What We Have Here Is A Failure To Communicate: Rock Cats Owners Didn't Even Bother To Tell The Big Club

One of the biggest complaints coming out of the pending deal by the Rock Cats and the City of Hartford is that key "stakeholders" were not let in on the talks nor intentions of the team's ownership to vacate New Britain Stadium in 2016 for the proposed I-84 linked Parcel 12B in downtown Hartford.

Neither New Britain's Mayor Stewart nor State Senator Eric Coleman nor even the team's big corporate sponsor, The Stanley Works, among others, were consulted or given as much as a courtesy call.

Well move over Erin and Eric. As it turns out local officials and sponsors were not the only ones left out of the loop. The ownership group led by Boston real estate mogul Josh Solomon didn't even bother to inform the big club in Minnesota.

A news blog out of Minneapolis reports that the MLB Twins of which the Rock Cats are a Double A affiliate in the Eastern League were also blindsided by the New Britain to Hartford project. And we're not talking about the busway here.

"The Twins were not consulted about the plans of their Class AA affiliate, the New Britain Rock Cats, to move into a $60 million stadium in Hartford, Conn., for the 2016 season, a deal announced in the state’s capital Wednesday. But Twins assistant general manager Rob Antony said the Twins understand why owner Josh Solomon is making the move, and will likely support him," wrote Phil Miller of the Minneapolis Star Tribune on June 5th

Hartford city officials are giving the Rock Cats owners a pass about their insistence on cloak and dagger negotiations. Hartford's Development Director told Connecticut Public Radio  that development proposals, if they are to come to fruition, need to be  under wraps before moving into the public domain.

So much for planning the use of taxpayer money with transparency. And the Twins -- a long way away from New Britain anyway -- are excusing the Solomons for their pursuit of a new park in secrecy.

The Rock Cats owners, however, may be in for a rude awakening now that the $60 million plan is subject to oversight and the full involvement of stakeholders in the process.

They want to walk away from New Britain's sweetheart deal of a $120,000 or so annual lease because they want even more public subsidies from their current local government.

They see dollar signs and corporate sky boxes at their proposed band box of a publically financed park in downtown Hartford. But if it can't be built, if the project won't survive a legitimate public vetting, they -- the fans and corporate sponsors --will not come.

Mr. Solomon may think he has a back up in Springfield but there are no guarantees there.

In the end the Rock Cats owners may have to come crawling back to hard hittin' New Britain just for a place to play two years hence. If that occurs let's negotiate the deal in the open with the involvement of all stakeholders.

Mayor Hires GOP Chair: SEEC Complaint Involving Peter Steele For Campaigning From Mayor's Office Still Under Investigation

"Oh. What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."  - Sir Walter Scott

In her campaign for Mayor last fall Erin Stewart was critical of Tim O'Brien  for rewarding political friends while in office. As Ms. Stewart said last year, she wanted to "take the city back from political cronyism."

In her first announced appointments Stewart tapped staffers from her youthful campaign team and appointed John Healey, an aide to Republican House Minority Leader Larry Cafero, to be a $90,000+ a year chief of staff. So far so good. New Britain mayors, coming into office just one week after elections, are entitled to assemble an office with people they know  -- even if the hires are political friends.

Two months after the election, however, Erin Stewart's promise to root out cronyism is just that -- a campaign promise not meant to be kept. More important,  her recent and unannounced hire raises new concerns about the use of  government resources for partisan political activity. Republican Town Committee Chair Peter Steele, a perennial GOP candidate, comes in -- "returns" is a better word -- as an aide at $45,000 annually. For Steele this is a pay hike and political reward.  He was a $25,000 a year aide to  Mayor Tim Stewart during his time in office.

GOP Town Chair Peter Steele
(NBRTC)

Here is where candidate Stewart's anti-cronyism pitch falls apart.  In that previous stint in the Mayor's office, Steele may have blatantly used  city resources to do political campaigning on the public's dime in the Mayor's office..

In a complaint filed early last year to the State Elections Enforcement Commission (SEEC) by O'Brien Aide Rosemary Klotz, Klotz asserted that when O'Brien came into office city information technology employees discovered "at least 200 files on city computers that indicate former Mayor Stewart and his staff, including Steele, used the machines to conduct campaign business."  After the complaint was filed SEEC investigators subsequently visited City Hall and collected evidence in the still unresolved case.

The New Britain Herald in a March 26, 2013 story by Lisa Backus, reported:

"Klotz's complaint alleges that the files, which range from campaign fundraising lists to lists on which residents would allow campaign signs on their lawns, were created and maintained on city computers, by Stewart and city staff members Peter Steele, Joe Shilinga and Lisa Carver, on city time."
The dates of when the files were created range from 2003 as Stewart was running a mayoral re-election campaign to 2011 when Stewart ran in a special election to fill a vacancy in the state Senate 6th District. The documents, obtained by the Herald, include drafts and final versions of campaign mailings, scripts for electoral "robo-calls," and "primed" voter lists indicating voter preference."

As of now that SEEC investigation about  using the Mayor's office for partisan Republican work is active and awaits a judgment from the commission.

The hiring of  GOP Chair Steele in and of itself isn't surprising. What is disturbing is that an unresolved case  alleging campaign work in the Mayor's office by former Mayor Stewart and Peter Steele still hangs in the air.

To be true to her high-mindedness against "political cronyism" it's time for Mayor Stewart to publicly announce the hiring of GOP Chair Peter Steele and provide the specifics on what his job functions are at $45,000 a year.

For all the campaign talk of cronyism in the O'Brien administration, every position in the last term had a clear function and every hire was tasked to be working in service to the city, not a political party.

At the very least the public has a right to know what Peter Steele does and when he does it on the City Hall clock.

Mayor Uses On-Line Survey To Encourage Participation: Appointments Pending For Boards and Commissions

Democrats, Republicans and Unaffiliated voters — are welcome to submit their names and qualifications to be considered for a nomination to one of the volunteer boards where citizen oversight and participation can make local government more accountable to residents. Over the last week Mayor Tim O’Brien completed his appointments to the city Police Commission. But 26 other bodies must be filled to have all hands on board for the new administration.

Mayor O’Brien has invited interested residents to submit information via an online survey available at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/93LHK6X

Commissions such as Fire, Parks and Recreation, the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Board of Finance and Taxation, Civil Service/Personnel and Veterans are mandated by the City Charter. Special acts require the Board of Water Commissioners and the Fairview Cemetery Commission to be filled. Other commissions that have been established or re-established by ordinance after Charter change in 2003 include the Arts, Building, City Plan, Aging, Persons with Disabilities, Youth and Family Services, Ethics, Human Rights and Opportunities, Parking, Public Works, Health, Conservation, Ordinance Appeals Board and Housing Board of Appeals. Mayoral appointments will also be made for the Commission on Community & Neighborhood Development and the Municipal Economic Development Agency. Complete information on commissions, their composition and schedules is available at the city’s website: http://www.newbritainct.gov/liv_boards.html

Persons interested in serving may call the Mayor’s office at 860-826-3303.

Reflecting On the Inauguration: Tim O'Brien Wants To Be The "Education" Mayor

Today's swearing in of the new Mayor, Tim O'Brien, and other municipal officials elected last Tuesday was most significant for where it was held as much as what was said at the ceremony.

 The New Britain High Band played the music and the Madrigal Singers sang the National Anthem as classes at the high school, the state's largest, were in full session.

As a legislator O'Brien has been nothing less than passionate about public education and how it can be improved in a city where pressures on keeping the property tax down are paramount. O'Brien has balanced the need for aid to education with solid plans to reduce the reliance on property taxes to pay for quality education.  O'Brien should fervently hope that Governor Malloy, formerly an urban Mayor, will address the school funding issues if he can get out from under the state's recession over the next two years. Among other things O'Brien has called for use of magnet school funding  to give New Britain parents a choice and to develop Sheff-O'Neill regional schools within the city which hosts one of the major teacher colleges in the state in CCSU.  Upwards of 600 New Britain students now journey to Hartford every day to attend the Classical Magnet or the college-oriented Capital Prep.

In the last two City Hall administrations (Pawlak's  and Stewart's 16 years)  the local allocation to the schools has been contentious and successive administrations have skirted or scuttled the requirement for a minimum level of support to education. Less than two years ago the Democratic Council restored more than $1 million  to avoid larger classroom sizes only to have it scuttled by the Mayor.

Unquestionably, Tim O'Brien faces enormous fiscal issues as he takes office amid the deep recession and less in the way of help from Hartford or D.C.  But based on his call at today's inaugural for cooperation and a clear statement that education IS a priority in his administration the terms of the debate have significantly changed.  Education will be a priority and O'Brien intends to be the "Education Mayor".  As the more perceptive politicians in our town have pointed out that is the only and best  strategy to retain and attract middle-class families to stay here and move in from anywhere else.

Beware of Professional Politicians Accusing their Opponents of Being A "Professional Politician"

I once knew a state representative in Lynn, MA who came up with a winning slogan: "Tim Bassett Is A Lousy Politician".  As I recall, the  Lynn lawmaker used the phrase to win  a term or two or three up on Beacon Hill giving  meaning to the use of irony in politics.

That same claim has been resurrected over and over again at every level and every year since I first heard it.

In presidential politics this year Mitt Romney, the former Governor of MA, the  former nominee for U.S. Senate and 2008 presidential contender, is using the line again, having accused his GOP opponents of being "professional politicians" in a recent speech. Shameless.

In New Britain, Mayoral Nominee Tim O'Brien's primary opponent, a multi-term alderman and office seeker, labeled himself the "people's advocate, not professional politician!!!"  Shameless again.

Most voters easily dismiss the "professional politician" charge because it always comes from a professional politician trying to deflect attention from issues and their own credentials.   The use of the tag line, however, is just another way of putting down the pursuit of politics and public service -- a meaningless phrase that further contributes to voter apathy and indifference.
And what's wrong with voting for a professional politician? He or she may know what their doing when they attain public office.

Hearing on FY 12 City Budget May 12th at Slade Middle School

Now that the Stewart administration has put a $216 million budget on the table officials have set a public hearing for Thursday May 12th at 6 p.m.   The hearing will be held at Slade Middle School, not the high school as originally announced.

With federal recovery act funds gone and a best-case scenario of level funding for state education aid, the operative word is "layoff"from the brass at the Board of Education and the Mayor's Office.

At City Hall, Mayor Stewart says $11 million must be saved via layoffs or related reductions in or to the work force.

Should New Britain Follow Tulsa And Consider Mediation at City Hall?

A Mayor and City Council majority are facing a big divide over budgets, policies and ethics.
The verbal disputes get heated with name calling and over the top rhetoric that pit one branch of government against another. All of this is occurring weeks ahead of what will be a very difficult municipal budget process.

The situation sounds a lot like New Britain and the continuing breech between the Mayor, his Republican allies on the Council and the Democratic majority on the Council -- a breech that grew worse when the Mayor lost a special election for state Senate this week and the Council leadership moved for a moratorium on city work for elected officials because of charges of favoritism towards them.

As much as it sounds like New Britain,  similar conflicts are occurring in Tulsa, Oklahoma where the idea of mediation has surfaced as a way to get the city's business done.

The news story from a local TV station quotes a local judge that seemingly intractable differences could be addressed  "in 30 days" if all sides agreed to sit down.

TULSA, OK -- There's talk of reconciliation between Tulsa's Mayor and the City Council.

The mayor and council might go into mediation to talk out their problems - and Thursday both sides took a step in that direction.

With Mayor Bartlett looking on, the City Council quizzed two retired judges about whether they could repair the mayor and council relationship.

"We can get for you what you want for the citizens of Tulsa and we can do that through mediation," Sam Joyner, a retired judge, said.

Sam Joyner and Daniel Boudreau have offered to serve as unpaid mediators and think they can settle the issues.

"If everyone wants to participate in the process, I think we could get it done in 30 days," Joyner said.

A short list of the issues includes the claim that Bartlett and Terry Simonson lied to the council and their ethics complaint against him. There's an allegation the council shouldn't have a city attorney, a lawsuit claiming the council violated the open meetings act and a threatened defamation lawsuit as well.

New Britain should be a big enough town to identify a judge or mediator who would enjoy the confidence of all sides so that the city's business could get done.  It's a certainty that the political and personal differences that have arisen aren't likely to be eliminated. But a reduced level of acrimony, respect for the rules and charter and some greater level of constructive communication between elected officials from opposite parties are in the best interests of the city.

If they are out there judges or diplomats may apply at City Hall.

Tim Stewart As Mayor and Senator? City Charter Says Not So Fast

In declaring his candidacy for the vacant 6th District State Senate seat on January 7th, Mayor Tim Stewart said at his announcement he "would not rule out the possibility of keeping both jobs" if elected to the Senate.

While Stewart  may want to hold both elective offices and the salaries that go with them,  the New Britain City Charter says otherwise in Article V. Section 5.

The Mayor shall devote the full time necessary to the duties of the office and shall have no other occupation during the term of office and shall keep the office open during such hours of each business day as the Ordinances of the City shall direct.

Unlike municipalities with full-time city managers and mayor/legislative bodies, New Britain requires nothing less than a full-time mayor to manage a $220 million budget and "keep the office open." The last revision of the city charter gave even more powers to the executive branch, making moonlighting at the State Capitol a stretch whether the charter states "no other occupation" or not.

Out of the Senate campaign starting gate, however, Stewart is showing no small amount of hubris in suggesting he could do both jobs and adequately serve the people of the 6th District and the city at the same time.

The charter prohibition aside,  city residents deserve and require a full-time CEO.

The over-reaching Mayor would have been wise to check with the corporation counsel before saying he'd keep a public office twofer under consideration.

Will City Avoid Layoffs To Frontline Education and Public Safety Jobs?

 From New Britain Democrat
 http://newbritaindemocrat.blogspot.com/2010/05/muncipal-budget-hearing-monday-may-17th.html


The full weight of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression is falling on the city’s budget makers in shaping a fiscal plan for the year that begins July 1st. Few cities or towns in Connecticut and the nation are exempt. And with Connecticut’s over reliance on property taxes the fiscal crisis falls most heavily on cities such as New Britain.

If there is one item across all city departments and divisions that should not be cut it is jobs – specifically: the frontline jobs that are integral to government functioning effectively. In times like these layoff proposals are inevitable because personnel represents such a huge junk of expenditures.

Maintaining direct service positions, however, should be the priority for the Mayor, the Common Council, department heads and labor unions as all parties look at tough options, including an increase in the mill rate. Maintaining frontline staff is all the harder because state aid won’t grow by much, and not enough federal stimulus dollars have been appropriated to bring local governments through the recession.

Eliminating municipal jobs, including the patrolman on the street, the on-duty fire fighter and the teacher in the classroom, certainly represents the easiest path to save the millions of dollars that will be necessary to hold the line on regressive taxes. But there is a direct correlation between layoffs of direct-service personnel and the reduction of essential services – a prospect that city residents will find untenable and an outcome that will prove more costly to the city over the long term. Cutting teachers means crowded classrooms. Cutting public safety personnel can lead to longer response times in an emergency. Pink slipping inspectors or depriving the city law office of sufficient legal counsel could even mean less revenue because of insufficient enforcement of what is due the city.

It is to be expected that the Mayor and Common Council will implement standard austerity measures for this year: hiring and spending freezes, consolidated purchasing between City Hall and the School District, eliminating the non-essential wherever possible -- ultimately raising the mill rate as the last resort as the Mayor has proposed.

All of these efforts, however, will not be enough to preserve services, avoid lay offs and minimize a tax hike. To implement a no-layoff budget the city and unions will have to strike deals through good-faith bargaining. Temporary furloughs are one option. State employees are in the middle of giving up seven pay days over two years along with other other short-term concessions that turned into job savers.

Municipal employees may be willing to step up, but only if management steps up first for the shared sacrifices that will be needed in fiscal year 2011 to preserve jobs and deliver city services.

There’s no guarantee that it’ll work completely, but setting the goal of a no-layoff municipal budget will serve the city and its residents best.

Remembering Bill Kerr, CCSU Politics Prof; Tribute Saturday, February 27th at New Britain Museum

A celebration of the life of Charles W. (Bill) Kerr, formerly of New Britain, will be held at the New Britain Museum of American Art on Saturday February 27, 2010, at 1 p.m.


Kerr, 78, died on February 2, 2010 in his home at Sun City, Hilton Head, SC. A Missouri native, Kerr was a professor emeritus of Central Connecticut State University (CCSU) and served a Chair of the Political Science Department at CCSU.

In the early ‘80s I first met Bill Kerr and his wife Marietta at a meeting of the Caucus of Connecticut Democrats (CCD) a few years before moving to New Britain. Thanks to connecting with Kerr outside of the city, I got a quick introduction to the New Britain Democratic establishment when I moved here and was fast-tracked into local politics – winning a seat on the Democratic Town Committee in ’86, and beginning what’s turned into 24 years of being involved in campaigns and elections.

Meeting Kerr at the CCD – the liberal group that in its heyday mobilized Dems for direct primaries, civil rights and an end to the war in Vietnam – was no accident. Bill Kerr, the partisan, was an unabashed progressive – supporting liberal candidates and favoring groups such as the Legislative Electoral Action Program (LEAP) and the Connecticut Citizen Action Group (CCAG).

Though I was never in one of his classes, Kerr, the teacher, had keen insights and possessed a wry and dry sense of humor about politics that you would have had to be around to appreciate. Those attributes, not to mention a Ph.D in political science, commanded respect from the left and right, and from Rs and Ds in Connecticut.

At CCSU, Kerr had a good run of organizing conferences and workshops, bringing experts and pols of all stripes together. One year it would Cong. Nancy Johnson. The next it would be Barney Frank. He organized these forums under his Institute for Practical Politics (IPP), a fitting name at an institution drawing many sons and daughters of the working class to become teachers and professionals or, in some cases, local and state elected officials. Kerr’s Institute was no high falutin’ think tank, but a series of “practical” sessions among academics and citizens on policy and political strategy. Kerr’s knowledge of CT politics and players always made IPP conferences informative and helped extend his teaching of politics and government well beyond the classroom.

When someone we know and respect dies it can be a comfort to say we are better persons for having known that person. In Bill Kerr’s case, I and I’d guess many of his students would say we are better citizens for having known him as fellow activists or students.

-- John McNamara

Trash Talk From Mayor Sets Wrong Tone At Start of New Term

Mayor Stewart began a new term this week with an official call for an "end to political warfare" between his office and the City Council, according to Courant coverage

And there was some high-minded rhetoric from Stewart to get things going:

"Today we stand at the threshold of becoming a new and exciting city, one that will be the centerpiece of central Connecticut — at the crossroads of prosperity and the future home of new and emerging workplaces for our citizens to grow and prosper. Our city has seen days of glory and days of decline, but surely our best days lie ahead of us."

At Thursday's first Council meeting Stewart urged civility, according to Jim Craven's story in the Herald under the headline "Stewart Demands Civility".

But Stewart's admonitions to the Democratic City Council were quickly contradicted in a series of published quotes from the Mayor in both daily newspapers: Council leaders Phil Sherwood and Mike Trueworthy are "hacks" , "carpetbaggers" and "liars" who will obstruct his agenda over the next few years.

In a story by Don Stacom in the Courant, Stewart didn't hold anything back:

"I don't like Michael [Trueworthy], but I can talk with him. Phil Sherwood? He's a carpetbagger and a partisan hack. I don't like him and I don't respect him — never did and never will," Stewart said last week.

Stewart and Republicans call out Democrats on the Council for going after department heads and showing disrespect to developers; a questionable charge when it is the obligation of the Council to oversee budget and policy matters and to ask pointed questions when you are committing city resources to major investments. Democrats assert that the Mayor's office is over the top in keeping a tight lid on public information that should be available to them.

The Mayor, perhaps realizing the discord his words were sowing, backtracked late in the week and "apologized" for remarks he attributed to the heat of the campaign. His verbal shots at Sherwood, however,("nobody I would break bread with") continued. And in a serious blow to mayor-council cooperation at the start of a new term, Stewart shut the door on regular meetings with Council leadership to work on city business.

At this early point in the new term, relations between the administration and council are no better off than they were during last spring's budget debate and in the run up to the municipal campaign.

At the time New Britain Democrat observed:

Some observers may say that Stewart has to be on guard and keep his cards close to his vest all the time because of the dominance of Democrats on the Council. That assumes, however, there is not an ounce of good will from Democrats and that the partisan divide will never be bridged. But voters, who've opted for divided government in recent elections, want and expect their elected officials to end the campaign the day after the election and govern without partisan sniping at every turn. Politically, the Mayor has benefited from a "me against them" strategy; he may feel that partisanship is the winning strategy, even if that strategy is not always a good way to govern.

Sherwood and the Democrats issued their own calls for cooperation and appeared more surprised than angry at Stewart's post-election diatribes.

"The challenges to the city are so severe and numerous. I don't think we have to agree on everything, but we can be less suspicious of each other," Sherwood told the Courant. Rep. Tim O'Brien, the Democratic mayoral nominee, issued a conciliatory statement pledging to continue work on the issues he raised in the campaign.

The Mayor's intemperate remarks, perhaps fueled by Democrats' continued dominance onthe Council, can't help his administration nor the city amid a difficult recession and the "challenges" everyone agrees we face.

Although shuttle diplomacy is not often raised in local politics, the prospect of a continuing City Hall stalemate left one observer wondering if there are influential individuals outside of the process who could bring the Mayor and Council leadership into a room to get down to the business of governing and set aside the campaigning for a while.

State Rep. O'Brien Poised To Take Mayoral Plunge

State Rep. Tim O’Brien (D-24) is set to make an announcement on his political plans this year at an announcement on July 17th to be held at the Pulaski Democratic Club, 89 Grove Street, from 5:30 to 8 p.m.

O’Brien formed an exploratory committee earlier this year to consider running for Mayor and he has since been meeting with voters and groups to gauge and build support for a possible mayoral run.

According to the Democratic Town Committee (DTC), no other Democrat has expressed an interest in the running for Mayor in the run up to endorsements to be held later this month.

O’Brien, a former councilor at large, was elected to the state House in 2002 and has made clean elections, property tax reform and equitable funding for cities cornerstones of his legislative efforts.

If nominated, O'Brien is expected to take on Republican Timothy Stewart who is expected to seek a fourth two-year term in the heavily Democratic city where Democrats currently dominate the City Council 13 to 2 and hold all state legislative seats. Stewart, a firefighter on leave of absence from his job as fire marshal, defeated Democrat Lucian Pawlak in 2003 riding a wave of anti-tax sentiment when property valuations soared by 40 percent. Stewart has successfully played a "me against them" theme in subsequent elections against Democratic opponents.

O'Brien has been a leading advocate in the legislature of comprehensive property tax reform that would reduce the property tax as a levy to pay for schools and other local services. During his tenure as Vice Chair of the GAE Committee, public financing and clean elections law was finally adopted. A blogger, O'Brien initiated the move by public officials late last year to seek the help of the state Department of Economic Development to save the New Britain Herald when the bankrupt Journal Register Company was ready to shut down the Herald and Bristol Press. In January, publisher Michael Schroeder emerged to revive the local dailies following the DECD's efforts to identify buyers for the local papers.

In considering a run for municipal office, O'Brien is breaking the mold for New Britain Democrats over the last generation. Elected Democrats have often moved from city government to the state legislature but not the other way around.

New Britain Democrats are scheduled to endorse their candidates on July 28th.

Stewart's double standard on state budget priorities

Mayor Tim Stewart has lashed out at New Britain's all Democratic legislative delegation for reductions in local aid made in a Democratic state budget plan presented last week.

Stewart, facing the prospect of higher property taxes in a bad economy, delivered a "broadside" that takes aim at State Rep. John Geragosian (D-25), the House appropriations Chair, and the entire delegation for a proposed reduction in state aid from casino revenue.

Gambling dollars, originally sold as a means of supporting education, have become another component of state aid to cities and towns since a portion of income from the slots started coming in the early 1990s. The casino revenue is another form of payments in lieu of taxes since the two tribes with casinos are considered sovereign under federal law.

In a statement released this week Stewart takes issue with a reduction in gambling aid in a Democratic plan that addresses a confirmed $2.7 billion shortfall in Rell's original budget proposal presented last February. "Stewart said he was extremely disappointed upon learning the proposal would mean a reduction of $865,000 in state funding for the city," according to the Herald's coverage.

Stewart's complaint, however, rings hollow when you compare his response to the Democratic budget plan with his effusive praise of Governor Rell's budget. In a joint statement last month Stewart and Bridgeport's Democratic mayor, Bill Finch, praised Rell's budget for not reducing allocations for schools under the Educational Cost Sharing (ECS) formula.

What Stewart and Finch forgot to mention was that most other forms of state aid to their cities was cut by substantial amounts in Rell's proposed budget. With her balance sheet more than $2 billion out of whack, you would think Rell could have preserved other forms of local aid. Rell, for example, reduced PILOT funds (payments in lieu of taxes for CCSU, hospitals and state agency property) by $1.6 million. Overall, Rell's numbers give New Britain 2.2% less by reducing PILOT, casino, capital improvement and town aid for roads, not to mention elimination of state services that benefit city residents.

The Mayor conveniently ignores the features of Rell's plan that would severely compromise New Britain's ability to deliver essential services. And Stewart, a Republican, has shown no inclination to ask his Republican Governor to work for a fairer deal for the city.

The Democratic legislative delegation remains a favorite target of Stewart's derisive comments and partisan charges. It's a refrain all too familiar for Stewart who has sniped at legislators in prior years. For all of Stewart's years in office, the delegation and Legislature took on Rell and significantly upped state aid to the city when the economy was better and state revenues weren't dropping off a cliff. Stewart has been the chief political beneficiary of using state aid to hold the line on property taxes thanks to the lawmakers he is so quick to criticize.

A comparison of Rell's proposed budgets and those adopted through the Legislature has a consistent outcome: state aid amounts would have been a lot worse for New Britain had Governor Rell prevailed in the last state budget. And they would be a lot worse for New Britain this year if Tim Stewart's friend in the corner office of the State Capitol has her way.

The reality of this budget cycle, as one state lawmaker put it, is that the Governor and Legislature have "to pick their poison" to balance the budget and maintain services. Stewart's "blame game" tactics are predictable. But given the severity of the budget crisis, it would be a good time for the mayor to set aside partisan sniping and work cooperatively with the delegation. Time is running short as the city and state face a June deadline to adopt budgets for the fiscal year that begins on July 1.

The Courant: Then and Now

I had the privilege of raising money for Hartford's Camp Courant back in the early 1990s. For one year I walked to a small cubicle assigned me in advertising at the newspaper's 285 Broad Street offices to seek support for the century-old free day camp serving thousands of Hartford's 5-12 year olds. Every day I would go down a corridor passing stacks and stacks of the newspapers left for easy reference -- an experience akin to a kid in a candy store for someone like me whose first job out of journalism school was covering city hall, state government and anything else newsworthy for a weekly paper. In the early 1990s the Courant didn't publish just one or two editions, but more than 10 different "zoned" editions. Bureaus from the Shoreline to the Northwest hills were plentiful and the "oldest continuously published newspaper" in the country probably had three or four times the number of people in editorial and news than is the case now. Before online news took hold, CT's biggest daily offered a news digest every day at 3 p.m. faxed on one sheet to subscribers who wanted tomorrow's headline and stories a day early. I remember senior managers saying that lay offs just didn't happen at a paper that was so dominant in its circulation area.

All of this is a sentimental way of saying that things have changed drastically for our metropolitan newspaper of record. Until a few years ago, even as the internet became pervasive ,the Courant was a public utility for news and commerce that thoroughly "penetrated" the marketplace of ideas and business.

The business models of the linear age and the increasing concentration of newspapers into a few corporate hands are decimating what's left of newsrooms -- last week's Courant layoffs of State House reporter Mark Pazniokas and others being the latest blow to good reporting and decent coverage in the capital city. You would think the Courant would want to sell off some physical assets, or rent some of the empty cubicles on Broad Street to maintain that kind of experience and talent, if only for a while longer.

Here in New Britain the dismantling of the metropolitan newspaper is complete. The bureau and home to a string of good journalists through the years (Lisa Chedekel, Joanne Klimkiewicz, Mike McIntire to name a few) on South Street quietly closed, consolidated to a regional Middletown office. Gone is the coverage of important City Council meetings and other government actions on a regular basis. The reporters who are left are gamely covering many more towns and doing what they can to deliver the news regionally and with less space in the print edition.

To some extent the revival of The Herald and its new local ownership has abated a total news blackout of what's happening in politics and government.

And there is still the largely untapped potential of local journalism to define itself in cyberspace: "The ease of blogging and exchanges of opinions online are addressing some gaps in the greatly diminished coverage of the dailies. It's also true that there is infinitely more news and opinion available globally for any interested reader," a recent blog noted about saving the hometown dailies.

But the situation remains difficult for an effective "Fourth Estate" locally and regionally. The further erosion of reporting and coverage by the Courant is a painful reminder that a void in how we keep the politicians honest and stay informed will get worse before it gets better.

(You can make a donation to Camp Courant at the above referenced website. It's a nonprofit bearing the newspaper's name that is a very worthy cause in Hartford)

Rell's Local Aid: Placing More Burdens On Cities

The mayors of Bridgeport and New Britain have forged a bipartisan alliance to praise Gov. Jodi Rell's budget package for level funding of education aid to cities and towns. All cities and towns will get the same amount for the single largest local expense item -- the schools.

According to a New Britain Herald op-ed by Bill Finch (D-Bridgeport) and Tim Stewart (R-New Britain) and James Craven's story sharing their togetherness, Rell's proposal is a good start to the budget process for their towns. To be sure a status quo Educational Cost Sharing (ECS) for all 169 cities and towns is a good idea. It will mitigate somewhat the annual tug of war between city halls and boards of education.

But a closer look at Rell's state aid formula shows that cities lose out in a big way compared to their suburban neighbors. At a February 19th Democratic Town Committee meeting on state aid and the federal stimulus package State Rep. Peter Tercyak (D-26) pointed out why Rell's budget -- estimated to be $2 billion out of balance in the early going -- tilts against cities and their residents more than suburbia.

Cities such as New Britain have always relied on payments in lieu of taxes -- PILOT funds -- to offset the presence of state property, hospitals and agencies in their towns. Otherwise, taxable land is tax free when a state- or nonprofit owns it. The economically distressed cities, by and large, house the bulk of tax exempt property; the more affluent towns do not. PILOT funds, though not providing a dollar for dollar exchange back to the community, offset the presence of tax-exempt property with much needed revenue.

Rell's budget slashes PILOT funds by double digit percentages. In Bridgeport, the Governor would cut PILOT money for colleges and hospitals from $11,200,500 to $10,041,445, a 10.35% decline. Aid for state-owned property in goes from $2,676,768 to $2,450,950, an 8.44% drop.

According to the percentage decreases, New Britain takes a bigger hit than Bridgeport on PILOT money. The current $3,561,936 for colleges and hospitals will drop down to $2,793,464, 21.57% less; payments for state-owned property go from $4,255,399 to $3,407,080, 19.94% less.

While Rell's 0% decrease on ECS is welcome news for Bridgeport and New Britain; it's equally welcome news for every town, rich and poor. Finch and Stewart may as well have been the mayors of New Canaan and Avon in offering praise for Rell's budget.

The PILOT funding shows that in tough economic times Rell gives the rich towns a better deal than economically stressed cities. It's just one more disadvantage that cities face and the long driveway towns won't in paying for and delivering essential services.

That's something Finch and Stewart can't be so happy about and didn't mention in their strong praise of Rell for level ECS funding. The Legislature now has the hard task of setting aside Rell's fuzzy math and dealing with the most difficult budget cycle since the early 1990s.

Ethics Flap Prompts Billy Mac To Resign From Board; Salvio's Complaint Called Another "Fishing Expedition"

The resignation of former Mayor William McNamara from the city ethics commission adds another partisan twist to the sorry state of affairs on a board charged with keeping municipal officials honest.

The Courant and Herald covered McNamara's move this past week.

Billy Mac, a supporter of the incumbent Mayor and the emcee at Stewart's inaugurals, derided a decision by the Common Council not to accept a ruling against Ald. Paul Catanzaro for participating in a Council discussion related to work at the Parks and Recreation Department. Republican Ald. Lou Salvio, a prolific filer of official complaints against Democrats, brought the original charge. On the first go around the ethics commission threw out the allegation. But it got a second life as the Herald's James Craven reports:

A quorum of the commission dismissed the complaint 2-1, but on Dec. 22, commissioner Jill Kemp, a Republican, made a motion to reconsider the dismissal. During a Jan. 21 meeting, the commission heard testimony and added two letters to its investigation. After reviewing the material, Republican commissioners William Dworski, Jill Kemp and Carmelo Rodriguez, along with Democrats Kemp and McNamara, voted unanimously that Catanzaro be reprimanded for two violations.

The reconsideration has brought charges from Democrats that Salvio openly violated the ethics rules himself by disclosing information that is supposed to remain under wraps as part of the ethics process. And then there is the matter of Billy Mac himself. Members of the ethics commission, while they can contribute to political candidates, may not endorse or campaign for a candidate. By all accounts, former Mayor McNamara has been a public supporter of Stewart during his re-election bids.

All of this tit for tat, of course, doesn't have much to do with grand lists, fiscal prudence, essential services and keeping the city afloat during one of the worst recession's in anybody's memory. Come to think of it, it may not have much to do with conflicts of interest or ethics either.

The allegation made against Catanzaro raises again the issue of what elected officials who are connected to the city by reason of employment can and can't do in their elected capacities. This two-hatted group includes Mayor Stewart (on loan from the fire department), Alderwoman Tonilynn Collins (water department)and Catanzaro
(a rank and filer at parks & rec).

Salvio alleges that Catanzaro's Council vote to have the city perform a landscaping job instead of a private contractor created a conflict because as an employee of Parks & Rec Catanzaro "would be benefiting himself." Catanzaro, a city alderman with responsibilities on budget matters, says that he felt obligated to support the city doing the work "to save money." He went further by saying he would not be involved in doing the work that was estimated as a two-day job with $120 in labor costs. But that's not Catanzaro's decision. It would be up to Parks Director Bill DeMaio or a supervisor to assign a worker to do the job, including Catanzaro if they so chose. And Catanzaro should have left well enough alone by excusing himself when the ethics report arrived this month.

The real issue is whether Catanzaro stood to directly gain financially from participating in the city versus private contractor vote. Did Salvio find a smoking gun? Was there a documented request by Catanzaro to his bosses that he wanted the work for himself and/or his union? The answer appears to be no, lending credence to the claim made by North-Oak Street neighborhood activist Rich Marzi at a February Council meeting that Salvio is engaging in "a fishing expedition." Salvio admitted as much at a January 21st ethics hearing on the matter by saying he "now believes Catanzaro would not have benefited directly as a result of his actions," according to a Herald story in the hearing.

This Salvio complaint follows a string of other complaints against Democratic members of the Common Council since Mayor Stewart, using his authority under a new charter, appointed a new ethics commission in 2004 at the start of his administration. A January 2004 Herald story "Stewart picks ethics panel" by Penny Riordan points to a Republican strategy of complaints aimed at Democratic aldermen and unionized city employees from the earliest days of Stewart's administration. Rather than take a bipartisan approach to appointments, Stewart took absolute control. Not surprisingly, the Stewart-appointed commission has been unanimous in casting aspersions against Democratic aldermen.

The Commission also turned aside a complaint early on that, as an elected mayor connected to the city fire department, Stewart was required to file a statement with the ethics board so he could carry out his elected duties while on leave from regular city employment. Stewart never filed a statement despite specific requirements for a mayor that are set forth in the code of ethics.

Another complaint that alleged Stewart intervened in fire department personnel matters was also rejected by the ethics panel. Subsequently, Stewart and the city have lost labor board and court rulings by denying Firefighter Ed Preece a promotion despite Preece' high exam scores. Preece was replaced by lower scoring candidates connected to the Mayor. And the case has cost the city a chunk of change for nothing in return.

If nothing else the controversies at the ethics board during the Stewart years have undermined a Commission that needs to be set up above the political frays that are an inevitable part of the process.

There are well-intended arguments that city employees should not be allowed to run for municipal offices as is the case with the state and state legislators. But that is not the case now. Stewart, Catanzaro and Collins were elected by voters with policy making and budget roles. They can and should recuse themselves if they or family members stands to directly benefit from their actions. Otherwise, let them govern.

By applying that standard, the latest complaint by Salvio has all the earmarks of a partisan and spontaneous attack on a fellow council member. Salvio's actions have been aided and abetted by Mayor Stewart who keeps the make up and structure of the local ethics board under his thumb. He can go to work at City Hall knowing that he and members of his administration are above any ethics problems because he has the votes to make it so.

Billy Mac is right about one thing: it's a waste of time to serve on the current ethics commission. The situation, however, leaves the city without a process to handle the real conflicts of interest that may be lurking at City Hall.

State Republicans Retreat To New Britain

The Republican State Central Committee, hit hard by losses in state House races last year, left Hartford for New Britain's A.H. Harris Building in December in office space that is "twice as big as our current digs and provides us with some exciting new opportunities," according to a GOP blog. The opportunities, say the Republicans, involve a facility big enough for in-house training classes "so that our candidates can improve their communication skills, learn about web-based tools...and engage in discussions on key policy questions with the smartest people we can find."

In Scott Whipple's recent Herald story on the Republicans' move, State Chair Chris Healy explained:

"New Britain is really the heart of the state..Not just geographically. It's emblematic of the kind of hard-working, family-oriented, community-involved city where we want to be.....The city has its own notable Republicans: Mayor [Tim] Stewart, Nancy Johnson and Tom Meskill. We didn't need to be in the capital city, yet we wanted to stay in metro Hartford."

Nonetheless New Britain seems an unlikely place for the state GOP to locate an office. There are 18,072 Democrats here (12/31/2008) compared to about 3,699 Republicans -- part of the surge that favored Democrats everywhere in 2008. When unaffiliateds (11,749) are counted, Republicans account for little more than 11 percent of the electorate. Republicans would counter that they hold the Mayor's office with incumbent Tim Stewart, who rode into office when residents were hit with 40% revaluation hikes a few years ago. Stewart certainly didn't get elected because he is a Republican; the electorate in a divided government mood voted the incumbent out for ignoring assessment hikes in a property tax system that state Republicans, by and large, want to maintain. Two years ago, however, Stewart's expected coattails didn't materialize as the GOP lost ground on the Common Council. His state party's presence is also a double-edged sword for the Mayor. The only party affiliation you'll find on his lawn signs is "Democrat" (as in "Democrats for Stewart"). The same could be said for former Congresswoman and New Britain resident Nancy Johnson who finally lost in 2006 when her Republican antics and actions in Washington finally outpaced her moderate, bi-partisan tone back home, complete with the "Democrats for Johnson" lawn signs all over town in her recent elections.

The often acerbic and confrontational Healy appears to be borrowing a page from the national strategy of former Democratic National Chair Howard Dean whose 50-state strategy is credited with turning red states to blue in the Presidential and congressional races last year. He says his party's candidates need to get support from all parts of the state, not just Fairfield County where even the last of the GOP members of Congress in New England, Chris Shays, lost last year.

Healy's challenges, however, run much deeper than finding and training candidates to run for office. In the Herald story, he unwittingly lets us in on the problem with the Republican brand:

"I'm not worried. We have plenty of talented people who want to run. We've got Republican mayors in Danbury, Middletown and New Britain with ability and passion. Democrats will always have people who want to make a career out of politics. A lot of Republicans come from the real world; they're not interested in government."

They're not interested in government. That statement provides as good an explanation as any of the mounting foreign and domestic troubles of the country with Republicans in charge of the White House and Congress over these last eight years. You might say Bush and the Republicans "weren't interested in government working effectively," leading to the train wrecks left to the Obama administration to solve now.

And in New Britain, Healy couldn't be thinking of his Mayor, Tim Stewart, with his lifelong career in government in the Fire Department. Nor his local party chair, Paul Carver, who left the private sector years ago to take a Rowland patronage appointment to the DPUC. Actions speak louder than words, and phony arguments that always tear down the public sector can't help our current difficulties when public and private solutions are needed for the recovery. Whatever happened to that well-known Republican Abraham Lincoln who famously said the role of government is "to do for the people what they can't do for themselves."

Healy's mantra and that of many of his Republican brethren remains that the individual is more important than the community; that private interest and gain should always trump the public interest even in these dire economic times. Witness the incredible display of selfishness by Republican House members last week in Washington: not one GOPer voted for a federal stimulus and reinvestment package that would reach down and provide some measure of relief to local governments, schools and the unemployed. Better to fork over more tax breaks to the wealthy and continue Wall Street welfare; promise that all of the government largesse will eventually trickle down to the rest of us living in Hooverville.

The acerbic Healy knows that that message will never sell in New Britain. He must know that a conservative Republicanism serving the interests of corporate giants over Main Street and small business is morally and politically bankrupt. The only thing left to do is to keep tearing down Democrats without offering much in the way of solutions or programs in return. In his new New Britain digs, Healy joins kindred spirits with the likes of Mayor Stewart, Ald. Lou Salvio and Chairman Paul Carver who could write a book on petty politics. Instead of reaching out to govern on a bipartisan basis between elections, their tactics frequently involve personal attacks, using official complaint processes for partisan ends and losing one Freedom of Information case after another to keep public information from Democrats and everyone else.

Let the battle for the hearts and votes of New Britain voters begin in 2009. Meanwhile, New Britain Democrats welcome the state Republican office to New Britain.

And kudos to State Party Chair Chris Healy for demonstrating that New Britain is not a bad place to re-locate a business or a group seeking to rebound from a disaster.

Photo Credit: http://forwardliberally.wordpress.com/2008/11/21/more-from-the-republican-civil-wars/

Back to the Future: Divisive Bozek Gets GOP Nod For State Senate

Tom Bozek, the former state senator and self-described "conservative Democrat", wants a soapbox to spew his racially divisive views and bizarre ideas on shrinking New Britain via the elimination of low-income households.

The New Britain Republican Party has obliged Bozek, anointing him as the Republican nominee for state Senate against Democrat Donald DeFronzo, who ousted Bozek from the state Senate in 2002 behind a broad-based coalition of Democrats and Unaffiliated voters. In that 2002 contest Bozek bitterly blamed more than 1,200 newly registered Hispanic voters for his loss.

Republican Town Chair Paul Carver sheepishly told the New Britain Herald on September 27th "nobody came forward but Tom. He's got a conservative record, and the committee did not want the seat to go unchallenged."

Bozek's nomination points to the sorry state of the local GOP. Of 3,600 Republicans in New Britain and a few thousand more in Berlin, local Republicans couldn't field any fresh, conservative blood to oppose DeFronzo.

Bozek, who still occupies a seat on the Democratic Town Committee in District 1, revived his tirades against "the professional poor" and "minorities" last year in an unsuccessful, independent bid for Councillor at Large. According to the Herald, Bozek is attacking public housing, Section 8 rental stipends and Senator DeFronzo again.

The 2008 Bozek isn't hiding his racially charged rhetoric and campaign against the poor:

"We have 11,000 kids, when we should have 7,000."

"These people destroy these places (public housing). They are 80 percent minorities...They can't make friends with people in their own neighborhoods."

While Bozek has been espousing an anti-public housing and anti-family housing stance for most of the last two decades, Senator DeFronzo points out that Bozek never introduced a bill on the public housing issue while in the state Senate. There is also a bit of irony in a candidate such as Bozek attacking the "professional poor" He is a big beneficiary of taxpayers as he cleverly worked the system to become "a double- or triple dipper" in receipt of public pensions -- the last being arranged by former Republican leader Lou DeLuca who employed Bozek briefly to qualify him for more income on the public's dime.

The nomination of Bozek by Republicans may ensure that the party filled a line on the November ballot. However, they are getting a candidate whose divisiveness and appeals to the lowest common denominator may shrink their numbers even more in 2008.

Salvio's Latest Salvo: Putting His Pet Projects and Partisanship Ahead of the Public Interest

It's bad enough that New Britain's share of federal community development grant funds have been dwindling for a long time. Mid-sized U.S. cities such as New Britain used to count on a bigger share of CDBG dollars to address neighborhood and housing issues and to deliver community services that the local property tax would not support.

"Twenty five years ago New Britain possessed more than double the CDBG funds it has today," noted NB Politicus in a May 2007 post. "When inflation is taken into account the city has no more than a third of the resources it once had to address blight and community development
issues. Of CDBG dollars currently available, much of current funding is dispersed to human and social service agencies because the federal and state pipeline for their services has been cut to the bone as well."

New Britain's share has shrunk to $1.9 million in the current fiscal year. Those dollars are sometimes used to fend off blight and improve neighborhoods. Increasingly the federal allocation has also been used to fill gaps in the budgets of community agencies and social service organizations.

That's why the recent action of GOP Councilman Lou Salvio is so disturbing. Salvio, whose modus operandi has been to use up public resources by filing official complaints against those he disagrees with, complained to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)about City Council approval of CDBG allocations.

Salvio's latest political salvo was directed at three Democratic Council members who are affiliated or related to persons affiliated with the Human Resource Agency (HRA) and the United Labor Agency, two organizations traditionally in line to get federal dollars because of their anti-poverty and job development services. The three Council members Michael Trueworthy, Toni Lynn Collins and Paul Catanzaro, appropriately abstained from voting on any funds directed to those agencies. In fact, Catanzaro who is Chair of HRA's Board of Directors, was absent. No conflict on their part. The Council acted in accordance with the regulations.

Salvio, who initially signalled unhappiness with the allocations because one or more of his pet projects did not get funded, complained to HUD over the failure of the city to file a perfunctory waiver to HUD about the Council abstentions. The irony is that the Stewart administration, which uses Salvio as its Council mouthpiece, failed to file the required waiver. This omission opened the door to Salvio's complaint and a divisive move to derail legitimately voted allocations on a technicality.

Maybe it's time for Mayor Stewart and his Chief of Staff Lisa Carver to put a muzzle on their Council point man when his actions serve no ethical or public purpose. Heaven knows they know how to muzzle city departments when the press and public come calling for information that should not require an FOI order to be shared.

Building Commission Update: A Phony Price Tag For Access To Code Violators

Once upon a time municipal government in New Britain had a Building Commission – a five-member body that oversaw code enforcement, permits and reviewed variance requests. Every month appointed citizens reviewed inspections, monitored activities and made requests of inspectors if they knew of any code problems.

For safe housing advocates the building enforcement has been made worse by the elimination of a certificate of occupancy law that went out before the old commission was eliminated.

Charter change did away with the Building Commission six years ago and City Councils ever since have failed to adopt a building board to deal with persistent blight, abandonment and code issues. While the current Charter did eliminate many boards and commissions it gave the Mayor and Council power to establish them by ordinance instead of the lengthy referendum process at any time.

At long last the City Council is set to reinstitute the commission at its July meeting in the aftermath of laudable press coverage by the New Britain Herald’s Rick Guinness on code problems, squatters and evictions at properties owned by out-of-town landlords. Guinness and the Herald, despite their limits at the corporate owned hometown daily, are turning in some of the best local journalism in years on the housing issue. More on that in a subsequent post.

Although Mayor Stewart has been against reinstituting the commission, he should work with the Council and, as the appointing authority, give appointees an opportunity to improve code enforcement and housing policy that has been neglected for a number of years. The reality is a new Building Commission will be as effective as the Mayor wants it to be.

The need for more oversight of the Building Department and more accountability in this area of services was evident at the July 9th Council meeting.

Councillors were told that it will take up to $40,000 just to put reports on building-code violations together from the building and health departments and the Fire Marshall’s office. According to the Herald story, “finding out what actions have been taken against building-code violators will cost the city $40,000” in administrative and overtime costs. To anyone outside the City Hall bureaucracy, the figure sounds preposterous. It raises the issue of whether accurate logs and records are being kept on a day to day basis at these enforcement departments. The Council appropriately rejected the $40,000 to get the information, but you have to wonder whether they were snookered into believing that it would or should take that much to get data that should be available at their next Council meeting. “Along with giving the $40,000 estimate, the city plan, fire, health and licenses, permits and inspections departments said they will begin keeping better track, electronically, of violation information,” the Herald reported. That admission alone illustrates the need for more citizen oversight over a department that, after the Police Department, fields the highest number of complaints and disputes from residents.

Put simply, a dubious price tag to get some basic data that should already be available has been thrown in the way of improving enforcement and making a Building Commission an effective tool to reduce blight.