Figured many readers would be interested in the Courant's editorial today calling for an end to city workers serving on the City Council. It is based largely on reporter Don Stacom's scathing indictment of the city police department in this story last Sunday.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Everyone can have such a conflict of interest at some time. If I am a school teacher, how can I approve the budget when the largest portion is allocated to education? If I am a businessman, how can I vote on issues that may benefit or hurt my business? It is done by reclusing yourself from a specific vote.
ReplyDeleteThat is why we have voters. The voters need to decide if the realtionship/s will interfere with the decision making.
If there is mismanagement - then those in power should not be re-elected. The buck stops at the top.
Capt. Osanitch hit it right on the head.It's a damn shame that all the excellent,professional officers on the Department are taking a hit from the "broadbrush" criticism of the BPD.It's the age old axiom "a few bad apples......"
ReplyDeleteI agree...McCauley should go
ReplyDeleteHatford Courant
ReplyDeleteFinally - a voice of reason!!!
we all know that stacom is cockayne's friend. every time cocakyne wants something "dirty" published he calls stacom from the courant. shame, shame, shame...don't pee where you sleep
ReplyDeleteTim:
ReplyDeleteThis focus of this article is the City Council not the police force.
As far as keeping these Democrat, government-class lackeys like Kevin McCauley (who's also a dunder-head) off the Council, I say DITTOS!!!
Thank you Steve for publicizing this on your blog.
Cockayne will talk to anyone that will print what he says.
ReplyDeleteSort of a standing joke among the council members
tim gamache is a moron
ReplyDeleteSteve
ReplyDeleteWow what happened and article? Are you feeling ok? There has to be a rapper story somewhere to cover!! LOL
This has been a burning issue in Bristol for many years. Maybe the public will now see how wrong it is to have City employees serve on the City Council. Most of these candidates are union puppets put there to serve their interests. City Council members should serve the interests of the taxpayers not the unions,
ReplyDeletewhat does the police investigation have to do with council members serving their city? it wasn't as if a council member swept under the rug what happened here. This whole thing was between the mayor, ferguson and the chief and if anything was done inappropriately, then it's between them.
ReplyDeleteKevin McCauley is a huge disappointment.
ReplyDeleteOh and thanks Ken Johnson for working so hard to get him elected.
This issue has come up and been officially proposed at least twice with past charter revision committees and has failed miserbly. Even if the issue somehow got put on the ballet, which is unlikely, their are a lot of city employees, and even more retired city employees, living in this city who believe the process is in fine order and do not believe anything should be changed. People are wasting their time even discussing this. It will never change and is most likely unconstitutional.
ReplyDelete@5:58,
ReplyDeleteEveryone has their "own" special interests. It's up to the voter to vote for the one whose interests serves them the best.
We had business people, city workers, and others with vested interests.
I find it courious with all the budget problems we are facing that we can find so many foolish and childish things to debate.
When do you plan to work the budget? Time to do some cutting....
If it is an issue then I'm sure the voters would see fit to NOT elect them. As long as the voters choose to elect these candidates, it's a non-issue.
ReplyDeleteCity workers should be on more boards because these board members don`t have a clue what has to be done from day to day or the needs of the dept they just listen to the mrgs.And alot of mrgs don`t have a clue like public works, and i`am sure it`s in all depts
ReplyDeleteAbout time someone got there say. These city workers in office are killing BRISTOL. They play the game but they get there way. Look the mayors family works for the city, Big man krawicki has his family in there and you wonder whynwee in trouble.
ReplyDelete5:58 Too bad they don't but I guess you'd be happier if they do what you want!
ReplyDeleteSometimes the aspirations of serving on the city Council is not to serve the people, but rather serve a small group of people. You should I repeat - never ever have too recuse yourself from voting on any City matter.
ReplyDeleteStop using the argument that we choose to elect them knowing they were already a City employee. Most people when they go and vote for that person really have no idea that they will be rescuing themselves from discussions or a vote on a particular city matter. That my friends is not fair to the people in that city's district and to the city in a whole.
I agree there are a ton of other city activities one could participate in if they wanted to be involved in city matters that would not require a vote. The Charter revision needs to take a look at this matter, or maybe the City of Bristol's HR policy should make a policy that if you are a City employee you are re-framed from serving on any boards/council in the city.
Wake up you idiots! OF course everyone potentially can have a conflict of interest at one time or another. My issue as a tax payer is that (as stated in the Courant article,) I did not elect someone that has to continually recuse themselves from votes due to conflicts of interest with the city. Your voting on business that may affect you and your busy does not affect me nearly as much as a City employee voting on where and how our tax monies are going. I can't even believe anyone with a sane mind would adhere to this principle . You cannot serve 2 masters. Its 2011 and yes the economy is bad, how long are we going to complain about the same things/problems/etc year after year? What city services do we get as a taxpayer? When was the last time our elected officials put thier noses to the grindstone and generated ANYTHING that will start bringing substantial revenue to this town. Yet again. the mill rate showed little growth so guess what, TAXES WILL BE GOING UP AGAIN.
ReplyDeletelet's see. its OK for an ex con drug dealer named Marion Barry to be a Mayor, but if you're a cop or heaven forbid, a relative of a cop you can't hold office?? Please, while you're at it why don't we limit others their freedoms...maybe like Freedom of the Press for the Courant..like it or not city employees have the same freedoms you do or should we repeal the Emaciation Proclamation or any other sticky paperwork that might be in the way?
ReplyDeleteWith out ever getting elected, Mr.Johnson has done an awful lot of damage.
ReplyDeleteHe lost for council, lost for mayor, supported dems, and kept some good people out of office.
Oh yea, Gary is his biggest supporter
What about the fact that Ward who has a son, son-in law, daughter in law and wife is a retired city employee. Kevin Fuller who is a city employee and his wife works for the city emploies credit union. Whos boss is Kilanie from the PD. Oh and Kevin is on the police board. Dave Mills retired teacher.
ReplyDeleteAnd what has the current DTC leadership (handpicked by Ward) done to recruit non-city workers to run for the council? Nothing. In fact, notice how Ward is hostile to the only two Dem's on the council who work in the private sector. They need to sweep out the whole DTC crowd, starting with Ward.
ReplyDelete10:57 What's Hatford? Voice of reason? LMAO
ReplyDelete3:47 You forgot to mention ending with bigfoot. (Cockayne) But you are showing that you are just a dumb biased Republican.
ReplyDelete7:00 am You forgot to mention the ex con radio announcer that was governor. Do I have to mention his name? You hypocrite!
ReplyDelete"In fact, notice how Ward is hostile to the only two Dem's on the council who work in the private sector"
ReplyDelete--McCauley is employed by the city fire department.
--But you're correct is stating that ward has always been in the tank for public labor...as are almost all Democrats.
Can't recall any republican mayors that were city employees
ReplyDeleteWho in the private sector would want to run for council?
ReplyDeleteYou people are nasty to each other.
Run for election, win, or lose, then work toghether.
No, it's election time %100 of the year.
The best reason to keep city workers off city council?
Control costs!
How about some of the attorneys on land use boards?
ReplyDeleteConflict??
Bristol is run by a few, the insiders and good old boys
And people like you too Ben! Nothing but your special interest. "You" It's all about poor you !
ReplyDelete3:33 How about Mike Werner. Didn't he own the BOE buses?
ReplyDelete3:33
ReplyDeleteNot when he was mayor
They tried this back in 2004.
ReplyDeletehttp://articles.courant.com/2004-10-09/news/0410090313_1_city-attorney-city-workers-police-officer
4:29 Better check you facts . Theres a lot more to the bus story.
ReplyDeleteHey, 10:30 AM:
ReplyDeleteThere's only one attorney on any of the city's land use boards (Planning, Zoning, ZBA, and Wetlands), and that individual is a corporate lawyer. So exactly where's the "conflict of interest" that you speak of?
Next time, you might want to actually get your facts straight.
Werner did'nt have to be Mayor when he owned the bus company. But there sure was a conflict then but the Republicans didn't bring it up then. Why not?
ReplyDelete9:01
ReplyDeleteCorporate or not, is he working for Renaissance or Monte?
And, he does not work for a corporation, unless his firm is incorporated.
6:55
ReplyDeleteHe was a driver when he was on the council.
Remember, the BOE controls that contract
@12:12,
ReplyDeleteWhere is that comming from?
Typical, can't argue the facts attack the person.
Instead of justifing why city workers should be on the council, you have proven what?
My vested interest is you stop raiding my wallet everytime you can't make the budget work.
Maybe the Courant was right, and I was wrong.
To 1:04 PM: The only attorney who's also a member of a city land use board is a woman, not a man. Once again, you have your facts wrong. But apparently that doesn't stop you (and others) from seeing conspiracies where they don't exist.
ReplyDeleteWanna try again?