Today Mayor Richard Moccia announced that he was running for re-election. I unforunately could not be in two places at the same time, and missed the announcement held today so that I could attend a seminar in Hartford. But I’m sure all of you have much to say on that and any other topic tonight. Comments ahoy!
Open Thread
by turfgrrl
April 14th, 2007 · 68 Comments
Tags: current affairs
68 Responses so far ↓ “Open Thread”
Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All
-
I only caught a sound bite on the local news, but I marvel at his self-dillusion. Accessible? Not. Improved quality of life? Nobody’s life that I know. He “enjoys” being the Mayor? What, you mean the ribbon-cuttings and banquets and all that? How about NOT enjoying it and actually coming forth with some initiatives of your own to improve Norwalk. Ugh. I marvel too at these politician’s sense of self-importance and wonder why anyone would want to be involved in politics. Which brings me to another point: I hope you Dems come up with a very capable candidate. I’m a little tired of the “lesser of two evils” voting rationale here in Norwalk.
-
We are so screwed … The Dems would rather spend time fighting amongst themselves instead of fighting for Norwalkers. Cany you imagine any of the current council members as mayor? I can’t. But then, I can’t imagine any of the Republicans either. I’m fed up, we need new blood in this town.
-
We need the man of the people to run for mayor: david angelo watts.
-
Regardless of the Council vote, doesn’t the BET have the final say on the spending?
Even if the Council voted to raise the cap- how does that affect the BET’s final decision on the cap?
Could Tom Hamilton be charged with looking at the BOE budget, acting as a financial director, and provide his recommendations on savings? It would be an expansion of his role, but without a financial director at Central Office and no one on the BOE taking up the mantle of analysis, perhaps he could provide some direction.
-
In fact, Tom Hamilton DID look at the BoE budget. He and I have prepared an analysis showing reductions ranging from $2.0 million to $2.8 million (depending on different assumptions) that could be made to the BoE budget without laying off a single employee or cutting any sports programs. Its been posted on this site before, I’ll ask Turfie to post it again.
However, note that I worked on that analysis with Tom to determine whether we on the Board of Estimate could RESPONSIBLY hold the Board of Education to a lower spending increase than requested, NOT to lay out for them how they had to do it. I wanted to know if Sal Corda HAD to cancel sports and lay off teachers to make those reductions, and our analysis pretty clearly shows that he could cut millions from his budget without laying off a single person — even in admnistration. A different result might have led me to propose a different budget number at the BET, again without necessarily telling the BoE where to cut.
Keep in mind, though, that our analysis of possible line item savings in the BoE budget is merely a recommendation. Unlike all the other City departments, whose budgets we control on a month-to-month basis, the BoE budget is out of our control once we approve the grand total appropriation. By State law the BoE can (and always does) take money the BET has recommended for various expenditures and then spend that money in different ways.
So Hamilton can’t really function AS the BoE’s Finance Director, since, unlike in his situation with the other City departments, he doesn’t have an idependent body (the BET) to back him up and enforce the budget with the BoE.
It really is an inadequacy of State law. With Police, Fire, DPW, etc., they have an connected Commission or Committee (e.g., the Police Commission) that runs the department, but then a separate budget ‘watchdog’ (the BET) keeps an eye on the money. With the schools, the Board of Education has to play both roles, and being your OWN ‘watchdog’ doesn’t really work. So the schools function without that second level of financial oversight, and I think the results show.
-
Is Norwalk heading for a five way mayor race?
It seems the mayor has stolen the tag line “the people’s mayor” from a young new comer supporters. Hey Moccia- Nice sign.
This could be interesting- A former state marshal, two lawyers, doctor, a community activist, and a Yalie.
Moccia (R)
Knopp, Krummel, Coffey, Watts (D)
Mike Coffey (WF/ I)
Merrell (I)
Riley- Wilson (I)
-
Since this is an open thread, I’d like to get off the mayoral race for a moment.
For the last several days, we’ve all seen warnings of a 20-year Nor’easter heading our way. Most of us watched out of concern for our weekend plans. The newspapers reported on how the cities were preparing for the deluge, and the National Weather Service issued “costal flood warnings” days ago.
I cannot begin to fathom what our neighbors in East Norwalk go through when a simple downpour causes severe flooding of their homes, and the spend days knowing a “20-year storm” is heading right at them. My prayers are with them.
It is absolutely unconscionable that this has been allowed to go on for so long, under both Republican and Democratic administrations. When did the health and safety of its residents stop being the number 1 priority for the City of Norwalk?
-
Mgeake, You are right on target with that comment. We as a city should put the pressure on our electeds to get moving on fixing the flooding instead of hiding behind the “let’s debate” everything excuse. There’s no debate, use the rainy day find for what it is for, rainy day emergencies.
-
Jen it’s likely that today’s flooding will change the dynamic of the mayors race. Bill Krummel will abandon any support for Alex Knopp and run as the man to fix the flooding. That will pit him against Coffey for a bloody primary fight for the Dem nod. The DTC will back Krummel. The rest of the candidates aren’t in play. Coffey is the most likable Dem, Krummel is the most capable leader on flooding. They could pair up and defeat Moccia in a landslide.
-
Not for nothing, but Krummel has been in office for years and has done NOTHING to address these flooding issues. This year Moccia has assembled over $3 million in funding (from old capital accounts, operating funds, and the new capital budget) to address these flooding issues. Knopp did nothing. Krummel did nothing. Moccia is addressing the issue. Don’t think that point won’t be easy to make with hard budget numbers.
-
The fundamental problem here is that, after decades of neglecting our infrastructure, $3M is but a drop in the bucket. Moccia may be “addressing” the problem, but he sure isn’t fixing it.
-
Mike Lyons said “and being your OWN ‘watchdog’ doesn’t really work.” in regard to the BOE. True. And also applies to the Ethics Commitee. COffey (and the Mayor) are all wet in thier defense of the current flawed ethics committee recommendations. And speaking of all wet, my heartfelt sympathies to our flood-prone neighbors. How come the officials got so damn down in the weeds with the BOE and didn’t take a fine-tooth come to Parks and Rec, DPW, Police, Fire, etc. to make sure to fix the flooding — caused by years of poor development decisions under Esposito (build wahtever you want wherever you want) and deliberate neglect of the infrastructure. By the way, wasn’t Espositio also “a people person”. Maybe what we need is fewer handshakes and more oversight of how departments are spending the money.
God knows, nobody had any problem taking ALL the money away from the Historical Commission. After telling them they needed to take better care of the city-owned historic buildings, they removed all funding. I wouldn’t mind so much if it went to flooding but I suspect it went to expand the Parks and Rec empire…
-
Bill Krummel takes no credit for the $3M nor should he take any credit for being the flood victims saviour. he talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk. Bill Krummel is a loud voice(when he’s not dozing) for the likes of Galen and friends to make the current elected officilas look bad. Whe leaving City Hall many of us were astounded by a conversation between Wells and Romano after a recent hearing was overheard in the City hall parking lot where Ms. wells told Ms.Romano that it was her job to make the current administration look bad and it is political. We all heard it and all were quite surprised. Ms Romano told Ms wells that she should be very ashamed of herself and both Ms Wells and Ms Briggs told Ms Romano that she was wrong and didn’t understand politics. Ms Wells should look around before making such comments because we are listening and with all the bickering and all the dissension we are listening very hard. Decisions about the welfare of this city has become all too political and the comment that Krummel is the voice and saviour of the flood victims is a joke. After reading the letters in todays paper perhaps Ms Cece should rethink her stance since from every meeting and hearing that I and others have attended, the BET and the council have made them their #1 priority. It is just the antics of some council members to defame the character and inteligence of those who would do the right thing. Don’t give Krummel any credit where credit isn’t due because his soap box just might topple over this time around.
-
I get what you’re saying about the ethics panel. But some improvements are better than no improvements and with that woman from ZBA so blatantly causing ethics problems, I tend to think that something is needed now.
The city budget was gone over with a fine tooth comb. The BOE budget never has. That is unfair. The BOE budget is 70% of the budget. They have not done one single cut. Look at all the other departments that got cut. That is the problem. Council members should be embarrassed that they want to put even more money into the schools, when there’s no accountability for how they spend their money.
You are being hypocritical about parks and rec too. You’ve said that you were against the mini golf at Duffy park. That would bring revenue to the parks and rec department. In other words they are self funding their projects.
-
Geake, 2nd District Commisoner that overseas a deaprtment that turned off a person’s electricity for a 57 cents overdue bil, and had to have the Attorney General intervene, The same district that has failed to pay the city there share of the South Norwalk Library expansion. The same district that has numerous complaints about residents being threatened with shutoff off for small amounts in arrearage,in homes where there was medical quiptment necessary to maintain life, we all know the second district history. By the way Mr Geake has already announced he is running for council, gee do you think it is political. Perhaps he should ask to see the letters sent to the Deomocratic adminstration complaining about flooding, that were ignored. Oh I forgot Mayor Knopp stated he did not read his mail.
-
Enrwlker: Moccia assembled $3 million dollars? Where??? There is $1.45 million in the capital budget for flooding. That doesn’t even come close to the $15 million we need to fix flooding. And it includes $250k in general drainage, which has always been there. Where are your numbers from? And Moccia did nothing. We flood victims did it. Endlessly, tirelessly, relentlessly begging for money. We researched, listened, went to meeting after meeting, lobbied council men and women, studied best practices, met with Tighe and Bond and other engineers, and so on. Moccia’s final contribution was influencing the move of $120k from the snow surplus over to GIS mapping, which still does nothing to stop the flooding. Mapping will have no impact on flooding for years. If the city doesn’t know where it’s own pipes are, than what do they intend to load into the GIS system; garbage in, garbage out. We flood victims know the city piping infrastructure better than some DPW highway supervisors! And why are flood victims finding federal grant money for public works projects like flooding, and the Mayor’s own full time grants coordinator found nothing. There was over $158 million dollars in grants linked to infrastructure improvement as it relates to economic development. Surely, Norwalk qualifies for that!
And you are right about Bill Krummel and others: they knew about flooding years ago, yet did nothing. However, Grumman, Linnartz and Alvord never ASKED for any money for flooding, so I believe Krummel assumed flooding was isolated and sporadic and was being managed. Having seen this lapse of judgment, Krummel & Hempstead and others have started to help the victims. Unfortunately, it is too little, too late. Fast forward to next January when the flood victims must start all over again to get the money in the budget to FIX the flooding. Until then, we will be holding every department head and elected official accountable for the money that was allocated, and will start a campaign for candidates that are willing to put OUR money where THEIR mouths are. -
Well said itsridiculous. Moccia is not leading on this issue. Neither is anyone else on the council. They are more concerend with whether they get email from parents over the school budget. Why are they having yet another meeting about the education budget? Why aren’t they meeting with the state departments about flooding issues like all the towns around us? Where is Alvord today?
-
anonnorwalk: The BET and the Council SAY flood victims are their number one priority, but as you know, actions speak louder than words. They merely gave a SMALL token to pacify the flood victims. And if that’s the best they could do in an election year, then I cringe to think how little will be put in the budget next fiscal year.
-
indiga, we on the BET DID get ‘down in the weeds’ with the other budgets, particularly DPW’s. I demanded a report on all funds allocated for flooding-related projects and discovered about $1.5 million in unspent and unallocated money that could be — and now will be — redirected to the flooding issue. But a bit in our defense, these flooding issues were never brought to the BET before this year. I first started serving on the BET last year. I looked at the minutes of our public hearing last year, and not ONE person appeared to ask for any flooding assistance. I looked back at the minutes of the year before (Knopp’s last year) — same thing, not one member of the public raising the issue. We can’t address a problem if we don’t know it exists. When it was loudly brought to our attention this year, we allocated better than $3 million to it –a lot more than the “nothing” Ms. Cece unfortunately states we did in her Hour Op-Ed today.
Regarding the Historical Commission, you say “nobody had any problem taking ALL the money away from the Historical Commission”. You’ve lost me on that one. According to the budget we unanimously approved at BET on March 23, we increased the Historical Commission’s budget this year to $256,487, including a last-minute increase of $10,000 for the buidling maintenance account. What’s the basis for your claim that we ‘took ALL the money away’ when we appropriated a quarter of a million dollars to the Commission?
-
Mr. Lyons, what makes up this $3 million figure? I just went online and see $1.5 million on the capital budget page.
-
Mike looking at public hearing minutes is hardly the place to look. What about the hundreds of phone calls made to City Hall over the years? Has our city government been reduced to he who complains the loudest at hearings? You seem conscientious, so my criticism is not leveled at you, but the fact is that departments under Esposito ignored this, under Knopp ignored this, and now under Moccia ignored this. Krummel has his head in the water on this one. He never ever fought for anything for DPW as much as he has been fighting for BOE funding.
-
You know Mike Lyons actually gives facts, instead of distortions. The anti Moccia people say, Moccia is doing nothing, Wait! He is doing something, but not enough, Wait! transfering money is just a show, But wait! It is a good idea but it should have happened sooner. But wait! The city should know where the pipes are anyway. His grants coordinator has applied for money, but Fema has not decided yet, so of course it is his fault that the supposed 158 million is not coming to Norwalk, of course not many can give the details what is required to get those funds. Letters went to city as far back as 2002 about flooding, and no action was taken. Who was in office at that time, Oh it was not Moccia, but blame him anyway, I guess as as mentioned maybe it was because the then Mayor did not read his mail. Finally on a bi-partisan basis, money wss allocated,snd transferred and at least it is a start. Oh by the way $375,000 was put in the dredging of the Holly pond which will offer more immediate relief for the Olmstead section where Ms. Cece lives. Also one might want to point out to her that the 1 Million for the reval was not an item that anyone had a choice on, the state requires it, or would she have us ignore the law? This is a complex situation that has been allowed to fester, but to blame the people in office now, whether it be Republicans or Democrats is silly, and it is even more silly to try to demonize the Mayor because he at least as tried to make a start. But it is poltical season. As I have said in the past, I do not agree with everything Moccia has done, from the Illegal gun resolution or the living wage ordiance, to some of his appoinments. But people I have talked to, will tell uyou that he does return phone calls and answer his E-Mails. Finally the complaint about his ribbon cutting and banquets is hard to justify. Would you have him turn down requests from the PTO’s to help raise money, or events for the various churches and non profits that are trying to raise money for worthy causes, or turn down a new business that wants to open and wants a ribbon cutting, that is what a Mayor is supposed to do. Gauging by the Hour poll which admittedly is not a perfect snapshot, he has about %60 saying they would vote for him again. I am sure as the candiates are finalized and the campaign season starts, this blog will continue to have inaccurate statements from both sides of the aisle. Too bad, but it is free speech.
-
According to Mayor “I want to run again” Moccia his number one priority next year is the Volk fire station. Not flooding, not roads, not sewers, not education, not budgets, not finances, not economic development. Turn up that political hearing aide Moccia, you are starting to sound like Alex Knopp.
-
It IS ridiculous. I can’t even begin to address all the inaccuracies in anon 22’s comment, and haven’t the time at the moment as I will probably begin flooding shortly. After all, as we know, it is the city systems that fail us. As to the Fitch Pond, it will overflow, also due to city neglect. But dredging that pond only serves to give the Olmstead folks about 5 more minutes warning before they flood. Big deal. I will be back later to provide other perspective.
-
ML, while the Historical Commission is the smallest part of the Norwalk budget and there are certainly more important issues, let me comment briefly.
In Capital, as far as I know, HC got nothing for funds to do needed restoration work. Lockwood Mathews Mansion money is a pass-through so that’s not ever used for buildings where the HC takes a more direct role. In the Operating budget, everything was held to 2007 so building maintenance remained at the $10,000 –an amount that had been increased in 2006 from the sorely inadequate $4000 that it had been for the past 10 years. It would be hard to do the maintenance on one house for $10,000 a year much less take care of the buildings in teh HC charge. If you’re saying an additional $10,000 has been added back in, that certainly helps.
The HC situation is complicated by the fact that Commissioners have been trying to get things done with no staff. The curator has been out since early December and had not been reliaby showing up for some time before that.
-
indiga, we did add in $10,000 more for maintenance at our March 23 BET meeting. We only set the total amount for capital budget funding (based on bonding capacity and similar issues), so we have no control over capital budget line items. That’s the Council’s bailiwick. Where BET has control, we did add funding.
-
its the flooding — I concur, if the city departments have been hearing aout this flooding for years then someone dropped the ball badly at the DPW Department and the Council’s DPW Committee by not bringing these needs to the forefront by putting them in the capital budget and bringing operating budget needs to our attention at BET. I don’t think that neglect is going to continue any more.
-
On flooding in general, last month (when I was checking past BET minutes to see if the flooding issue had been brought to this Board [it hadn’t]), I asked Tom Hamilton (Finance Director) to check on City responses in the past. He responded “I’d also note that very little capital money has been requested by DPW in the past to address drainage issues. For instance, in the FY 2006-07 DPW Capital Budget Request, the DPW requested $1,230,000, and over the Five Year Capital Plan, the total requested for drainage projects was only $3,170,000. None of the areas that are garnering all of the attention this year (Buckingham/Lockwood, Olmstead/Fitch area, and Noah’s Lane) are anywhere to be found in the Five Year Plan that was developed by the department last year. Of the projects that were identified in the Five Year Plan last year, none of them make reference to flooding problems into peoples’ houses. For instance, funding was requested for a Keeler Brook Storm Water Study (which was funded at the full request of $150,000), but the description of the project indicates that this is to address street flooding, and storm water flooding that enters the sanitary sewer system (and hence is a concern of the DEP); there is no mention of any homes being affected by the problem. Likewise, the Mary Austin at Silvermine Ave Drainage Project (which was not funded in FY 2006-07) is to address a street flooding problem. The problem of flooding into peoples’ homes is not anywhere to be found in DPW’s Five Year Capital Plan from last year.” As the City’s finance board we’re definitely to address this, but the planning/engineering for it has to come from DPW first.
As I said, we’ve identified about $1.5 million in old capital account surpluses that is going to be redirected to these flooding problems, plus $1.5 million in this year’s capital budget, plus $250K we appropriated last year that the DPW is finally about to spend. That’s where the figure of $3 million comes from.
-
The bottom line here folks is, do we need or want to add more funding to the BOE when we have many more items that need immediate attention? I for one would rather see our infrastructure be our first priority or Norwalk will float away with all the bickering going on. This administration is not responsible for past flaws. It is however responsible for rectifying the situation and by reading Mike Lyons many enlightening posts, it would seem that this admin is going in the right direction. We who listen and read know it is not enough but perhaps Sal Corda and others who feel this is not important should roll up their sleeves today and go to the houses of the flooding and help these people move furniture, block water pouring in the homes, clean up the raw sewage floating throughout their childrens living spaces and bring food and whatever else is needed to help these people. But, I think not, they are in their cozy homes looking for more ways to threaten the admin, council and taxpayers with program cuts and demise of our education system if we won’t give them what they want. Ms Cece is not correct in her assessment that no-one is listening and no-one cares but she is correct in that former admins did nothing and that is what has brought us here today.
Does anyone out there have the wherewithal to endure what these people are going through? No, we can all sit back today and say I’m sure glad its not me but, those who really care will go to that special meeting on Tuesday and demand that the cap not be raised for anything other than the problems at hand and I for one do not see the BOE as a major problem at hand. Stop blaming and start doing. -
Since 2002 I have experienced flooding on my street,in my yard and home. The DPW knows about Buckingham Place because I informed them in person. In 2004 I tried again to get the DPW’s attention. I know Olmstead neighbors also brought their flooding problems to DPW. To hear that we were not in the 5 year plan and that monies were not requested to solve our problem is unbelievable. Had I not spent the last 8 months,along with Olmstead,attending meetings and learning about the budget process, I would still be waiting for assistance. I appreciate the information shared by Mike Lyons and will never allow this serious oversight to happen again.
