An open government complaint that may have helped sway the outcome of the Democratic mayoral primary was dismissed this month by the state Freedom of Information Commission.
The panel ruled that the “script” that former city Councilor Ellen Zoppo wrote to guide Mayor William Stortz and most of her colleagues through a crucial meeting about downtown almost a year ago did not violate open government laws.
There was never a secret session “to plan how to manipulate discussion” at the January 4 public meeting or to dictate its outcome, the commission ruled.
The state’s decision clears Zoppo of wrongdoing in the case brought by resident Jay Meisinger.
Zoppo, the Democrat’s endorsed mayoral candidate, lost a September 11 primary to challenger Art Ward, a longtime city councilor who went on to win the general election in November. She no longer holds a political position.
The case arose because of an Ordinance Committee meeting in January that Zoppo chaired.
Zoppo wrote out a detailed “script” for the meeting that gave the City Council’s approval to the new downtown corporation. She later called it “talking points” and expressed the wish that she’d never used the word script.
In its ruling, the FOI Commission said that Zoppo’s “use of the term ‘script’ and the level of detail that the script contains reasonably gave rise to the complainant’s suspicion of a secretly manipulated meeting and pre-determined decisions.”
But the panel determined that Zoppo and other city leaders did not actually orchestrate the session improperly.
However, the commission advised Zoppo and the city “to re-evaluate such use of scripted procedure and discussion in public meetings” in the future.
The panel said that it believed Zoppo “prepared the script in an effort to keep the January 4, 2007 meeting ‘on topic’ and to make sure that council members would have an opportunity to express their views on the agenda topics in an orderly manner” rather than to dictate the outcome.
Zoppo gave copies of the script to Stortz and to every city councilor except Ward, who was deliberately iced out.
The commission determined that Zoppo “did not share the script” with Ward “because she believed it would be counter-productive, in light of her experience that he had behaved with hostility toward her” and other city leaders.
It said that Zoppo “testified that she wanted to avoid ‘another verbal barrage’ by” Ward so she kept the script secret from him.
The incident came to light in June when the Press received, in response to a Freedom of Information request, copies of emails between Stortz and Zoppo that discussed the script. Zoppo readily provided copies of the script when the Press asked her about it.
Here is the link to the state's ruling.
For background, check out these earlier Bristol Blog posts:
Is Ward behind the FOI complaint? (Aug. 10, 2007)
Mocabee speaks out on FOI complaint (Aug. 10, 2007)
FOI complaint lodged against Zoppo, Stortz, city (Aug. 10, 2007, includes text of FOI complaint)
Council hopeful Rich Kilby weighs in on script controversy (June 10, 2007)
McCauley defends Zoppo (June 8, 2007)
Zoppo stands by scripted meetings (June 6, 2007)
What do you think about scripting city meetings? (June 5, 2007)
Scripting city meetings (June 5, 2007, includes the script used for the January meeting)
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Showing posts with label script. Show all posts
Showing posts with label script. Show all posts
December 28, 2007
December 11, 2007
Preliminary ruling on "scripted meeting' FOI complaint
The state Freedom of Information Commission will decide Wednesday whether or not it agrees with the preliminary decision of its hearing officer in the FOI case brought against the city and former city Councilor Ellen Zoppo by resident Jay Meisinger.
The preliminary decision, which favors the city, can be downloaded here:
Page one
Page two
Page three
Page four
Probably the easiest way for most people to read the documents is to print them or download them and view them with a picture viewing program.
The FOI Commission will likely make its decision at a 2 p.m. Wednesday meeting. Most of the time, it backs preliminary rulings.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
The preliminary decision, which favors the city, can be downloaded here:
Page one
Page two
Page three
Page four
Probably the easiest way for most people to read the documents is to print them or download them and view them with a picture viewing program.
The FOI Commission will likely make its decision at a 2 p.m. Wednesday meeting. Most of the time, it backs preliminary rulings.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
October 31, 2007
Tax dollars flushed away?
Republican mayoral hopeful Ken Johnson just sent this along:
I’m unhappy that the initial hearing for Freedom of Information complaint about scripted meetings happened yesterday. I state again: we are all aware that the complaint served one purpose and one purpose only- to poke a political stick in the eye of Mr. Ward’s opponent in the Democratic primary. I’ve repeatedly asked my opponent to ask his friend Mr. Meisinger to withdraw the complaint and last Monday Mr. Ward publicly refused to do so. I’ve warned that this could cost the taxpayers money to defend this frivolous case. Sure enough, a hearing took place in Hartford yesterday and we’ve now running up the tab for the cost of outside counsel at taxpayers’ expense for the city to defend the case.
I understand that Mr. Meisinger showed up with no attorney and presented no evidence -- is the complainant even taking this seriously? I guess they’ve got to see it through to give it the appearance of legitimacy. Public disgust at watching our tax dollars being flushed away is completely justified.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
I’m unhappy that the initial hearing for Freedom of Information complaint about scripted meetings happened yesterday. I state again: we are all aware that the complaint served one purpose and one purpose only- to poke a political stick in the eye of Mr. Ward’s opponent in the Democratic primary. I’ve repeatedly asked my opponent to ask his friend Mr. Meisinger to withdraw the complaint and last Monday Mr. Ward publicly refused to do so. I’ve warned that this could cost the taxpayers money to defend this frivolous case. Sure enough, a hearing took place in Hartford yesterday and we’ve now running up the tab for the cost of outside counsel at taxpayers’ expense for the city to defend the case.
I understand that Mr. Meisinger showed up with no attorney and presented no evidence -- is the complainant even taking this seriously? I guess they’ve got to see it through to give it the appearance of legitimacy. Public disgust at watching our tax dollars being flushed away is completely justified.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
October 30, 2007
The other "scripted" meeting, which included Ward
The other day, Republican Party Chairman Art Mocabee lambasted Democratic mayoral candidate Art Ward for a number of things that I think most of the readers here are familiar with.
But one point may be fuzzy.
Mocabee's attack included this paragraph: "In addition to your failure to negotiate the City’s business in the open, why don’t you step up to the plate and explain why it was okay for you to participate in the 'scripted' meeting when the Blight Ordinance was adopted? Now you feel, by way of your supporter’s recent FOI complaint, that the process is flawed. Maybe the answer is that if it serves your needs it is okay, but when you don’t support another council member’s idea it is wrong. This is hardly the mark of a leader."
I'm not sure that issue has been made clear to everyone, including Mocabee.
It wasn't the blight ordinance, as Mocabee says, it was the new housing code in 2005.
City Councilor Ellen Zoppo provided a copy of that "script" back in June but it got left on the back burner because it was both older and duller than the downtown hearing last winter that's been the focus of attention.
But I am sure some of you would like to see the script so you can ascertain for yourselves whether Ward did anything wrong.
In the first comment below, you can read the entire text of the "Housing Code Talking Points" that Zoppo prepared for the Sept. 14, 2005 meeting that led to the implementation of a new housing code in Bristol.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
But one point may be fuzzy.
Mocabee's attack included this paragraph: "In addition to your failure to negotiate the City’s business in the open, why don’t you step up to the plate and explain why it was okay for you to participate in the 'scripted' meeting when the Blight Ordinance was adopted? Now you feel, by way of your supporter’s recent FOI complaint, that the process is flawed. Maybe the answer is that if it serves your needs it is okay, but when you don’t support another council member’s idea it is wrong. This is hardly the mark of a leader."
I'm not sure that issue has been made clear to everyone, including Mocabee.
It wasn't the blight ordinance, as Mocabee says, it was the new housing code in 2005.
City Councilor Ellen Zoppo provided a copy of that "script" back in June but it got left on the back burner because it was both older and duller than the downtown hearing last winter that's been the focus of attention.
But I am sure some of you would like to see the script so you can ascertain for yourselves whether Ward did anything wrong.
In the first comment below, you can read the entire text of the "Housing Code Talking Points" that Zoppo prepared for the Sept. 14, 2005 meeting that led to the implementation of a new housing code in Bristol.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
FOI hearing in Hartford Tuesday not scripted
Here's reporter Jackie Majerus' account of the state Freedom of Information Commission hearing today on the complaint filed by resident Jay Meisinger:
HARTFORD – Upset that city Councilor Ellen Zoppo's distribution of a script to fellow councilors before a public hearing early this year undermined the integrity of the open meeting process, a Bristol man presented his complaint to state officials Tuesday.
"There was something terribly wrong," Jay Meisinger told hearing officer Colleen Murphy, who is executive director and general counsel of the state Freedom of Information Commission, and commission counsel Lisa Siegel.
Meisinger said he was concerned about a "closed government," "manipulation of legislation" and other violations.
"It looked like it was predetermined results," said Meisinger of the scripted public hearing that ended with the council's approval of the creation of the Bristol Downtown Development Corp. to oversee the city-owned mall property.
Before the hearing that day, Zoppo handed out what she described in an email to Mayor William Stortz that same day as a "script" for councilors to follow that night. She gave one to Stortz and every member of the council except for Art Ward.
Zoppo said she left Ward out because he had "become extremely antagonistic" and wasn't participating with the rest of the council.
"We just don't include him when we do these types of things," said Zoppo.
Now, Zoppo says the script was "simply an organizing document" to be used by councilors to "keep us on message for that evening."
"The script word really gives a connotation that people were told what to say," Zoppo said.
She said the instructions in the email to gather up the scripts so none were left lying around afterward stemmed from her sensitivity that the other councilors might not want anyone to know that she'd provided them a script.
"It's a reflection of preparation," said Zoppo, adding that it might hurt the "pride" of the others on the council if it was obvious they didn't do their own preparation, but relied on hers.
That January day, Zoppo said, she and Councilor Craig Minor met with Stortz in his office and talked for an hour about the upcoming hearing. She had the city's computer department take the script as an email attachment and print it out for her, Zoppo said. Then she went to the mayor's office and made copies.
"I gave one to the mayor and four of my colleagues," said Zoppo.
A month earlier, Zoppo said, five of the six Democrats on the council met privately to talk over the contentious issues related to downtown. She called that session a "caucus."
Attorney John King, representing the city, peppered Meisinger with questions. He demanded to know whether Meisinger had first-hand knowledge of secret meetings or agreements among members of the city council before the hearing.
A frustrated Meisinger, who said he became upset when he learned of the scripted meeting from reading a news story in The Bristol Press, said he wasn't privy to secret sessions among city councilors. He had no evidence to produce, said Meisinger, who was there alone, without any attorney.
"How could I possibly have it?" Meisinger asked. "If I was present, I would know all this."
Meisinger said Zoppo's script and her email to Stortz, which he provided to the FOI Commission, was what he had to offer.
Meisinger said he is friends with Ward and wasn't going to deny it. He said he did speak with Ward before filing his complaint – in part because he'd never filed an FOI complaint before, he said – and Ward didn't have any problem with it.
But Meisinger said the fact that he filed a complaint had nothing to do with the individuals involved.
"If it was somebody else," said Meisinger, "I would have done the same."
After the FOI hearing, Meisinger said he didn't like the way it went, but seemed glad to have brought the issue to the attention of the Commission.
"Win or lose, I don't want this to happen again in City Council chambers," said Meisinger. "I think it was totally wrong."
For more information on the issue, including copies of the scripts, emails, and Meisinger's FOI complaint, check out the Bristol Blog at http://bristolnews.blogspot.com.
For background, check out these earlier Bristol Blog posts:
Is Ward behind the FOI complaint? (Aug. 10, 2007)
Mocabee speaks out on FOI complaint (Aug. 10, 2007)
FOI complaint lodged against Zoppo, Stortz, city (Aug. 10, 2007, includes text of FOI complaint)
Council hopeful Rich Kilby weighs in on script controversy (June 10, 2007)
McCauley defends Zoppo (June 8, 2007)
Zoppo stands by scripted meetings (June 6, 2007)
What do you think about scripting city meetings? (June 5, 2007)
Scripting city meetings (June 5, 2007, includes the script used for the January meeting)
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
HARTFORD – Upset that city Councilor Ellen Zoppo's distribution of a script to fellow councilors before a public hearing early this year undermined the integrity of the open meeting process, a Bristol man presented his complaint to state officials Tuesday.
"There was something terribly wrong," Jay Meisinger told hearing officer Colleen Murphy, who is executive director and general counsel of the state Freedom of Information Commission, and commission counsel Lisa Siegel.
Meisinger said he was concerned about a "closed government," "manipulation of legislation" and other violations.
"It looked like it was predetermined results," said Meisinger of the scripted public hearing that ended with the council's approval of the creation of the Bristol Downtown Development Corp. to oversee the city-owned mall property.
Before the hearing that day, Zoppo handed out what she described in an email to Mayor William Stortz that same day as a "script" for councilors to follow that night. She gave one to Stortz and every member of the council except for Art Ward.
Zoppo said she left Ward out because he had "become extremely antagonistic" and wasn't participating with the rest of the council.
"We just don't include him when we do these types of things," said Zoppo.
Now, Zoppo says the script was "simply an organizing document" to be used by councilors to "keep us on message for that evening."
"The script word really gives a connotation that people were told what to say," Zoppo said.
She said the instructions in the email to gather up the scripts so none were left lying around afterward stemmed from her sensitivity that the other councilors might not want anyone to know that she'd provided them a script.
"It's a reflection of preparation," said Zoppo, adding that it might hurt the "pride" of the others on the council if it was obvious they didn't do their own preparation, but relied on hers.
That January day, Zoppo said, she and Councilor Craig Minor met with Stortz in his office and talked for an hour about the upcoming hearing. She had the city's computer department take the script as an email attachment and print it out for her, Zoppo said. Then she went to the mayor's office and made copies.
"I gave one to the mayor and four of my colleagues," said Zoppo.
A month earlier, Zoppo said, five of the six Democrats on the council met privately to talk over the contentious issues related to downtown. She called that session a "caucus."
Attorney John King, representing the city, peppered Meisinger with questions. He demanded to know whether Meisinger had first-hand knowledge of secret meetings or agreements among members of the city council before the hearing.
A frustrated Meisinger, who said he became upset when he learned of the scripted meeting from reading a news story in The Bristol Press, said he wasn't privy to secret sessions among city councilors. He had no evidence to produce, said Meisinger, who was there alone, without any attorney.
"How could I possibly have it?" Meisinger asked. "If I was present, I would know all this."
Meisinger said Zoppo's script and her email to Stortz, which he provided to the FOI Commission, was what he had to offer.
Meisinger said he is friends with Ward and wasn't going to deny it. He said he did speak with Ward before filing his complaint – in part because he'd never filed an FOI complaint before, he said – and Ward didn't have any problem with it.
But Meisinger said the fact that he filed a complaint had nothing to do with the individuals involved.
"If it was somebody else," said Meisinger, "I would have done the same."
After the FOI hearing, Meisinger said he didn't like the way it went, but seemed glad to have brought the issue to the attention of the Commission.
"Win or lose, I don't want this to happen again in City Council chambers," said Meisinger. "I think it was totally wrong."
For more information on the issue, including copies of the scripts, emails, and Meisinger's FOI complaint, check out the Bristol Blog at http://bristolnews.blogspot.com.
For background, check out these earlier Bristol Blog posts:
Is Ward behind the FOI complaint? (Aug. 10, 2007)
Mocabee speaks out on FOI complaint (Aug. 10, 2007)
FOI complaint lodged against Zoppo, Stortz, city (Aug. 10, 2007, includes text of FOI complaint)
Council hopeful Rich Kilby weighs in on script controversy (June 10, 2007)
McCauley defends Zoppo (June 8, 2007)
Zoppo stands by scripted meetings (June 6, 2007)
What do you think about scripting city meetings? (June 5, 2007)
Scripting city meetings (June 5, 2007, includes the script used for the January meeting)
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
"Scripted" meetings FOI complaint to be heard in Hartford today
A note from Republican mayoral candidate Ken Johnson to reporters this morning:
Just wanted to bring to your attention that city attorneys are going to Hartford today at 1pm to defend the city against the Freedom of Information Complaint filed by the Ward camp. As I have stated before, we are all aware that the complaint served one purpose and one purpose only: to poke a political stick in the eye of Art’s primary opponent. I’ve repeatedly asked my opponent to ask his friend to withdraw the complaint and last Monday he finally answered me and publicly refused to do so. He has ignored my argument that it does not serve the best interest of the people. I’ve warned that this could cost the taxpayers money for the city to defend the case. So now this, too, has become come to pass because of my opponent’s need to put his own political agenda above the interest of the people. So here we go again. Politics over people.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Just wanted to bring to your attention that city attorneys are going to Hartford today at 1pm to defend the city against the Freedom of Information Complaint filed by the Ward camp. As I have stated before, we are all aware that the complaint served one purpose and one purpose only: to poke a political stick in the eye of Art’s primary opponent. I’ve repeatedly asked my opponent to ask his friend to withdraw the complaint and last Monday he finally answered me and publicly refused to do so. He has ignored my argument that it does not serve the best interest of the people. I’ve warned that this could cost the taxpayers money for the city to defend the case. So now this, too, has become come to pass because of my opponent’s need to put his own political agenda above the interest of the people. So here we go again. Politics over people.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
August 15, 2007
Johnson calls Bristol "Mum City"
Here's a new release from Republican mayoral candidate Ken Johnson:
Ken Johnson, the Republican nominee for Mayor of Bristol, today assailed the current City Council for what he called “gives a whole new meaning to the word Mum City.” Johnson, who is challenging Democrats Ellen Zoppo-Sassu and Art Ward for Mayor was irritated at the lack of public discussion with regards to the FOI complaint filed by a supporter of Councilman Ward.
After a local reporter scolded the council on his blog regarding the council agenda which included an executive session to discuss this matter, members of the city council put out releases and blogs that said they wanted to discuss this matter in public. “After last nights city council meeting how much more does the public know about the issue?” Johnson asked.
Johnson believes that this issue is about much more than Ellen Zoppo-Sassu’s meeting preparation or Art Ward’s self imposed isolation from the rest of the City Council. “It’s about the fundamental way in which Bristol has conducted its business over the years, and electing the same people over and over again will not change this conduct,” Johnson continued “It’s time for fresh ideas.”
The current situation on the city council illustrates to Johnson the need for this change. They voted to buy the mall property in 2005 with virtually no public discussion, they have participated in scripted meetings over the past two terms and that’s what we know and both Zoppo-Sassu and Ward have not spoken to each other in over a year.
“Do you think our forefathers were physic when they coined the slogan Mum City?” Johnson continued “If they cannot get along with each other than how are they going to lead the City and manage people on a daily basis that don’t always agree with their politics? “
“It’s time to Put Bristol First” Johnson concluded.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Ken Johnson, the Republican nominee for Mayor of Bristol, today assailed the current City Council for what he called “gives a whole new meaning to the word Mum City.” Johnson, who is challenging Democrats Ellen Zoppo-Sassu and Art Ward for Mayor was irritated at the lack of public discussion with regards to the FOI complaint filed by a supporter of Councilman Ward.
After a local reporter scolded the council on his blog regarding the council agenda which included an executive session to discuss this matter, members of the city council put out releases and blogs that said they wanted to discuss this matter in public. “After last nights city council meeting how much more does the public know about the issue?” Johnson asked.
Johnson believes that this issue is about much more than Ellen Zoppo-Sassu’s meeting preparation or Art Ward’s self imposed isolation from the rest of the City Council. “It’s about the fundamental way in which Bristol has conducted its business over the years, and electing the same people over and over again will not change this conduct,” Johnson continued “It’s time for fresh ideas.”
The current situation on the city council illustrates to Johnson the need for this change. They voted to buy the mall property in 2005 with virtually no public discussion, they have participated in scripted meetings over the past two terms and that’s what we know and both Zoppo-Sassu and Ward have not spoken to each other in over a year.
“Do you think our forefathers were physic when they coined the slogan Mum City?” Johnson continued “If they cannot get along with each other than how are they going to lead the City and manage people on a daily basis that don’t always agree with their politics? “
“It’s time to Put Bristol First” Johnson concluded.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
The public speaks up...
At the City Council meeting Tuesday, the audience participation section proved to be something of a Greatest Hits compilation.
Among those who got up to talk were some residents who are frequent speakers, from Tim Gamache to Lewis Michaud.
I thought I’d give you all a taste of what gets said during the public’s section of the meeting.
First up was Stan Orzell, who is seeking a sign change on Route 69 near the Wolcott town line. His request sounded eminently reasonable.
Next up was Gamache, a near constant presence at municipal meetings. He talked about the “scripted meetings” issue, saying that making outlines is “simply good organization” but he has “serious concerns” that the outcome of the meetings were also orchestrated.
Following Gamache was Tom Doyle, who’s been addressing the council since long before I started attending meetings back in 1994. Doyle called for the city to leave the Roberts property undeveloped and defended the use of the older schools that educators are seeking to close.
Joe Geladino, a Republican council contender, got up next. Earlier this year, he threw in a white towel of surrender to express his disgust for the city’s administration. But last night, he merely blasted the council as “dysfunctional” and told its members that they are “not making the taxpayers happy.”
Mark Blaschke, an independent council candidate in the 2nd District, spoke next to say that existing schools should be renovate instead of pursuing a “really not solid” plan for new ones.
Michaud griped that a lot of people in town are not recycling, pointing to a neighbor who never has a recycling bin out. He said the city doesn’t take action against those who violate recycling rules because “you people are afraid you’re going to lose a vote” by cracking the whip.
Al Cianchetti, who once gave the mayor a failing grade during a long recitation of his record in office, rose to the microphone next. He said that the chief “told me to behave tonight.” He thanked the city attorney for clarifying the public referendum process and took a shot at city Councilor Ellen Zoppo for leaving Councilor Art Ward “out of the loop” in the scripted meeting about downtown last winter.
Finally, Maureen Carter addressed the council.
“I hate what’s happening in this city,” she said. “I hate seeing the decay.”
She said the council created the downtown corporation as a way of passing the buck so it wouldn’t have to deal with the mall issue before the election. Then she blasted the council for allowing themselves to be “led by the nose” on the scripted meeting issue, which she called “an egregious act that cannot and should not be tolerated.”
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Among those who got up to talk were some residents who are frequent speakers, from Tim Gamache to Lewis Michaud.
I thought I’d give you all a taste of what gets said during the public’s section of the meeting.
First up was Stan Orzell, who is seeking a sign change on Route 69 near the Wolcott town line. His request sounded eminently reasonable.
Next up was Gamache, a near constant presence at municipal meetings. He talked about the “scripted meetings” issue, saying that making outlines is “simply good organization” but he has “serious concerns” that the outcome of the meetings were also orchestrated.
Following Gamache was Tom Doyle, who’s been addressing the council since long before I started attending meetings back in 1994. Doyle called for the city to leave the Roberts property undeveloped and defended the use of the older schools that educators are seeking to close.
Joe Geladino, a Republican council contender, got up next. Earlier this year, he threw in a white towel of surrender to express his disgust for the city’s administration. But last night, he merely blasted the council as “dysfunctional” and told its members that they are “not making the taxpayers happy.”
Mark Blaschke, an independent council candidate in the 2nd District, spoke next to say that existing schools should be renovate instead of pursuing a “really not solid” plan for new ones.
Michaud griped that a lot of people in town are not recycling, pointing to a neighbor who never has a recycling bin out. He said the city doesn’t take action against those who violate recycling rules because “you people are afraid you’re going to lose a vote” by cracking the whip.
Al Cianchetti, who once gave the mayor a failing grade during a long recitation of his record in office, rose to the microphone next. He said that the chief “told me to behave tonight.” He thanked the city attorney for clarifying the public referendum process and took a shot at city Councilor Ellen Zoppo for leaving Councilor Art Ward “out of the loop” in the scripted meeting about downtown last winter.
Finally, Maureen Carter addressed the council.
“I hate what’s happening in this city,” she said. “I hate seeing the decay.”
She said the council created the downtown corporation as a way of passing the buck so it wouldn’t have to deal with the mall issue before the election. Then she blasted the council for allowing themselves to be “led by the nose” on the scripted meeting issue, which she called “an egregious act that cannot and should not be tolerated.”
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
August 14, 2007
Zoppo's take on the FOI complaint
This is from Democratic mayoral candidate Ellen Zoppo's website:
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
Recently a close friend and political ally of my opponent in the Democratic Primary filed a complaint with the state FOI Commission concerning the January 2007 Ordinance Committee meetings that were held to adopt the ordinance for the downtown corporation. At issue is my use of a detailed agenda that outlined the points that needed to be covered and the order of business, starting with input from the public, comments from elected officials, as well as the introduction of technical amendments.
I do not believe the FOI complaint has any merit and I am disappointed that this has resulted in the city being placed in a position of having to expend resources to defend what was in fact meeting preparation by me, the chair of the Ordinance Committee, as it relates to the ordinance meetings and public hearings on the downtown corporation. I have stated earlier that the word I used, which was script, was an extremely poor word choice and does not reflect that the document used was, in fact, merely my detailed agenda and order of how the meeting was to be handled. The document clearly indicate that I was tracking concerns of both the public and the members of the council as the public hearings progressed so that nothing would fall through the cracks. There were also variety of technical amendments and a continuance of the public hearing.
I will not apologize for meeting preparation and I do believe that if the City of Bristol has to go forward with defending this claim at the FOI Commission in Hartford, that we will prevail. As I have stated publicly, my opponent did not receive a copy of this document at the meeting because he had decided a year earlier that he was not going to cooperate with the new mayor, and was angry that the rest of us were working with him. He cut himself off from the rest of the Democratic members of the Council and sent us an e-mail that he was going to go it alone. We respected his wishes.
I have often used detailed agendas and talking points for meetings that have many moving parts. As chair of the Ordinance Committee, which makes laws, I work with staff to ensure that all parts of the law are met in posting meetings, conducting public hearings, and the eventual adoption of a new ordinance by committee.
What disappoints me is the fact that this issue keeps re-surfacing as if it is a major campaign issue. There are many major issues facing Bristol but this is being blown out of proportion as a screen for my opponent to hide behind instead of discussing and debating how he would attend to downtown, budget issues and other needs.
As always, please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely, Ellen Zoppo-Sassu
Zoppo's website also contains the "script" itself, which is already on here.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
Recently a close friend and political ally of my opponent in the Democratic Primary filed a complaint with the state FOI Commission concerning the January 2007 Ordinance Committee meetings that were held to adopt the ordinance for the downtown corporation. At issue is my use of a detailed agenda that outlined the points that needed to be covered and the order of business, starting with input from the public, comments from elected officials, as well as the introduction of technical amendments.
I do not believe the FOI complaint has any merit and I am disappointed that this has resulted in the city being placed in a position of having to expend resources to defend what was in fact meeting preparation by me, the chair of the Ordinance Committee, as it relates to the ordinance meetings and public hearings on the downtown corporation. I have stated earlier that the word I used, which was script, was an extremely poor word choice and does not reflect that the document used was, in fact, merely my detailed agenda and order of how the meeting was to be handled. The document clearly indicate that I was tracking concerns of both the public and the members of the council as the public hearings progressed so that nothing would fall through the cracks. There were also variety of technical amendments and a continuance of the public hearing.
I will not apologize for meeting preparation and I do believe that if the City of Bristol has to go forward with defending this claim at the FOI Commission in Hartford, that we will prevail. As I have stated publicly, my opponent did not receive a copy of this document at the meeting because he had decided a year earlier that he was not going to cooperate with the new mayor, and was angry that the rest of us were working with him. He cut himself off from the rest of the Democratic members of the Council and sent us an e-mail that he was going to go it alone. We respected his wishes.
I have often used detailed agendas and talking points for meetings that have many moving parts. As chair of the Ordinance Committee, which makes laws, I work with staff to ensure that all parts of the law are met in posting meetings, conducting public hearings, and the eventual adoption of a new ordinance by committee.
What disappoints me is the fact that this issue keeps re-surfacing as if it is a major campaign issue. There are many major issues facing Bristol but this is being blown out of proportion as a screen for my opponent to hide behind instead of discussing and debating how he would attend to downtown, budget issues and other needs.
As always, please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely, Ellen Zoppo-Sassu
Zoppo's website also contains the "script" itself, which is already on here.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Who does the city attorney represent?
The Freedom of Information complaint brought by resident Jay Meisinger against a handful of top city officials highlights one of the things that's always struck me as wrong about government.
At tonight's City Council session, the city attorney, Ed Krawiecki, Jr, called the complaint "a contested, adversarial case" that required the same vigorous defense that lawyers offer in typical lawsuits brought against the town.
But it's not.
In this case, unless I'm off my rocker, what residents want isn't to win the case. It's to find out the entire truth of what happened and determine whether or not any local officials violated open government laws.
The city's lawyers shouldn't be treating this as "a contested, adversarial case" because the people who pay their salaries aren't interested in beating Meisinger in a legal showdown. They're interested in candor, openness and a decision that determines whether anybody did anything wrong.
Why, for example, would Krawiecki tell Mayor William Stortz and city councilors not to discuss the complaint at all? Is he worried they'll let something out of the bag that might make it less likely the city will "win?" So what? Why should he even care?
The city lawyer said that Bristol's attorneys "need to develop our defense" in order "to protect all of your collective interest."
That might be the most telling comment of all.
Because Krawiecki is not saying that his office is trying to protect the "collective interest" of Bristol as a whole, merely the officials who are accused of doing something improper.
It strikes me, as it always has, that taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for lawyers to defend officials in open government matters. Where is the public interest in that? What is the rationale? Isn't what we all want simply the truth, unvarnished?
What's happening here is that municipal lawyers are mistakenly acting as if they represent the mayor and a handful of city councilors rather than representing everyone in town. I always thought that the interests of the people whose taxes pay the attorneys should be front and center.
For now, at least, they aren't.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
At tonight's City Council session, the city attorney, Ed Krawiecki, Jr, called the complaint "a contested, adversarial case" that required the same vigorous defense that lawyers offer in typical lawsuits brought against the town.
But it's not.
In this case, unless I'm off my rocker, what residents want isn't to win the case. It's to find out the entire truth of what happened and determine whether or not any local officials violated open government laws.
The city's lawyers shouldn't be treating this as "a contested, adversarial case" because the people who pay their salaries aren't interested in beating Meisinger in a legal showdown. They're interested in candor, openness and a decision that determines whether anybody did anything wrong.
Why, for example, would Krawiecki tell Mayor William Stortz and city councilors not to discuss the complaint at all? Is he worried they'll let something out of the bag that might make it less likely the city will "win?" So what? Why should he even care?
The city lawyer said that Bristol's attorneys "need to develop our defense" in order "to protect all of your collective interest."
That might be the most telling comment of all.
Because Krawiecki is not saying that his office is trying to protect the "collective interest" of Bristol as a whole, merely the officials who are accused of doing something improper.
It strikes me, as it always has, that taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for lawyers to defend officials in open government matters. Where is the public interest in that? What is the rationale? Isn't what we all want simply the truth, unvarnished?
What's happening here is that municipal lawyers are mistakenly acting as if they represent the mayor and a handful of city councilors rather than representing everyone in town. I always thought that the interests of the people whose taxes pay the attorneys should be front and center.
For now, at least, they aren't.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Council mum on FOI complaint
After taking heat from angry residents for participating in “scripted” meetings, city councilors Tuesday refused to discuss a pending Freedom of Information complaint in secret session or in public.
“Let the lawyers handle it,” said Mayor William Stortz, one of those cited in the complaint by resident Jay Meisinger.
The city attorney, Edward Krawiecki, Jr, said his office wanted to lay out the city’s options in defending the claim in a closed-door executive session.
“There is a defense, and we intend to pursue it,” Krawiecki said, without elaborating.
Krawiecki said that because the council wouldn’t meet in executive session, municipal lawyers will have to talk to councilors individually.
Resident Maureen Carter expressed disgust with the council’s refusal to speak openly about the case then got up and walked out of the council chambers in protest.
Earlier, she had called the scripted sessions “an egregious act that cannot and should not be tolerated.”
She said that Zoppo’s script, which is akin to a detailed outline, makes it seem that the council engaged in “a stacked meeting” whose outcome was already decided.
The state’s Freedom of Information Commission is looking into the charge that Mayor William Stortz, Zoppo and other city councilors violated state open government laws by scripting municipal meetings ahead of time on at least two occasions, including a key session in the creation of the new downtown corporation.In the complaint, Meisinger argues that because of the open government violation, the council’s establishment of the Bristol Downtown Development Corp. and all of the nonprofit’s subsequent actions “might be null and void.”
City Councilor Art Ward, who was specifically excluded from possessing a script, said he would not participate in an executive session “mainly because I was not involved in it.”
Al Cianchetti, a city resident, told Zoppo, “You left him out of the loop.”
“He’s not part of the team, at his own request,” Zoppo responded.
Zoppo said she has “full faith and confidence” in the city’s attorneys so there was no need to talk about the case behind closed doors.
Tim Gamache said he didn’t mind that officials outlined the meeting ahead of time, calling it “simply good organization.”But, he said, he has “serious concerns” because it also appears the session’s outcome was orchestrated.
Joe Geladino, a Republican council candidate, called the council “a dysfunctional group” that is “not making the taxpayers happy.”
Krawiecki urged councilors and Stortz to say nothing about the pending case. He said it was not a gag order but he would prefer that officials remain mum while the case is before the state panel.
Stortz said the complaint will be investigated by the state and the FOI panel will make a determination on its merits.
“They will do a thorough, complete job to decide if something was done wrong,” the mayor said.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
“Let the lawyers handle it,” said Mayor William Stortz, one of those cited in the complaint by resident Jay Meisinger.
The city attorney, Edward Krawiecki, Jr, said his office wanted to lay out the city’s options in defending the claim in a closed-door executive session.
“There is a defense, and we intend to pursue it,” Krawiecki said, without elaborating.
Krawiecki said that because the council wouldn’t meet in executive session, municipal lawyers will have to talk to councilors individually.
Resident Maureen Carter expressed disgust with the council’s refusal to speak openly about the case then got up and walked out of the council chambers in protest.
Earlier, she had called the scripted sessions “an egregious act that cannot and should not be tolerated.”
She said that Zoppo’s script, which is akin to a detailed outline, makes it seem that the council engaged in “a stacked meeting” whose outcome was already decided.
The state’s Freedom of Information Commission is looking into the charge that Mayor William Stortz, Zoppo and other city councilors violated state open government laws by scripting municipal meetings ahead of time on at least two occasions, including a key session in the creation of the new downtown corporation.In the complaint, Meisinger argues that because of the open government violation, the council’s establishment of the Bristol Downtown Development Corp. and all of the nonprofit’s subsequent actions “might be null and void.”
City Councilor Art Ward, who was specifically excluded from possessing a script, said he would not participate in an executive session “mainly because I was not involved in it.”
Al Cianchetti, a city resident, told Zoppo, “You left him out of the loop.”
“He’s not part of the team, at his own request,” Zoppo responded.
Zoppo said she has “full faith and confidence” in the city’s attorneys so there was no need to talk about the case behind closed doors.
Tim Gamache said he didn’t mind that officials outlined the meeting ahead of time, calling it “simply good organization.”But, he said, he has “serious concerns” because it also appears the session’s outcome was orchestrated.
Joe Geladino, a Republican council candidate, called the council “a dysfunctional group” that is “not making the taxpayers happy.”
Krawiecki urged councilors and Stortz to say nothing about the pending case. He said it was not a gag order but he would prefer that officials remain mum while the case is before the state panel.
Stortz said the complaint will be investigated by the state and the FOI panel will make a determination on its merits.
“They will do a thorough, complete job to decide if something was done wrong,” the mayor said.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
August 11, 2007
No secrecy on FOI case
Addendum to the Aug. 14th City Council agenda:
Executive Session regarding pending Freedom of Information case of J. Jay Meisinger vs. City Council, City of Bristol, Docket #FIC 2007-376.
Let me be the first to protest the very idea of meeting behind closed doors to discuss an open government issue. The entire notion is preposterous.
Before I go on, let me explain that while journalists rarely offer their opinions on issues they write about -- except some of those television types -- there is one generally agreed on exception to the norm: matters related to open government. Former Press Publisher Bart Barnes, who championed the Freedom of Information Act in Connecticut, always said that the press has to be on the front lines on the issue because we're the ones who see the problems firsthand. We have to be the advocate for the public's right to know.
As for this specific case, what on earth is there to talk about in secret? How to beat the rap? At least two of the city councilors named in the FOI complaint -- Ellen Zoppo and Craig Minor -- have said they did nothing wrong. Perhaps that's true. But if they did nothing wrong, they certainly have nothing to discuss behind closed doors.
Innocent people shout their innocence from the hilltops. They don't whisper about it in secret sessions.
The only proper defense to a claim that officials are violating open government laws is to do everything openly. If there are matters to discuss about the claim, and there surely are, do it in public. Let the public know what's going on in every detail. Secrecy, after all, breeds suspicion.
I told the city attorney, Ed Krawiecki, Jr, that I do not view FOI cases in the same light as other litigation (some legal cases can, and should, be discussed behind closed doors) because there are two public entities involved and an intrinsic public interest in ensuring openness in resolving the claim.
I am not taking sides between those who say the "scripted" meetings broke the law and those who say they were perfectly legal. That's for the FOI Commission to decide.
But I'm sure I'm not alone in finding it astonishing that city leaders would give even passing thought to talking about the case in secret. The public needs to know what they're hearing, what they're saying and what they're doing on this case. Let the light shine in.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Executive Session regarding pending Freedom of Information case of J. Jay Meisinger vs. City Council, City of Bristol, Docket #FIC 2007-376.
Let me be the first to protest the very idea of meeting behind closed doors to discuss an open government issue. The entire notion is preposterous.
Before I go on, let me explain that while journalists rarely offer their opinions on issues they write about -- except some of those television types -- there is one generally agreed on exception to the norm: matters related to open government. Former Press Publisher Bart Barnes, who championed the Freedom of Information Act in Connecticut, always said that the press has to be on the front lines on the issue because we're the ones who see the problems firsthand. We have to be the advocate for the public's right to know.
As for this specific case, what on earth is there to talk about in secret? How to beat the rap? At least two of the city councilors named in the FOI complaint -- Ellen Zoppo and Craig Minor -- have said they did nothing wrong. Perhaps that's true. But if they did nothing wrong, they certainly have nothing to discuss behind closed doors.
Innocent people shout their innocence from the hilltops. They don't whisper about it in secret sessions.
The only proper defense to a claim that officials are violating open government laws is to do everything openly. If there are matters to discuss about the claim, and there surely are, do it in public. Let the public know what's going on in every detail. Secrecy, after all, breeds suspicion.
I told the city attorney, Ed Krawiecki, Jr, that I do not view FOI cases in the same light as other litigation (some legal cases can, and should, be discussed behind closed doors) because there are two public entities involved and an intrinsic public interest in ensuring openness in resolving the claim.
I am not taking sides between those who say the "scripted" meetings broke the law and those who say they were perfectly legal. That's for the FOI Commission to decide.
But I'm sure I'm not alone in finding it astonishing that city leaders would give even passing thought to talking about the case in secret. The public needs to know what they're hearing, what they're saying and what they're doing on this case. Let the light shine in.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
August 10, 2007
State probes 'scripted' meetings
The state is investigating whether Democratic mayoral nominee Ellen Zoppo and other city leaders conspired in secret to orchestrate the outcome of public votes and meetings.
Following up on a complaint by Bristol resident Jay Meisinger, the state’s Freedom of Information Commission is looking into charges that Mayor William Stortz, Zoppo and other city councilors violated state open government laws by scripting municipal meetings ahead of time on at least two occasions, including a key session in the creation of the new downtown corporation.
In the complaint, Meisinger argues that because of the open government violation, the council’s establishment of the Bristol Downtown Development Corp. and all of the nonprofit’s subsequent actions “might be null and void.”
Should the commission agree, it could throw into turmoil the city’s efforts to revitalize the 17-acre mall site, which the nonprofit corporation is assigned to oversee.
Many officials and residents raised questions after The Bristol Press revealed in June that Zoppo had prepared a “script” for the Jan. 4 city session that put the council's stamp of approval on the new corporation, as well as a 2005 session that endorsed a controversial new housing code.
Zoppo said Friday the complaint lacks merit and she is confident the city will prevail in the case.
She said the papers she prepared for the sessions are more like "talking points" or guidelines than scripts – the word she used to describe them at the time that she now says was “an extremely poor word choice.”
Zoppo said she “was tracking concerns of both the public and the members of the council as the public hearings” on the downtown corporation progressed “so that nothing would fall through the cracks.” She said she did not orchestrate an outcome to any meeting.
The scripted meetings, which were largely prepared by Zoppo, highlight the need for a radical overhaul at City Hall, Republican mayoral hopeful Ken Johnson said.
Johnson called it “the height of hypocrisy” and contemptuous of the public for Zoppo to
write a script advocating public input when “the outcome, the actual vote, was predetermined.”
“This completely flies in the face” of the whole notion of open government and public debate on important issues, Johnson said.
City Councilor Art Ward, who is taking on Zoppo in the Democratic mayoral primary, called Zoppo “the prime defendant” in the case and again expressed concern that she told Stortz and other officials to make sure he didn’t know about the script during the meeting.
In an email to Stortz before the meeting, Zoppo wrote that “Art will not have a script” and urged city Councilor Mike Rimcoski to “be discreet since he is seated adjacent to” Ward.
“All scripts need to be collected at the end of the night so there are no leaks,” she added.
Ward said he’s still unhappy about her effort to exclude him.
“It definitely, definitely was totally unprofessional,” Ward said.
Johnson said the complaint could “completely unravel the downtown commission” and “roll back the clock six months.”
“At the thought of that, frankly, I’m disgusted,” Johnson said.
“When Ken Johnson is mayor, this is not the way that I will run a city,” he said.
The city attorney, Edward Krawiecki, Jr, said the case is “a contested matter so I don’t think we can actually discuss it at the moment.”
He said he could not offer an opinion on whether the complaint has any merit.
The Freedom of Information Commission plans to schedule a hearing on the issue, according to an Aug. 6 letter to the city from Petrea Jones, its acting clerk. It has also assigned the case to an ombudsman, Thomas Hennick, to try to work out a settlement ahead of time.
For more information on the issue, including copies of the scripts, emails and Meisinger’s FOI complaint, check out the Bristol Blog at http://bristolnews.blogspot.com.
Collins covers Bristol government and politics and related agencies. Contact him at scollins@bristolpress.com or 584-0504 ext. 254.
For background, check out these earlier Bristol Blog posts:
Is Ward behind the FOI complaint? (Aug. 10, 2007)
Mocabee speaks out on FOI complaint (Aug. 10, 2007)
FOI complaint lodged against Zoppo, Stortz, city (Aug. 10, 2007, includes text of FOI complaint)
Council hopeful Rich Kilby weighs in on script controversy (June 10, 2007)
McCauley defends Zoppo (June 8, 2007)
Zoppo stands by scripted meetings (June 6, 2007)
What do you think about scripting city meetings? (June 5, 2007)
Scripting city meetings (June 5, 2007, includes the script used for the January meeting)
Please feel free to add your comments by clicking on the comments link just to the right of the time below this post.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Following up on a complaint by Bristol resident Jay Meisinger, the state’s Freedom of Information Commission is looking into charges that Mayor William Stortz, Zoppo and other city councilors violated state open government laws by scripting municipal meetings ahead of time on at least two occasions, including a key session in the creation of the new downtown corporation.
In the complaint, Meisinger argues that because of the open government violation, the council’s establishment of the Bristol Downtown Development Corp. and all of the nonprofit’s subsequent actions “might be null and void.”
Should the commission agree, it could throw into turmoil the city’s efforts to revitalize the 17-acre mall site, which the nonprofit corporation is assigned to oversee.
Many officials and residents raised questions after The Bristol Press revealed in June that Zoppo had prepared a “script” for the Jan. 4 city session that put the council's stamp of approval on the new corporation, as well as a 2005 session that endorsed a controversial new housing code.
Zoppo said Friday the complaint lacks merit and she is confident the city will prevail in the case.
She said the papers she prepared for the sessions are more like "talking points" or guidelines than scripts – the word she used to describe them at the time that she now says was “an extremely poor word choice.”
Zoppo said she “was tracking concerns of both the public and the members of the council as the public hearings” on the downtown corporation progressed “so that nothing would fall through the cracks.” She said she did not orchestrate an outcome to any meeting.
The scripted meetings, which were largely prepared by Zoppo, highlight the need for a radical overhaul at City Hall, Republican mayoral hopeful Ken Johnson said.
Johnson called it “the height of hypocrisy” and contemptuous of the public for Zoppo to
write a script advocating public input when “the outcome, the actual vote, was predetermined.”
“This completely flies in the face” of the whole notion of open government and public debate on important issues, Johnson said.
City Councilor Art Ward, who is taking on Zoppo in the Democratic mayoral primary, called Zoppo “the prime defendant” in the case and again expressed concern that she told Stortz and other officials to make sure he didn’t know about the script during the meeting.
In an email to Stortz before the meeting, Zoppo wrote that “Art will not have a script” and urged city Councilor Mike Rimcoski to “be discreet since he is seated adjacent to” Ward.
“All scripts need to be collected at the end of the night so there are no leaks,” she added.
Ward said he’s still unhappy about her effort to exclude him.
“It definitely, definitely was totally unprofessional,” Ward said.
Johnson said the complaint could “completely unravel the downtown commission” and “roll back the clock six months.”
“At the thought of that, frankly, I’m disgusted,” Johnson said.
“When Ken Johnson is mayor, this is not the way that I will run a city,” he said.
The city attorney, Edward Krawiecki, Jr, said the case is “a contested matter so I don’t think we can actually discuss it at the moment.”
He said he could not offer an opinion on whether the complaint has any merit.
The Freedom of Information Commission plans to schedule a hearing on the issue, according to an Aug. 6 letter to the city from Petrea Jones, its acting clerk. It has also assigned the case to an ombudsman, Thomas Hennick, to try to work out a settlement ahead of time.
For more information on the issue, including copies of the scripts, emails and Meisinger’s FOI complaint, check out the Bristol Blog at http://bristolnews.blogspot.com.
Collins covers Bristol government and politics and related agencies. Contact him at scollins@bristolpress.com or 584-0504 ext. 254.
For background, check out these earlier Bristol Blog posts:
Is Ward behind the FOI complaint? (Aug. 10, 2007)
Mocabee speaks out on FOI complaint (Aug. 10, 2007)
FOI complaint lodged against Zoppo, Stortz, city (Aug. 10, 2007, includes text of FOI complaint)
Council hopeful Rich Kilby weighs in on script controversy (June 10, 2007)
McCauley defends Zoppo (June 8, 2007)
Zoppo stands by scripted meetings (June 6, 2007)
What do you think about scripting city meetings? (June 5, 2007)
Scripting city meetings (June 5, 2007, includes the script used for the January meeting)
Please feel free to add your comments by clicking on the comments link just to the right of the time below this post.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Is Ward behind the complaint?
Republicans questioned Friday whether city Councilor Art Ward pushed a friend into filing a Freedom of Information complaint that could harm his rival in the Democratic mayoral primary.
But Jay Meisinger, who filed the complaint, said Friday that Ward had no input.
“Art Ward didn’t have his hand in it,” said Meisinger, who is a friend of Ward’s and the commander of the American Legion post on Hooker Court.
Republican mayoral contender Ken Johnson said he knows Meisinger and “I’m not sure I believe that Jay Meisinger wrote this complaint.”
City Republican Chairman Art Mocabee said it is “obvious that Art Ward is behind all of this along with one or two others.”
Johnson said that he would be “extremely disappointed if I learned that” Ward was behind it.
Meisinger said that he got mad about the scripting issue because Democrats were “eliminating one of their own” by trying to hide the script from Ward.
“It’s like everybody wants to play tag and they’re leaving somebody out. And somebody should be held accountable,” he said.
Meisinger said that his wife prodded him to act on his anger and file the complaint, which he spent weeks polishing before filing it in early July.
Ward said that he told Meisinger how to file an FOI complaint and read the paperwork before it was submitted to the state. But, Ward said, he had nothing to do with its wording and no changes were made after he read it.
“He was adamant that he wanted to file one,” Ward said. “I told him how to do it, at his request.”
“Are we supposed to believe that this is not politically motivated?” Johnson asked.
“And how does this serve the best interests of the people of Bristol?”
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
But Jay Meisinger, who filed the complaint, said Friday that Ward had no input.
“Art Ward didn’t have his hand in it,” said Meisinger, who is a friend of Ward’s and the commander of the American Legion post on Hooker Court.
Republican mayoral contender Ken Johnson said he knows Meisinger and “I’m not sure I believe that Jay Meisinger wrote this complaint.”
City Republican Chairman Art Mocabee said it is “obvious that Art Ward is behind all of this along with one or two others.”
Johnson said that he would be “extremely disappointed if I learned that” Ward was behind it.
Meisinger said that he got mad about the scripting issue because Democrats were “eliminating one of their own” by trying to hide the script from Ward.
“It’s like everybody wants to play tag and they’re leaving somebody out. And somebody should be held accountable,” he said.
Meisinger said that his wife prodded him to act on his anger and file the complaint, which he spent weeks polishing before filing it in early July.
Ward said that he told Meisinger how to file an FOI complaint and read the paperwork before it was submitted to the state. But, Ward said, he had nothing to do with its wording and no changes were made after he read it.
“He was adamant that he wanted to file one,” Ward said. “I told him how to do it, at his request.”
“Are we supposed to believe that this is not politically motivated?” Johnson asked.
“And how does this serve the best interests of the people of Bristol?”
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Mocabee speaks out on FOI complaint
City Republican Party Chairman Art Mocabee sent this along recently:
I think Mr. Meisinger has brought to the surface proof once again of just how much the two democratic mayoral candidates care about their own agenda. If one reads the entire complaint, including much of the email surrounding Zoppo's manipulation of the City Council, it is obvious that both Zoppo and Ward prefer to conduct business in a less then public fashion.
It is also obvious that Art Ward is behind all of this along with one or two others. It is this type of ego bashing that Bristol taxpayers have been subject to from Ward Zoppo Minor and Nicastro over the last 8 to 14 years, which none of has moved the needs of the City forward. It is doubtful that this action will have a positive outcome for the City.
I thank Mr. Meisinger for pointing out the flaws of these two candidates...major flaws... and I am sure we have not herd the end of this issue. It is a sad day for Bristol at the hands of the two democratic mayoral candidates: Zoppo and Ward.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
I think Mr. Meisinger has brought to the surface proof once again of just how much the two democratic mayoral candidates care about their own agenda. If one reads the entire complaint, including much of the email surrounding Zoppo's manipulation of the City Council, it is obvious that both Zoppo and Ward prefer to conduct business in a less then public fashion.
It is also obvious that Art Ward is behind all of this along with one or two others. It is this type of ego bashing that Bristol taxpayers have been subject to from Ward Zoppo Minor and Nicastro over the last 8 to 14 years, which none of has moved the needs of the City forward. It is doubtful that this action will have a positive outcome for the City.
I thank Mr. Meisinger for pointing out the flaws of these two candidates...major flaws... and I am sure we have not herd the end of this issue. It is a sad day for Bristol at the hands of the two democratic mayoral candidates: Zoppo and Ward.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
FOI complaint lodged against Zoppo, Stortz, city
June 6, 2007
To: CT Freedom of Information Commission
From: Jay Meisinger, Bristol
Re: FOI complaint against Mayor William Stortz and City of Bristol
Following information published in The Bristol Press on Tuesday, June 5, 2007, it would appear that 6 members of the 7-member Bristol City Council engaged in one or more unannounced meetings, without proper public notice, electronically or in person, in violation of the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act to discuss and render a decision on the matter of establishing a downtown corporation. Furthermore, it would appear that the final noticed public meeting to vote on January 18, 2007 was not scheduled until the vote had been privately discussed and agreed upon.
It appears from emails distributed through the city’s email system, upon which the reporter based the enclosed news stories, that some Bristol City Council members had polled their collective yea and nay votes outside of the confines of any public meeting, including a continued public hearing of the Ordinance Committee. The parties then clearly worked to prepare scripted responses to voice their support. They clearly agreed to coordinate their responses to a vote that had not been publicly taken, probably via emails and telephone. Some emails of these elected officials may have been made with electronic addresses that are not public and thus not subject to the FOI request made by the reporter, yet may have been the means by which public officials performed the public’s business in a private manner. The Commission is better equipped to request all pertinent information from all parties and all sources. The secret nature of these transactions are clear from the attempt to exclude at least one other elected official, Councilman Art Ward, from all discussion.
Since the charter involves members of both political parties, no one can claim the right to caucus as a political party.
Per information in the newspaper article, those persons primarily involved in the FOI violation appear to be Mayor William Stortz and Councilwoman Ellen Zoppo, City Hall, 111 North Main St., Bristol, CT 06010. Mayor’s office telephone number (860) 584-6250. Others involved include Councilmen Michael Rimcoski, Kevin McCauley and Craig Minor who also may be addressed through city hall.
There seems to be a prima facie case for collective decision making by the Bristol City Council outside of the public meeting process and preparing their collective response outside of public channels. The latter is most clear but it would not have been possible without the former action – collectively voting “yes” in private. The scripts are the fruits of private polling, in effect, a virtual meeting outside the public eye. It is the collective nature and subsequent requests for secrecy that draws attention to these actions.
If section 1-206,4c of the statute applies, then the actions to establish the corporation and all subsequent action by the Council and the new corporation might be null and void based upon inappropriate action by the Bristol City Council.
Although the actions in question may have occurred in December of 2006 and January of 2007, the actions just became known to people by reason of the Bristol Press article on June 5, 2007, therefore the time period to file this complaint is timely as it remains open for 30 days – until July 4, 2007.
There is sufficient reason to request an investigation of the facts by the FOI Commission and to determine if there was a violation of the letter and spirit of the regulations. The enclosed news articles are important to the uncovering of these events but the enclosed emails are largely self-explanatory.
I trust that the Commission will find sufficient cause to investigate and then to draw conclusions. Because these actions that were kept secret for five or more months are now leading to the expenditure of substantial public funds, the commitment of legal resources as well as the commitment of other public resources, the Commission should consider granting interlocutory relief by way of an interim order before further public resources are committed or used.
Signed and Notarized this 2nd day of July 2007.
Zoppo's response Friday:
I have not seen the complaint but have been advised of its receipt at City Hall by the Corporation Counsel's office.
I am aware that it has been submitted by a close friend and political ally of Art Ward's, Jay Meisinger, who is the current Commander of the American Legion.
I do not believe the FOI complaint has any merit and I am disappointed that this has resulted in the city being placed in a position of having to expend resources to defend what was in fact meeting preparation by me, the chair of the Ordinance Committee, as it relates to the ordinance meetings and public hearings on the downtown corporation. I have stated earlier that the word I used, which was script, was an extremely poor word choice and does not reflect that the document used was merely my detailed agenda and order of how the meeting was to be handled. The documents that I shared with you and others clearly indicate that I was tracking concerns of both the public and the members of the council as the public hearings progressed so that nothing would fall through the cracks. There were also variety of technical amendments and a continuance of the public hearing.
I will not apologize for meeting preparation and I do believe that if the City of Bristol has to go forward with defending this claim at the FOI Commission in Hartford, that we will prevail.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
To: CT Freedom of Information Commission
From: Jay Meisinger, Bristol
Re: FOI complaint against Mayor William Stortz and City of Bristol
Following information published in The Bristol Press on Tuesday, June 5, 2007, it would appear that 6 members of the 7-member Bristol City Council engaged in one or more unannounced meetings, without proper public notice, electronically or in person, in violation of the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act to discuss and render a decision on the matter of establishing a downtown corporation. Furthermore, it would appear that the final noticed public meeting to vote on January 18, 2007 was not scheduled until the vote had been privately discussed and agreed upon.
It appears from emails distributed through the city’s email system, upon which the reporter based the enclosed news stories, that some Bristol City Council members had polled their collective yea and nay votes outside of the confines of any public meeting, including a continued public hearing of the Ordinance Committee. The parties then clearly worked to prepare scripted responses to voice their support. They clearly agreed to coordinate their responses to a vote that had not been publicly taken, probably via emails and telephone. Some emails of these elected officials may have been made with electronic addresses that are not public and thus not subject to the FOI request made by the reporter, yet may have been the means by which public officials performed the public’s business in a private manner. The Commission is better equipped to request all pertinent information from all parties and all sources. The secret nature of these transactions are clear from the attempt to exclude at least one other elected official, Councilman Art Ward, from all discussion.
Since the charter involves members of both political parties, no one can claim the right to caucus as a political party.
Per information in the newspaper article, those persons primarily involved in the FOI violation appear to be Mayor William Stortz and Councilwoman Ellen Zoppo, City Hall, 111 North Main St., Bristol, CT 06010. Mayor’s office telephone number (860) 584-6250. Others involved include Councilmen Michael Rimcoski, Kevin McCauley and Craig Minor who also may be addressed through city hall.
There seems to be a prima facie case for collective decision making by the Bristol City Council outside of the public meeting process and preparing their collective response outside of public channels. The latter is most clear but it would not have been possible without the former action – collectively voting “yes” in private. The scripts are the fruits of private polling, in effect, a virtual meeting outside the public eye. It is the collective nature and subsequent requests for secrecy that draws attention to these actions.
If section 1-206,4c of the statute applies, then the actions to establish the corporation and all subsequent action by the Council and the new corporation might be null and void based upon inappropriate action by the Bristol City Council.
Although the actions in question may have occurred in December of 2006 and January of 2007, the actions just became known to people by reason of the Bristol Press article on June 5, 2007, therefore the time period to file this complaint is timely as it remains open for 30 days – until July 4, 2007.
There is sufficient reason to request an investigation of the facts by the FOI Commission and to determine if there was a violation of the letter and spirit of the regulations. The enclosed news articles are important to the uncovering of these events but the enclosed emails are largely self-explanatory.
I trust that the Commission will find sufficient cause to investigate and then to draw conclusions. Because these actions that were kept secret for five or more months are now leading to the expenditure of substantial public funds, the commitment of legal resources as well as the commitment of other public resources, the Commission should consider granting interlocutory relief by way of an interim order before further public resources are committed or used.
Signed and Notarized this 2nd day of July 2007.
Zoppo's response Friday:
I have not seen the complaint but have been advised of its receipt at City Hall by the Corporation Counsel's office.
I am aware that it has been submitted by a close friend and political ally of Art Ward's, Jay Meisinger, who is the current Commander of the American Legion.
I do not believe the FOI complaint has any merit and I am disappointed that this has resulted in the city being placed in a position of having to expend resources to defend what was in fact meeting preparation by me, the chair of the Ordinance Committee, as it relates to the ordinance meetings and public hearings on the downtown corporation. I have stated earlier that the word I used, which was script, was an extremely poor word choice and does not reflect that the document used was merely my detailed agenda and order of how the meeting was to be handled. The documents that I shared with you and others clearly indicate that I was tracking concerns of both the public and the members of the council as the public hearings progressed so that nothing would fall through the cracks. There were also variety of technical amendments and a continuance of the public hearing.
I will not apologize for meeting preparation and I do believe that if the City of Bristol has to go forward with defending this claim at the FOI Commission in Hartford, that we will prevail.
*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
June 10, 2007
Council hopeful Rich Kilby weighs in on script controversy
1st District Democratic City Council contender Rich Kilby recently sent me this statement:
I feel nothing wrong was done, wouldn't you would like to know what's happening at a very special Ordinance Meeting, so you could do your homework, when questions are asked you could give a detail summary of whatever plan is on the table, get the taxpayers comments and move forward in the best direction. Whether it's Art, Ellen, or Bill you need to know what is going on.
I feel nothing wrong was done, wouldn't you would like to know what's happening at a very special Ordinance Meeting, so you could do your homework, when questions are asked you could give a detail summary of whatever plan is on the table, get the taxpayers comments and move forward in the best direction. Whether it's Art, Ellen, or Bill you need to know what is going on.
June 8, 2007
McCauley defends Zoppo
City Councilor Kevin McCauley sent this statement recently about the "script" controversy:
First off, I don't think "script" was the best word to describe the process of gathering and organizing a mountain of information which contained concerns, questions, desires and input from all the council members. Ellen’s ability to effectively compile all that in an orderly outline so we would all have our particular areas of concern brought onto the record highlights her leadership (Mayoral) qualities.
This particular outline even addressed Art Ward’s issues. Even after Art had made his position quite clear early on that he wanted no part of his Democratic colleagues working with the other party and went his own way, we respected his viewpoint just as we always have, and January’s meeting was no exception. Art Ward’s comment about having no knowledge of this form of government is disingenuous, as he has participated in similar outlines in the past. For him to infer this happens all the time does a disservice to the public trust because he is well aware of it’s inaccuracy.
First off, I don't think "script" was the best word to describe the process of gathering and organizing a mountain of information which contained concerns, questions, desires and input from all the council members. Ellen’s ability to effectively compile all that in an orderly outline so we would all have our particular areas of concern brought onto the record highlights her leadership (Mayoral) qualities.
This particular outline even addressed Art Ward’s issues. Even after Art had made his position quite clear early on that he wanted no part of his Democratic colleagues working with the other party and went his own way, we respected his viewpoint just as we always have, and January’s meeting was no exception. Art Ward’s comment about having no knowledge of this form of government is disingenuous, as he has participated in similar outlines in the past. For him to infer this happens all the time does a disservice to the public trust because he is well aware of it’s inaccuracy.
GOP chairman turns up the heat on Zoppo
City Republican Chairman Art Mocabee issued this statement this morning:
In light of Ellen's arrogance in responding to the her scripting, further comment is warranted.( "No apology")
What would have happened if some councilmen refused to follow her attempt to control the flow of business? Is this what she calls leadership? It is more micro management then some others have been accused of. However, the overriding problem I have is that so many of our elected officials went along with the script. It proves just how dysfunctional this council is.
Councilman Minor and the Democrats call it "meeting preparation". I would argue that it is direct manipulation of an issue to achieve a desired result, otherwise known as a fix!
If our elected officials can not think for themselves, then they either do not or can not understand the "complexities" or the "legal issues" of the City's business as Dean Kilbourne suggests. In my opinion, those Councilmen who need a script should not be conducting the City's business if they don't understand it.
This issue being scripted, (BDDC) I happen to support and am pleased with the fact that it is a reality.How- ever, what about the people who do not support it? I think they may feel robbed of their representation.
What else was scripted by her?...the Burgryn Property debate...the purchase of the mall. Is the failure of the Roberts Property funding from the Bd. of Finance an example of what happens when you do not follow her script?
Bottom line is that it is bad management, bad government, bad for the process and the taxpayer and voters once again takes it in the end!
In light of Ellen's arrogance in responding to the her scripting, further comment is warranted.( "No apology")
What would have happened if some councilmen refused to follow her attempt to control the flow of business? Is this what she calls leadership? It is more micro management then some others have been accused of. However, the overriding problem I have is that so many of our elected officials went along with the script. It proves just how dysfunctional this council is.
Councilman Minor and the Democrats call it "meeting preparation". I would argue that it is direct manipulation of an issue to achieve a desired result, otherwise known as a fix!
If our elected officials can not think for themselves, then they either do not or can not understand the "complexities" or the "legal issues" of the City's business as Dean Kilbourne suggests. In my opinion, those Councilmen who need a script should not be conducting the City's business if they don't understand it.
This issue being scripted, (BDDC) I happen to support and am pleased with the fact that it is a reality.How- ever, what about the people who do not support it? I think they may feel robbed of their representation.
What else was scripted by her?...the Burgryn Property debate...the purchase of the mall. Is the failure of the Roberts Property funding from the Bd. of Finance an example of what happens when you do not follow her script?
Bottom line is that it is bad management, bad government, bad for the process and the taxpayer and voters once again takes it in the end!
June 7, 2007
Zoppo stands by scripted meetings
Story in today's Bristol Press
City Councilor Ellen Zoppo also sent me a more detailed statement after the paper went to press last night. Here it is:
If people take the time to read them as posted, they would realize they are more of a combination expanded agenda and talking points and not a script where people had lines.
Neither the mayor nor the Council were told by me what to say, as the term script would imply....that word is the part that I think people are reacting to. People were not scripted, they were simply given the outline of how I was going to chair the meeting and what order was going to be used including when we would hear from the public, when they would have the opportunity to comment, and then a second round for any additional thoughts or closing remarks for them to go on the record as to how they were going to vote and why, which I thought was important for the public. It leaves more questions that it answers when people just vote yes or no without stating on the record why.
I don't think it hindered "open government,"I think it enhances the quality of the dialogue concerning important issues that have many pieces. There are few occasions where an important point is "forgotten" when these types of expanded agendas or outlines are used.
I have used this tool for years for various events and meetings, starting back in Hartford when I worked for the MetroHartford Chamber of Commerce and continue the practice today in New Britain. In some form or another, I use it for meetings I chair when there is going to be lengthly debate or many issues to be considered.
City Councilor Ellen Zoppo also sent me a more detailed statement after the paper went to press last night. Here it is:
If people take the time to read them as posted, they would realize they are more of a combination expanded agenda and talking points and not a script where people had lines.
Neither the mayor nor the Council were told by me what to say, as the term script would imply....that word is the part that I think people are reacting to. People were not scripted, they were simply given the outline of how I was going to chair the meeting and what order was going to be used including when we would hear from the public, when they would have the opportunity to comment, and then a second round for any additional thoughts or closing remarks for them to go on the record as to how they were going to vote and why, which I thought was important for the public. It leaves more questions that it answers when people just vote yes or no without stating on the record why.
I don't think it hindered "open government,"I think it enhances the quality of the dialogue concerning important issues that have many pieces. There are few occasions where an important point is "forgotten" when these types of expanded agendas or outlines are used.
I have used this tool for years for various events and meetings, starting back in Hartford when I worked for the MetroHartford Chamber of Commerce and continue the practice today in New Britain. In some form or another, I use it for meetings I chair when there is going to be lengthly debate or many issues to be considered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)