YourCT.com header image 2
← Norwalk: Rising Robberies Reveal Much Norwalk: East Ave. Railroad Bridge Looked At →

Norwalk: Ethics Code Revision A Fluid Process


by turfgrrl


June 5th, 2007 · 35 Comments

According to Matt “Mad Max” Breslow, the latest revision of the ethics code will include an independent ethics panel.

Coffey said he’ll recommend strengthening the educational component in the current draft code by asking the new ethics commission to host yearly discussions with officials about its role, the ethics code and any new developments that arise.

He’ll also propose a provision barring retaliation against whistleblowers who file ethics complaints and a restriction on former elected officials taking jobs with the city within one year of leaving office.

Coffey has said he wanted to create an independent ethics commission when the ethics code revision process began more than three years ago, although he changed his mind after considering the idea.

Last month’s public hearing, the third on the proposed revisions, helped change his mind again.

“Hey look, legislation is a fluid process,” Coffey said. “We erred on the side of holding more public hearings so we could get input, so we could make sure we get it right.”

Of course all the sturm und drang of the ethics code wouldn’t have happened if a certain Zoning Board of Appeals member hadn’t made a series of bad decisions prompting a former client to file an official complaint. Without that incident, there has been no ethics complaints filed in Norwalk for over 15 years. To some degree, that’s a credit to the way the city operates at all levels.

Having an independent ethics panel is a good thing. But in the overall priority of what matters most to Norwalk, time spent focusing on the ethics code could have been better spent focusing on the flooding issues and other infrastructure issues that threaten more of Norwalk’s quality of life than legislation that kicks in so rarely.

The better news was that there were no reports of flooding after yesterday’s rain storm.

source: Norwalk Advocate, Independent ethics panel proposal nears a vote, By Matt Breslow, June 5 2007

Tags: In the News · Norwalk

35 Responses so far ↓ “Norwalk: Ethics Code Revision A Fluid Process”


Pages: [1] 2 » Show All



  • 1 anon // Jun 5, 2007 at 8:27 am

    TG Ann Carbone was not the only issue.

  • 2 Anonymous // Jun 5, 2007 at 9:08 am

    #1 you are right but some democrits have tried to make her into the poor victim, poor thing. But the RE community knows better and she is now untouchable through her own stupidity. Stupid acts are often commited by abuse of power.

  • 3 sick and tired // Jun 5, 2007 at 9:34 pm

    I am hoping that once the Ethics Commission is formed the taxpayers can bring some of the politicians before it. That should keep them busy for at least a few years!

  • 4 anonymous // Jun 6, 2007 at 8:43 am

    If there ever was a strong argument for limiting the mayor’s and councilmen’s terms to two years this is it. All of a sudden Coffey is for the independant ethics panel? Guess he woke up and remembered that there is an election in November!

  • 5 Alfonso Salazar // Jun 6, 2007 at 9:07 am

    I think the article in the Hours June 3rd edition “Another View” was the straw that broke the camels back.

  • 6 Looking for Ethical Government // Jun 6, 2007 at 10:53 am

    Turgirl,
    Maybe you didn’t read the Advocate today and missed an important story about the Common Council’s failure to abide by FOI regs. This has been an ongoing problem, and especially evident when they held “investigations” which were thinly veiled attempts to smear city officials who were not to their liking. This is why a proper ethics code and independent commission are so needed, to make these “witch hunts” less likely to happen. The Council is scheduled to receive training in FOI compliance at its June 26 meeting.

    Here is the link to the story:
    http://www.norwalkadvocate.com/news/local/scn-sa-nor.foi5jun06,0,3910389.story?coll=nor-news-local-headlines

  • 7 turfgrrl // Jun 6, 2007 at 11:05 am

    Looking for Ethical Government: I read the story and my take away was that it was a good thing that Mike Coffey is having a refresher on FOI compliance at the bipartisan meeting. Of course, not all council members show up to them. The last one I attended, Kevin Poruban sat outside the council chamber instad of participating, even though Hal Alvord was making an important presentation about the waste disposal contract issue.

    I’m all for sunshine and transparency. It’s one of the reasons I do this blog. But for you to characterize an investigation as a “hinly veiled attempts to smear city officials who were not to their liking” is wrong. THe outcome of these investigations in transparency and an examination of the incidents that prompted them. I have read the transcripts of those investigations that I have not attended, and attended some of them. Each time I see that the questions asked are made in an effort to improve the process or system, in short, a better Government.

    I further think that characterizing Phyllis Bolden as anything less than an upstanding and thoughtful council member is unfair. To say that she conducted a “witch hunt” is demeaning and an insult to all those who stand for good open government.

    The open investigation process works. The cover ups don’t.

  • 8 Looking for Ethical Government // Jun 6, 2007 at 11:15 am

    TG,
    If the Council were concerned about open government, they would have read the FOI regs when they got elected. It’s quite a simple piece of legislation, and essential for good government. NOw that they have been reprimanded bu the FOI commission, they had little choice in scheduling an education meeting.

    Continuing an investigation of a city official’s conduct, when there is no evidence, is a witch hunt. It is extremely demeaning and damging to the city offical in question. I have been present at meetings where several firemen spoke of how low the morale of their department was as a result of the Council’s continually dragging them through the mud when there was not even a complaint filed.

  • 9 turfgrrl // Jun 6, 2007 at 11:42 am

    Looking for Ethical Government: What’s wrong with having informational hearings and workshops to improve compliance with FOI? I applaud that they are going to hold them. Why are you so critical?

    I totally disagree with your characterization of the investigation. McCarthy mishandled the allegation of racism in his department. The Fire Department does have low moral, but not because this incident was investigated, but because this incident was ignored by McCarthy. Read Lauren Garrison’s excellent article on the subject in the Citizen-News. It was one of the reasons I followed the whole incident in the first place.

    To have a Fire Chief who doesn’t listen to his fire fighters, and otherwise mishandles racial charges is bad. As I wrote previously on the subject: Yet an earlier Norwalk Citizen-News report dug into the morale issue noting that McCarthy spends little time with firefighters and makes judgment calls and decisions without involving them.

    Government works when there are checks and balances. The people at the top of organizations need to embrace transparency and engage with their workforce.

    Cover ups are bad, whatever the reasons.

  • 10 Looking for Ethical Government // Jun 6, 2007 at 11:53 am

    You can continue to smear the chief on your trash-talk blog, that’s your right.It’s good to be queen of smear isn’t it? What the firemen said at the Diversity Day meeting was that they were demoralized by continuing allegations of racism in the fire department. They said nothing about the chief. This was after the mayor invited the diversity consultants to investigate the allegations, who found no racism existed in the fire department.

  • 11 turfgrrl // Jun 6, 2007 at 12:01 pm

    Looking for Ethical Government: Quick with the accusations of smearing. I know and talk to many Norwalk Firefighters. And you apparently didn’t read the Norwalk Citizen News article which was not about the Diversity Day meeting, it predated it. If you are so distressed with the supposed “trash-talk” here, don’t come here and do exactly that. Why don’t you make a positive contribution here about how investigations can provide better results if you care so much about them.

  • 12 Anonymous // Jun 6, 2007 at 1:02 pm

    It seems to me that all administrations should make a point of having an ethics professional speak to each new group of elected officials. Also, there should be workshops on all kinds of things like FOI, how to actually run a meeting, etc. Training should be in Norwalk and after work hours. Resources are available for this.

    I’m not aware of any mayor, council or law department that has made this common practice - not this one or any previous one. I would think that between the mayor, the HR department and the law department this should be desirable and mandatory training offered to the locals.
    The council will do it now be cause it didn’t happen before or some council men/women just don’t get it. Why do we need to criticize everything that they do right? even if it is late coming.

  • 13 Looking for Ethical Government // Jun 6, 2007 at 2:01 pm

    TG,
    OK here’s a way to improve investigations-DO investigate a written complaint where there is a witness who is willing to testify and answer questions. Do NOT investigate unwritten complaints where there is no witness to question. Pretty simple, right? This should clarify the 3 cases you continue to provide coverage, aka smearing good peoples’ reputations: the fire chief, the Zoning Board official and the summer jobs porn rumor at Paganos.

    Secondly, the panel doing the investigating should be “independent” meaning no one with a political ax to grind, like our current Ethics committee.

  • 14 turfgrrl // Jun 6, 2007 at 5:15 pm

    Looking for Ethical Government: Not bad, I pretty much agree with your requirement of a written complainant for investigations. Except that if there’s a whistleblower, that would be dicey depending on who and what, meaning that if someone wanted to file a complaint, the written statement should be recorded by a trusted entity.

    Which brings me to the second part of what you said. In the Zoning Board official, which was the only ethics investigation undertaken, there was in-fact a written complaint and witnesses. SO score one for how the ethics panel handled it. What lawyering went on from there, was at the behest of the two sides, that is the complainant and the zoning official, not the panel. Lawyers, ah well, what did Shakespeare say, first let’s kill all the lawyers….

    The fire chief also had a written complaint, but that was handled through the personnel committee. Nothing about ethics there, just personnel stuff.

    The Pagano thing also had a written complaint, filed by a member of the former mayor’s staff, and resurrected by an embarrassing incident where Pagano’s was called to participate in the summer youth program again. I’ll have to see what committee handled that, but I don’t think it was the ethics committee. The police report also was documentation.

    Of the three, I attended the Pagano’s one. I have to say that the gist of the investigation was all about better documenting the process and making sure the Summer Youth program complies with state law. If you read my post on that, you’d see that was the case.

    There are some people that insist on characterizing everything as some sort of political vendetta. It especially happens here, in the comments. The thing is, that not everything revolves around the personalities involved. There are good reasons why incidents should be looked into, especially in the absence of documentation.

    We see it with how the BOE and the City handle time off, work hours, job descriptions and performance reviews. When the director of Human Resources for the City says that he’s concerned that individual departments run personnel matters in an ad hoc manner, and that there is no consistency to the application of the law or personnel policy, that is a huge problem. And that is not a partisan issue, it is a good governance issue. The fact that this council has chosen to be more aggressive in not only policing itself, but in attempting to air these issues is an important step in having a functioning democracy. Much better than an keeping everything hidden, undocumented and subject to the whims of discretion.

    Ask yourself why certain people are really fighting against them, and you’ll arrive at the only conclusion that I’ve drawn, which is that some people are afraid of full disclosure. No one should be afraid of letting the truth come out.

  • 15 Rocky Morone // Jun 11, 2007 at 8:42 am

    you’ll arrive at the only conclusion that I’ve drawn, which is that some people are afraid of full disclosure. No one should be afraid of letting the truth come out.

    by turfgrrl
    —————————
    Full disclosure, or Transparency, not matter what you call it, is like SUNLIGHT TO A VAMPIRE.

  • 16 Looking for Ethical Government // Jun 11, 2007 at 10:19 am

    Turfgirl: some good thoughts there, about whistleblower protection and good governanance.I agree with your conclusion - some people are afraid of full disclosure.
    Regarding the three incidents, not sure I agree with you completely. IN addition to a written complaint, the investigation needs at least one witness. If no one comes forward, the complaint should be dropped.
    Let’s take the zoning official, once the complaint was withdrawn, the council should have dropped it. Instead, they chose to have a meeting with 2 FOI violations, obviously trying to come up with a way to continue the investigation. This put the city at risk of a lawsuit.
    Regarding the fire chief, there was no complaint, other than the fireman with drinking violations who used the incident to get a sweetheart deal for his offense. He refused to testify against the chief or turn over the infamous video, again the investigation should have been dropped.
    The Council has NOT been agressive in policing itself, they proposed an ethics policy that put them fully in charge of judging their own ethics, and it was not to go into effect until AFTER the election. It’s likely that the first complaint would be against the councilman whose company is sponsoring the jazz festival. The complaint would have forced full disclosure about how much any city officals profited personally from the event. With the council sitting in judgment of their own actions, full disclosure seems unlikely.
    The revised ethics proposal does sound much stronger–let’s see what actually passes.

  • 17 turfgrrl // Jun 11, 2007 at 12:57 pm

    Looking for Ethical Government: In some cases a witness should be required. But that too can get dicey. A sexual harassment incident comes to mind as one that would be difficult to meet that. (Gender X vendor dealing with Gender Y official)

    Hiring a lawyer to file the complaint I think has to cary some weight, which was what was done in the ZBA official complaint. I disagree about any FOI compliance issues on that hearing, and my understanding is that if the lawyer for the plaintfiffs had dropped the complaint earlier,and the lawyer for the defendant had not asked for continuances, in all likelihood it would have been dropped earlier. But considering how messy this was (things like there not being any cler zoning regulation against having a second kitchen in the first place, one was passed after the incident) I’m sure that the ethics panel did what they had to do. The fact that their determination that it was dropped speaks to to the process working. The revised code will codify what wasn’t before.

    I still don’t see any ethics violations with Grant’s jazz festival. If there is one, and someone isn’t bringing forth the complaint, than that as just as bad. Our government can only work with checks and balances. All this exercise of making allegations without substance is wrong.

    And really, why be concerned over what profit the festival makes? The profit making event is not a bad thing. No one is being forced to buy tickets to the event, right? And no one is forcing sponsors to buy sponsorships to the event.

    I’ve posted on where I think its a bit dicey before, but I have to get to a meeting, so I’ll post more later.

  • 18 Gale Shepard // Jun 12, 2007 at 2:55 pm

    What percentage of the profits from the Jazz Festival are going into the coffers of the City of Norwalk?

    How much was the park leased for to the Jazz Festival?

    It seems that the only way that this will be made public is if an FOI order is executed on the city. Is this another example of
    “Well, we can’t be sure”

    “It’s privileged information.”

    “No one really knows.”

    “It all depends.”

    “Don’t go there.”

    “It’s non of your damn business”

    “It’s between those two”

    Politics as usual in this city. The taxpayers in Norwalk are the last ones to know what is going on, but the first ones to pay for it, if it goes belly up.

  • 19 Anonymous // Jun 12, 2007 at 3:05 pm

    Why don’t you call the Parks and Rec’s office and ask?
    Everyone pays the same price for renting parks in this town and no one gets special consideration. Mike Mocciae can lay your fears to rest that anything untoward has transpired between The jazz festival and the city. This is all a bunch of crap started by the dems who don’t like Mr. Grants politics because he doesn’t cow tow to the Galen Wells and friends regime. It has been fed by them and allowed to fester by them. Instead of embracing this as a start to more cultyural projects that will benefit the city and our students the instead wish to badmouth and destroy those who have an interst in this town. getting others to jump on this bandwagon has been their goal all along. Who is their next target?

  • 20 AnonymousObserver // Jun 12, 2007 at 3:15 pm

    Gale, you seem to be late to the discussion or not paying attention. The Jazz Festival, like any group, such as the Oyster Festival, pays a fee to use the park. They get a permit and they do not give their proceeds to the city. This is not sponsored by the city but private corportions. The city supports the idea of arts in the parks (such as Cranbury Park, etc.) but it does not have to be city sponsored and the city does not profit. Same as the dog competition or the antique car shows at Taylor Farm. The city sets the fee, collects the fee and makes sure the group lives up to its contract which means putting the park back in the same condition it was in before the event. This arrangement would apply if the NY Symphony gave a concert, Willie Nelson gave a concert or if the Boy Scouts took over the park for a jamboree. This would not profit the city but the city would likely issue the permit and a contract would be drawn up.
    If you don’t know what is going on, you should ask at city hall and be an informed tax payer.

  • 21 Mr Greenpeace // Jun 12, 2007 at 3:34 pm

    I wonder about the safety and who pays the details, and if we are to expect more lewdness on 13 year olds like sunday in the middle of the day…are they now going to get extra security at our expense above what the contracted out for,,a contract i would like to see printed..

    why can’t it be printed or put on the web site save the taxpayers a lot of time , and gives city hall a break from answering the same questions that have been asked,,

  • 22 Anonymous // Jun 12, 2007 at 3:56 pm

    Since when has this much scrutiny been placed on any event in this city. This has become nothing more than a verbal mob linching of an elected official. Police protection is essential at any event and it is the responsibility of the Jazz festival to provide any and all security deemed necessary by the city and the police department. Why would the city post on a blog anyway? You are free to go to or call city hall Parks and Rec and ask to see the contract.`

  • 23 Gale Shepard // Jun 12, 2007 at 5:23 pm

    Police protection is essential at any event and it is the responsibility of the Jazz festival to provide any and all security deemed necessary by the city and the police dept.

    OK, lets see if we get a council report on what the city earned for renting the park, and what the bottom line profit was for the city. THAT should be sent to the local paper or a reporter should ask. As far as calling the P & R try it after the dust settles on the concert and ask who made what, and how the city made out. IS THIS A BAD THING.

    Do you think you will ever find out if the city had to spend more than planned on fixing the park, traffic control, and Police presence?

    Yeah! When Pigs Fly. Like lets call up and find out what the REAL PROFIT MARGIN to the city was. You have more chance on finding out what next weeks winning Power Ball numbers are going to be.

  • 24 Gale Shepard // Jun 12, 2007 at 5:25 pm

    Just about everyone knows that this Jazz Festival is just a dry run for what is coming.

  • 25 Anonymous // Jun 12, 2007 at 5:27 pm

    What part of “the city makes no profit other than that of the rental fees and there is no cost to the city” that you just don’t get? They are pasying exactly the same thing that the Oyster festival, the Haitain Festival, The car shows, and any other organization pays for use of the park. Perhaps you just don’t understand or perhaps you don’t want to understand.

  • 26 Mr Greenpeace // Jun 12, 2007 at 5:49 pm

    It may be hard to swallow but for us giving examples of things you can read in the paper, get in your car and go see and can’t get from city hall it must bother some to think their city has failed them,,for those who saw it coming simply makes us better voters next time,,

  • 27 Anonymous // Jun 12, 2007 at 6:15 pm

    Exactly Mr. Greenpeace-Keeping notice of what goes on in the city makes for the best voters. Everyone should watch who does what and why when it comes to local candidates. This is why some of us are looking that much closer to what the BOE is doing and who is doing it.

  • 28 Gale Shepard // Jun 12, 2007 at 6:24 pm

    “Perhaps you just don’t understand or perhaps you don’t want to understand.” When I moved into Norwalk, I was a very naive person. It took me exactly 8 years to become suspicious of anything that has the appearance of something not for public consumption. Where I came from in Florida, was a bit smaller than Norwalk, but the citizens were made aware of everything that was going on in the city government. It was open and there was nothing that was not known to the public. We did not have to spend our lives trying to find out. The local papers always had investigative reporters asking the questions of the city government that we wanted to ask but were afraid to. We had to move when my husband was transferred to NYC. I now see in retrospect that we got a good bang for our political buck and our tax money in that city.

  • 29 anon // Jun 12, 2007 at 6:31 pm

    Anything you want to find out is evident on the city website. It is not the fault of the city or elected officials what the papers do or do not print. Unfortunately we only get what they want us to read and not the actual happenings. I agree, having moved here from another area, it takes time to get used to the local do’s and don’ts, who’s who and who isn’t and anything else of importance. Looking and listening is a good way to get in the know. However, in the local papers you can pick up one and read a story and pick up another, read the same story but none of it is the same as the first one. Makes one wonder just who is reporting this news. Of course this blog is another thing altogether.

  • 30 Truthfull Taxpayer // Jun 12, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    #28 - You were lucky to have open government in Florida. There is no such thing as an investigative reporter in Norwalk or transparency in our government. In New York citizens pay less that one quarter of the taxes that we pay and have all kinds of services.

    Norwalk’s form a government is more akin to the Sopranos in New Jersey. Welcome to Corrupticut, where cronyism and corruption are the name of the game.

    When you read the news papers, you have to read “between the lines” and know all the characters. Then you can see a little of what is going on. My suggestion is if you want the real facts of what happened at a public meeting etc.. wait until Friday and read the Citizen News.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All