Richard Lacey, an assistant city attorney, said the city can't answer the chief operating officer questions posed by former Mayor William Stortz.
Lacey said that state law requires "strict neutrality" by city officials on referendum questions.
Municipal employees "cannot take any official action" related to the issue, he said, or they could face fines up to $1,000 and other penalties.
So it's up to supporters of the COO to respond to Stortz, if anyone does.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Finally, Lacey gets what he always wanted -- to tell Stortz to shove it.
ReplyDeleteHeadline should read "No answers for the people".
ReplyDeleteAgain the public gets shortchanged,
Bill, thanks for trying.
What aboutt the money aspect?
Ridiculous!
ReplyDeleteHow are we supposed to know what is going on?
How does a citizen get answers?
ReplyDeleteDid Laceys office review this before it became a question on the ballot?
What was Stortz question?
ReplyDeleteToo bad Billy, your going to have to find another to be an obstructinist.
ReplyDeleteThank God your not doing it as Mayor.
Thats not the first time Lacey has stuck it to Stortz: remember when ehe didn't tell Stortz that the Supreme Court had set a date on the Ocean State issue, and he then brought it up during the meeting.
ReplyDeleteNot a nice guy.
The questions were on this blog: Collins has since taken them off.
ReplyDeleteMaybe he will repost them, or put them in the Press article.
I did not take them off. They're here: http://bristolnews.blogspot.com/2008/09/stortz-raises-questions-about-chief.html
ReplyDeleteGuess Ward didn't help Stortz the way Stortz helped Ward get elected!
ReplyDeleteStortz, why don't you just call Johnson and ask the questions yourself?
Stortz....go back into your little hole and stay there.
I wouldn't trust Johnson's answers, and I don't think Bill would either.
ReplyDeleteI would think that with the time in office that Bill has, his questions would be meaningful.
Nevermind who asked the questions, it's important that the voters get the answers prior to the election so that they can make an educated decision when they vote. Right now we are just being asked to vote on something without important details.
ReplyDeleteA lot of people have posed questions, and I am sure that Bill will admit that many of his came out of discussions with voters who trust him.
ReplyDeleteWho asked is not important, but what is important is getting answers from an objective source.
By the way, the questions are good, and they are pertinent.
if the charter revision commission, ken johnson, ken cockayne, craig minor, gary schaffrick and craig yarde did their jobs, this would not be the abomination that it is - they should have been the ones to explain the details - they want it.
ReplyDeleteThe Clan hasn't explained it, and if they did, would anyone be comfortable with the accuracy?
ReplyDelete1:46
ReplyDeleteThey can't explain it, they don't understand the charter.
It is interesting that we don't see any attempt by the Johnson group to respond to any of the questions.
ReplyDeleteWonder why???
6:44am - refer to 8:35pm posting
ReplyDelete9:34
ReplyDeleteOOPS!, Sorry I lost my head.
Thanks
Here is a case of politicians on both sides protecting their turf, and joining forces against a maverick.
ReplyDeleteso if bill reads this blog, which I am sure that he already has, then he should be able to understand that, by law, he has to get the answers to his questions from the "proponents" of the coo movement, not the elected officials.
ReplyDeleteif the proposers of this question can't answer the questions then one needs to question how they can propose such an inadequate proposal.
"Voter Beware"
I find it difficult to understand why the mayor did not respond to stortz, at least giving reasons for not answering the questions.
ReplyDeleteOnly proper business courtesy to respond.
the community heard the corporation counsel's reasons at the council meeting, the council meeting has been on Nutmeg TV 3 times, the media has had stories on it and it has been on here. seems as though public access has been addressed.
ReplyDelete1. when did the press put Laceys opinion in the paper?
ReplyDelete2. Common Courtesy and good business practise justifies a responce in kind, and should have been done BEFORE Lacey announced it at a council meeting.
Ward is totally out of it.
8:19 - not a problem, you probably won't remember this posting either but we hope that the help that has been requested will be delivered to you very quickly - padded walls don't really hurt.
ReplyDeleteHeading should read, no answers for the voters!!!
ReplyDeleteMaybe Stortz wasn't so bad after all.
ReplyDelete