we elect.
  • The Upstairs-Downstairs Magic Show:  The town hall renovated ballroom became available for overcrowded meetings in the 2010-11 budget season.  While this hall maybe great for social events, it is not up to snuff  for meetings.  Acoustics are non-existent, lighting feeble, the setting sun blinds both spectators and meeting participants, and best yet (for politicians) the room lacks both audio and video equipment.   Finance Chair, Barbara McGrath  used this room to her advantage.  When a hearing was expected to draw undo negative comments in her crusade to provide more funding to the school board, she would move the finance board hearing to the ballroom (no TV coverage) even if a sparse crown was in attendance. Conversely, when the school board filled the meeting room, hallway, and out the front door of town hall with those sympathetic to her cause, she chose to remain downstairs -- forsaking the much larger hall on the second floor. (TV coverage)
  • Playing Favorites:  We're splitting hairs here, but why should an "important person" be allowed an extra 45 seconds to talk over "Just Plain Joe" -- or someone with "more stature" be allowed to interject his thoughts during a meeting.  It doesn't happen often, but when a citizen is limited to exactly three minutes why are others accorded special status?
Going through Town Council minutes on the Windham web site proves interesting. Sixty two meetings, 124 opportunities to speak ( Sept. 21, 2009 -Dec. 6, 2011). Public hearing not included.
The findings:

  • Total comments: 605
  • Early comments: 391 (2/3)
  • Late comments: 224 (1/3)
  • Most comments: July 20, 2010, 54 first comment session, 10 second comment session
  • Heavy participation always occurred during the first comment session when controversial items were on the agenda: union issues, ballroom naming, drinking in town hall, wrestling club, Card Street, senior citizens issues, magnet school concerns. 
  • Budget season 2011 saw a reversal in public comment.  More people spoke during the second comment session.  
  • Budget season 2010, near equal citizen participation.
"We were finding that it was the same people coming to speak twice,” those councilors voting to eliminate the second comment period claimed. “This will encourage people to focus on what they have to say.” In fact: 

  • (Nov. 2009-Dec. 2011), 81 citizens took advantage of both the first and second comment period at least once. Familiar names such as Stone, Santucci, Lary, Crane, DeVivo, Hoxie, Niles, Galucci, Fantolli, Montalovo, Veins, D'Auteille, Millard, Giordano, O'Brian, Jeffers, Doyle, Council members Iazetta & Underwood (who voted to elimanate the second public comment,) and Quercas.
  • Of the 81citizens speaking twice, 64 offered different subject matter during late comment. 
  • 14 contributor's repeated themselves to some degree.
  • Three speakers definitely repeated themselves. 
The most recent buzz at town hall is adding a third polling place. Windham's voting results have sunk to embarrassing levels. The November 2011 municipal elections saw a turnout of less than 15% ... Education budget referendums, even less.
Our authorities say the convenience factor is a detriment to voter turnout.
But, convenience has little to do with voter turnout:

  • Poverty and voter turnout go hand in hand. As poverty rates increase, voter turnout descends. When you don't know where tonight's supper will come from or how your fuel bill will be paid, voting is quite trivial.
  • When government shuts down citizen participation and stymies public engagement government suffers.
  • When government becomes hearing-impaired and forgets how they got where they are ...
  • When government considers their position a God-given right ... 
  • ... we are on the brink of government breakdown and moral  bankruptcy.
Maybe someday a third polling place will be required, but first our councilors must change their tune. The town council should offer citizens increased -- not fewer -- opportunities to participate in policy-making and to provide town government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information.  Public engagement enhances government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions.
Government must be tuned toward a bi-lingual format.  We are currently shutting out hundreds of voters and potential leaders.
For once politicians must serve the town first, not their party. Our government cannot withstand power plays.  Yes, we know that one party controls town government, they always have.

In 2009, then state representativeWalter Pawelkiwicz concluded a speech for a Main Street substance abuse center dedication with these words: "Windham, may be the the second poorest  in Connecticut, but we have heart."

Heart ain't going to do it, nor is closed government going to solve Windham's problems:

  • We need leaders with integrity and intellectual honesty.
  • We need politicians who respect their political opponents, treat their constituents like adults, and promote openness and transparency in government.
  • We need leaders with compelling ideas -- and the ability and vision to turn those ideas into action.
  • We need leaders who can see beyond the next election cycle and who have the political courage to lay the foundation for Windham's future success -- even if it means making unpopular decisions today.
  • We need leaders who are willing to work with those from across the aisle to get things done.
  • Most importantly we look for men and women who are not afraid to challenge their party’s leadership when that leadership is putting politics and partisan mudslinging above what’s best for  us all.
And so, Councilmen Krich, DeVivo, Underwood, Kevin Donahue, Rivera, Christel Donahue and Iazzetta ... when did it happen?
When did you grow too big and stop caring about the people who elected you? When did you see them as a herd of the needy that comes to you to find purpose in life? Oh come on, if you keep up this attitude, the herds of people will soon start disappearing. And what are you without your little people -- or jerks as BOF member Jeff Smith calls us? Who will consider you the authority that you pretend to be if there is nobody to listen to you?

Listen to us. Respect us. We'll do the same.





From: Kate Fortier <k

Delleted from text above

Public engagement enhances the government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is a widely dispersed comity, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. The town council should offer citizens increased, not less, opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their town government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information.  Public engagement enhances the government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is a widely dispersed comity, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. The town council should offer citizens increased, not less, opportunities to participate in policy making and to provide their town government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information.








  1. 2. Not speaking out (whether or no






  1. their view really was the minority position) makes it seem to others like that point of view is even less common.
3. A downward spiral occurs because the less one hears in support of the perceived "unpopular" idea the more unpopular it seems. One's fear of isolation for expressing that view intensifies. Eventually some people really do decide not to hold that view (so they can feel part of the majority).

Why people don't vote-poverty

•In 2007, 10.6 percent of Connecticut children under 18 (85,530 children) lived in a family with income below the federal poverty level ($21, 027).
•In 2007, the state's largest cities had extremely high child poverty rates — Hartford (47 percent), Waterbury (31.4 percent), New Haven(28.7 percent), and Bridgeport (28.4 percent)."
•Undernutrition and environmental factors associated with poverty can permanently retard physical growth, brain development and cognitive functioning.
•Families earning low wages cannot afford to work if they lack access to affordable child care. Families who cannot work fall deeper into poverty, and the children don't receive the early education they need to succeed later in school.
•Research shows that a father's absence in a child's life can be devastating. Children living in fatherless homes are: five times more likely to live in poverty; nine times more likely to drop out of school; 37 percent more likely to abuse drugs; and 20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders.
•An average child growing up in a low-income family receiving welfare hears one-half to one-third as many spoken words as children from more affluent households. At these rates, a low-income child hears 10 million words by age 3 while a high-income child hears as many as 30 million words by then. The low-income child would know about 3,000 words by age 6, while the child of the high-income family wou


Voter turnout 

The second is to motivate people to participate. This will be more difficult, but it is critically important. Democracy is predicated upon the participation of informed citizens. When voters stay home, they are less likely to get competent or accountable government, which in turn affects the quality of schools, public safety and town services.
A hot local issue, or a compelling candidate, can still get voters out. But it is hard to explain why, to take eastern Connecticut as an example, Hampton and Sprague turned out 63.75 percent and 55.70 percent of their voters, while Sterling, with a turnout belying its name, had only 6.01 percent of its registered voters bother to cast ballots.

Cacus

a. A meeting of the local members of a political party especially to select delegates to a convention or register preferences for candidates running for office.

c. A group within a legislative or decision-making body seeking to represent a specific interest or influence a particular area of policy:a minority caucus.


hronicle-freedom of speech
that angered some citizens.

Councilmen voted 7-4 Tuesday to change how it operates meet­ings, including the controversial elimination of a public comment period.

Voting in favor of the change were Councilmen Charles Krich, Thomas DeVivo, Joe Underwood, Kevin Donahue, Arnaldo Rivera, Christel Donahue and Jerry Iazzetta.

Those dissenting were Tony Fantoli, Lorraine McDevitt, Mark Doyle and Windham Mayor Ernest Eldridge.

The change was made as part of a revision to the council’s standing rules, which are revisited every two years when a new council is elected.

In the previous term, the council had two public comment sessions during its regular meetings, one at the beginning and one at the end.

Now, the council will have just one public comment session at the beginning of the meeting.

The change was recommended by Krich.

Krich said Wednesday the change was made to make meet­ings more efficient.

“We were finding that it was the same people coming to speak twice,” said Krich. “ This will encourage people to focus on what they have to say.”

Willimantic Republican Town Committee Vice Chairman Lori Jeffers, speaking during the final public comment session, was vis­ibly upset about the change.

She said the second public com­ment session gave the citizens the opportunity to give feedback on items discussed during the meeting.

“I think you made a mistake in the way you voted tonight,” said Jeffers.

The decision was made to have the session at the beginning so people would not have to stay until the end of the meeting.

“ To a lot of people, that’s a bur­den,” said Krich. Krich said the public has “ plenty of access” to council members other than during meetings and can write them letters or speak with them at other times.

Beets noted that, although the council elimi­nated the second public comment session, it did revise the rules so council members can address citizens.

Another change made was the format of council meetings.

Historically, the town council has had sub­committees report to the full council during its meetings.

The full Windham council, including Willi­mantic representatives, meets on the first Tuesday of the month while Willimantic councilmen meet by themselves on the third Tuesday of the month.

Previously, there were two subcommittees: the administration and finance, health and human services committee, and the public safety, recreation and public works committee. Beets recommended the first meeting of the month be used as a “work session,” dur­ing which the full council will be introduced to issues and ask questions, as well as voice opinions.The second meeting of the month will be used as a “ regular business session,” during which the council will vote on action items.

Following Tuesday’s vote, there will no lon­ger be subcommittees.

Beets said Wednesday this approach would be an experiment and noted other public “ bod­ies” have operated in this manner, including the Windham Board of Education.

The school board recently set up workshop meetings per the recommendation of Special Master Steven Adamowski, the state-appoint­ed liaison working with school officials to turn around the struggling district.

Beets said the change could result in fewer meetings. “I thought we’d give it a try,” said Beets. “I always thought it was a productive way to go.”

Fantoli said he likes the new format. “It’s a good way to go,” he said.

McDevitt agreed, and said having commit­tees was a “complete waste of time.”

“Committees can kill you,” said McDevitt. “I think more work can be done if we’re all here.”

Significant changes were also made pertain­ing to Windham Mayor Ernest Eldridge’s role on the council, a recommendation made by Krich.

Eldridge will no longer have the authority to vote on Willimantic service district matters.

Krich said people in the Willimantic Service District felt Eldridge should not be allowed to vote on matters in the district because he resides in Windham.

“I think it’s a conflict,” said Krich.

He said residents were upset when Eldridge voted to increase taxes in the Willimantic dis­trict, Krich said.

“I take offense by that,” said Krich.

Per the new rules, Eldridge will no longer have the opportunity to vote on behalf of the Willimantic Service District, a change he felt was unfair. “I should have a vote,” he said.

Doyle said Eldridge is an “ex-officio” for both the Willimantic Service District council and the full town council.

“I don’t see that we need to change that based on the mayor’s residence,” said Doyle.

Eldridge will still have a vote on the town council.

This morning he said he is seeking a legal opinion on the council’s action to eliminate his vote on the Willimantic 
Service District.











10 signs of a good listner
http://writermel.hubpages.com/hub/10-Signs-of-a-Good-Listener

Transparency in government-the white house
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/

overnment should be transparent.  Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.  Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.





 Open meetings,open records and Tranparency in government (what is a meeting)
http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/focusareas/government_ethics/introduction/open-meetings.html

Of course, transparency means that something can be seen through. When we talk about transparency in government, we mean that citizens must be able to "see through" its workings, to know exactly what goes on when public officials transact public business. Government that is not transparent is more prone to corruption and undue influence because there is no public oversight of decision making.

What is an open meeting law?
To protect transparency in government, every state in the United States has some variety of law mandating that all government business be conducted in open meetings to which the public has access. These are sometimes referred to as "sunshine laws," open government laws, or, in California, the Brown Act. The Oklahoma Court's decision in Oklahoma Ass'n of Municipal Attorneys v. State (1978) gives a clear statement of why open meetings are important: "If an informed citizenry is to meaningfully participate in government or at least understand why government acts affecting their daily lives are taken, the process of decision making as well as the end results must be conducted in full view of the governed."
In addition, most states have laws ensuring public access to government documents and records. These are often versions of the federal Freedom of Information Act. 
What do open meetings have to do with ethics?
Transparency is a way of protecting fairness and ensuring the common good. When citizens know what their government is up to, they have a better chance of ensuring that decisions treat everyone equally and protect the common conditions that are important to everyone's welfare. As the Carter Center puts it: 
Democracy depends on a knowledgeable citizenry whose access to a range of information enables them to participate more fully in public life, help determine priorities for public spending, receive equal access to justice, and to hold their public officials accountable. Inadequate public access to information allows corruption to flourish, and back-room deals to determine spending in the interests of the few rather than many.



 What makes a good politician-good read
http://congress.indiana.edu/what-makes-good-politician
The press and public often pay attention to what politicians say, but less to how well they do what they're supposed to do. Former Congressman Lee Hamilton asks, "What Makes A Good Politician?"

Perhaps just as important, they also understand the limits of their power — both what a legislator can realistically accomplish, and the fact that legislators might react to events but rarely can control them. 
This ability to keep oneself in perspective is crucial to a politician. After years in office, it is supremely tempting to think of a legislative seat as an entitlement, as something held by right. It's not. Good politicians not only understand that they serve in a representative democracy, they embrace the challenges and opportunities this offers them. 
The occasional exception notwithstanding — Richard Nixon comes to mind — they are good communicators who genuinely like all kinds of people and are comfortable talking to perfect strangers in all kinds of environments. They are accessible to the grand and the humble alike. They are sensitive to the mood in a room, know how to read an audience, and are quick to respond. They are generally open to other points of view, and know that while they may differ with someone on one issue, they'll likely be working with him or her on another in the future. 
And perhaps most important, they understand that politics involves give and take, and the ability to find common ground. A good politician listens very carefully to those on the other side, not only to learn their arguments, but especially to learn how far he or she can move them and how far he or she has to be moved in order to reach consensus. 
This is why politics puts a premium on resourcefulness and intelligence, and tends, over time, to discourage ideological blinkers — if you approach a problem by saying that all the good is in your side and all the bad lies with the opposition, then you'll never accomplish anything. Good politicians persist in trying to forge agreement on policy or political goals, and they can take defeat in stride; they know that setbacks and criticism go with the territory, and are quick to learn from them and move forward. 
Finally, they never forget where they're from and fight hard not to succumb to Potomac Fever. They understand their districts and states, remain loyal to their constituents, and have an abiding faith in the decency, intelligence and patriotism of the voters. Without that, it's almost impossible to be a true representative, able to express in the halls of the powerful the hopes, dreams, and interests of ordinary Americans. That's what they got sent to Washington to do, and the very best never forget it. 
T
Why Andover web site was closed
The new web site — http://ando­verconnecticut. org — was cre­ated by a group of volunteers after selectmen shut down the original site in October 2008.

It was originally shut down due to a state law requiring all towns with web sites to post meeting minutes for all boards on the site within 48 hours of a meeting.

The original web site did not have minutes posted.

 Mr. Malloy was advocating ways to make voting easier, including Web-based voter registration, Election Day registration and larger penalties on efforts to intimidate or impede voters.

New London Hot Dogs
http://www.theday.com/article/20111017/NWS01/310179914
Bridgeport Discord
http://www.ctpost.com/default/article/Records-detail-the-discord-on-Bridgeport-s-school-1469788.php#page-1

AYP info
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/cwp/view.asp?a=2662&Q=333592

Plan, Organize, Lead/Direct, Control
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/management-concepts-the-four-functions-of-management.html

 Public Finance
Collection of sufficient resources from the economy in an appropriate manner along with allocating and use of these resources efficiently and effectively constitute good financial management. Resource generation, resource allocation and expenditure management (resource utilization) are the essential components of a public financial managementsystem.

 ts role is to act as a balance against the Board of Selectmen or School Board, which usually set the budget and present it to the public at town meeting. Typically the Board of Finance is seen as being more cost-conscious than the governing body - that is, it prefers smaller budgets.

 Quote:
The Day really needs hammer this story, the city may be short on cash but this is ethically bankrupt.

Jan 18 2012 link of Jan 17th meeting agenda
http://www.windhamct.com/meetings.htm?id=lj59ef58

So you become an authority when you're elected or appointed to a board
Mark Phelps, feels the message sent tonight by Council members was a poor example for the youth of the Community. He said the professionals you just kicked off the Committee are exactly the same professionals you are talking about putting back on. You should have added people with certain areas of expertise to the existing committee. He was shameful of the hours of personal time, and dedication that everyone has put into this, only to have the Council disband them. From July 20, 2010 minutes

 An informed society
These panels focus on how a healthy democracy requires an informed citizenry. 
This panel will examine from a historical perspective how we access the information we need to participate in a democratic society, with a focus on public education, public libraries, and how we learn about the people we elect.

 An ability to vocally express oneself in a manner that exudes a clear and purposeful discourse for oral communication; 
Government should be transparent.  Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.  .
Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the Government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public input on how we can increase and improve opportunities for public participation in Government.

What is the definition of transparency?
Of course, transparency means that something can be seen through. When we talk about transparency in government, we mean that citizens must be able to "see through" its workings, to know exactly what goes on when public officials transact public business. Government that is not transparent is more prone to corruption and undue influence because there is no public oversight of decision making.

What is an open meeting law?
 "If an informed citizenry is to meaningfully participate in government or at least understand why government acts affecting their daily lives are taken, the process of decision making as well as the end results must be conducted in full view of the governed."

From Budget Picture is Bleak/Windham - In note pad
Councilman Thomas DeVivo, chairman of the Willimantic Ser­vice District, said he thought the town should charge a user fee for the placement of newspaper boxes on Main Street.

What do open meetings have to do with ethics?
Transparency is a way of protecting fairness and ensuring the common good. When citizens know what their government is up to, they have a better chance of ensuring that decisions treat everyone equally and protect the common conditions that are important to everyone's welfare. As the Carter Center puts it: 
Democracy depends on a knowledgeable citizenry whose access to a range of information enables them to participate more fully in public life, help determine priorities for public spending, receive equal access to justice, and to hold their public officials accountable. Inadequate public access to information allows corruption to flourish, and back-room deals to determine spending in the interests of the few rather than many.


 “There is too much mystery …”
“Process is far too secretive …”
“Take the mystery out …”
“Veil of secrecy should be lifted …”








Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)