YourCT.com header image 2

Norwalk: Centralized Policy Still Be Worked On


by turfgrrl


June 23rd, 2007 · 46 Comments

Following the ordinance committee meeting of last April, the committee is still struggling with how to standardize the reporting and management of the summer youth program. Common Council member Joanne Romano is working on a draft of guidelines for all city employees who work with children. The ordinance committee debated whether background checks should be required of participants in the summer youth program. Matt Miklave and Carvin Hillaird are against background checks, however Miklave concedes that more supervision through more resources be assigned to the program.

The Ordinance Committee began its investigation in April amid allegations that the probe was politically motivated. Many also were concerned that it would hurt the program and questioned whether the committee was the appropriate body to do the probe.

Coffey has denied he initiated the probe for political reasons, saying he wanted to determine what happened, how it was handled by the city and whether a new policy or ordinance was needed.

As part of its investigation, the Ordinance Committee sought information from the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities about measures that other cities take to protect children in similar jobs programs.

The material from CCM involved mandatory background checks for various positions, city Corporation Counsel Peter Nolin said this week. None of the information was directly related to Norwalk’s summer job program, Nolin said yesterday.

Discussion at an Ordinance Committee meeting Tuesday night centered on whether to require background checks for regular employees at businesses participating in the program, which matches youths with private- and public-sector jobs.

Some committee members expressed concern that the checks would be too burdensome for businesses and discourage them from participating.

“I think it would actually hurt the program, and I’m not in favor of that,” Carvin Hilliard, a committee member and the council’s Democratic majority leader, said in an interview Wednesday.

Coffey said Wednesday he supported requiring some form of background-check requirement.

Children’s safety must be the city’s top concern, he said.

However, based on Tuesday night’s discussion, Coffey said: “At this time it would seem that . . . there’s no clear majority on the Ordinance Committee to pass regulations mandating background checks, so I guess there will be no legislation (stemming from the investigation) that I can think of at this time.”

Republican council member Joanne Romano, who is not on the Ordinance Committee, said Wednesday she is working on a draft of guidelines for working with children; she also is studying policies in cities with similar demographics.

Romano said she wants to establish new protocols for the summer jobs offering and other programs involving children.

Regarding fellow council members’ concerns about background checks, Romano said she doesn’t want to hurt the program.

However, she said: “If you’ve got kids, you want to make sure your kids are in the right hands.”

When Romano’s proposal is ready, Coffey said he will place it on the Ordinance Committee’s agenda.

Hilliard said he doesn’t think background checks are necessary for the summer jobs program. Its current administrator - Assistant City Clerk Darlene Young, who was not in charge in 2005 - does a good job supervising the children who participate, he said.

“I completely understand the . . . justifiable desire to make sure our programs are safe,” Matthew Miklave, a Democrat on the Ordinance Committee, said at Tuesday’s meeting.

However, Miklave, a labor attorney, described the shortcomings of background checks.

He said a more effective step might be to ensure the city devotes enough resources to the summer jobs program, so there is adequate supervision and ample opportunity for problems to become known.

“I’m satisfied that that part is being done,” Hilliard said in response.

Although, Matt “Mad Max” Breslow’s article did not touch on it, Director of Human Resources james Haselkamp mentioned the fact that none of Norwalk’s city departments are required to report to human resources any incident involving employees. Centralized reporting of any type of incident might be a good thing. In addition to formalizing the guidelines for dealing with children, it might have avoided the mystery of who knew what when. Or other mysteries as to whether an employee is following job directives. Or whether an employee is working another job in Hartford instead of city hall. Following a formal documented process. Just a thought.

source: Norwalk Advocate, Summer job probe worth the effort, councilman says, by Matt Breslow, June 23, 2007

Tags: In the News

46 Responses so far “Norwalk: Centralized Policy Still Be Worked On”


Pages: [1] 2 » Show All



  • 1 Jasmine Bullard // Jun 23, 2007 at 8:26 pm

    ” Matt Miklave and Carvin Hillaird are against background checks,”

    Wonderful, let’s not check some of these job applicants

    John Wyane Gacy
    Charles Manson
    Ted Bundy
    Jeffrey Dahmer
    Richard Ramirez
    Richard Speck
    David Berkowitz
    Juan Corona

    They seem like such nice people. The kids will love them.
    ——————
    JACK THE RIPPER

    In fact even though this guy has a strange name we can hire him straight off the street.

  • 2 Anonymous // Jun 23, 2007 at 10:29 pm

    Jasmine Bullard -some people just don’t get it! Thankfully some of our elected officials understand the importance of protecing children. Hopefully some guidlines are set and and people will know what is and isn’t acceptable. I guess until something bad happens no one wants to step up to the plate.

  • 3 East Norwalk Native // Jun 23, 2007 at 10:34 pm

    I can see honestly see both sides, but I tend to be cautious.

    I wouldn’t want someone with drunk driving convictions driving my company vehicles

    I wouldn’t want someone who was convicted of embezzlement being my accountant and

    I wouldn’t want someone convicted of endangering a minor supervising my children…

  • 4 Katie Shannon // Jun 24, 2007 at 7:07 am

    East Norwalk Native in post #3 wrote;

    I wouldn’t want someone convicted of endangering a minor supervising my children…

    This is such a simple concept, that I don’t understand why it seems to escape some of our elected officials understanding.

    I guess it will be easier after a tragedy happens to one of our kids, for them to write a letter to the Hour and tell us how they are Wringing their hands in horror on how something like this could happen.

  • 5 anon parent // Jun 24, 2007 at 11:18 am

    Katie Shannon- you are correct and that is why we as parents need to think about this when we go to the polls this year. Look at those willing to protect our children by putting the proper guidlines in place and those who think its too cumbersome a task to handle. I for one will be looking at those candidates who are willing to go the extra steps needed to ensure that everyone is safe and our childrens welfare is important.

  • 6 anon // Jun 24, 2007 at 7:38 pm

    When are they going to do the one for kids that Romano is working on? Will the public be able to weigh in on this one too? This too important not to get approved.

  • 7 indythinker // Jun 25, 2007 at 7:52 am

    After reading the Advocate today, I certainly hope that all council people vote to approve the new ethics code for the city. It been pushed aside way too long and now it needs to be made law. I only hope that memebers of the unaffiliated or independant voters are part of the committee. We need non partisan membership. I see alot of bickering over the proposed code and this is crazy. Once everything is put in place the new committee can add to or adjust the code as needed. Stop stalling this important code and vote to approve it. I also look forward to reding the proposed code for our kids. Finally someone has realized we need regulations in place that will deter those who would harm our kids. I certainly hope the controversy and bickering that is surrounding the ethics code doesn’t continue on to the child protection code.

  • 8 Anonymous // Jun 25, 2007 at 9:28 am

    So watchdog-haven’t heard your opinion of the above topic. What do you think about the ethics codes? You usually have a middle of the road approach to your answers.

  • 9 Anonymous // Jun 25, 2007 at 9:57 am

    Looks like more infighting to me after reading the he said she said BS in the papers. Hopefully the children’s safety code won’t go through the same crap as the ethics code. There have been public hearings, public debate and every other public involvement you can imagine on this and still no one is happy. The question is the monetary gifts that an elected official can recieve over the period of a year. Well, how about setting a limit of all total $500 which would include coffee with constituents, appearances at events, a basket of fruit at Christmas or Chanukah, anything that can be misconstrued as a bribe should be eliminated therefore setting an overall limit should take care of that. Amen, sign the darn thing let the council vote it in and get on with other important issues.

  • 10 Watchdog // Jun 25, 2007 at 10:32 am

    #8 - Thank you, my friend. I’m not sure anyone wants to hear my rant. I assure you it will be one.

    Here goes:
    Mr. Miklave cites the shortcomings of background checks. Forgive me, but I feel a need to see a list of these shortcomings in its entirety. I’m not totally sure of what they could be, but if one reason why not to do a check is that it might insult or inconvenience someone, then that surely is not reason enough. Anyone who applies for a job with kids in the school system understands the need to satisfy a background check. Anyone who recognizes the unquestionable need for child safety in our society today, would heartily welcome a background check.
    Mr. Miklave goes on to say that, rather than a background check, a more effective step might be “to ensure the city devotes enough resources to the summer jobs program, so there is adequate supervision and ample opportunity for problems to become known.”
    Again, this is not reason enough. Ample resources and opportunity for problems to become known should be a given no matter what. This one statement, “opportunity for problems to become known” suggests a problem after the fact. With children, there must be pro-action with regard to any and all situations that may endanger them in any way.
    Another reason why background checks are not necessary is cited by Mr. Hilliard, who says that its current administrator, Darlene Young, “does a good job supervising the children who participate.” Again, not good enough. Nothing is said with regard to supervising the adults in question.
    Kudos to everyone involved for fine-tuning the summer program and addressing its inadequacies. Mrs. Romano is a pit bull when it comes to advocating kids’ rights and is the right person for this job. Of course, there are two sides to every issue, and I applaud those who would ask questions. However, when the dust settles, I would hope the foundation remains clear. The city cannot afford one child to experience one single impropriety or indignity in its charge. In the final analysis, all precautions must be taken from all angles in whatever ways necessary. There is no simpler recourse then that.

  • 11 just asking // Jun 25, 2007 at 10:38 am

    Why does every project in this town turn into a free for all? Why is it that things cannot be done in the spirit that they are proposed without a bunch of sideliners always putting a damper on everything. If all these people want input on laws and codes, regulations and all else that occurs why don’t they run for office and be a part of the solution? I sit here day after day looking at some of these posts and can’t for the life of me understand why any of these elected officials would want to give up their personal lives for this. I suggest some of you posters get your resumes together and go to your local political parties and request to be a candidate for which ever party you are affiliated with and do the walk and not just the talk.

  • 12 Anonymous // Jun 25, 2007 at 11:13 am

    watchdog, thanks for your hmm rant? I don’t think its a rant, more like thoughtful input which some on the council don’t use when opening their mouths. Mr. Miklave bashes all efforts that anyone makes. He uses Lawyer for human rights or what ever is his job title as being the know all for every last thing that goes on. Anyone who picks up a paper or hasaccess to the internet knows about the ramifications of child abuse. The destruction of individuals, families, communities etc. Yet Mr. Miklave and others seem to think that if you don’t talk about it it will go away. NOT TRUE. It is the same scenario with the ethics code, all this is about is power. Mr. Peruban seems to think that anything he doesn’t agree with should go away. Message for Mr. Peruban, remember you didn’t get elected, you were appointed to the council because someone left. That should give you a message that nobody wanted you there and didn’t agree with you before so what makes you think they do now? This public display of lack of respect for fellow officials must stop or guess what guys, you’ll all be voted out in November. P.S. this goes for both sides of the isle.

  • 13 Anonymous // Jun 25, 2007 at 11:14 am

    You think it would be any different if this were Westport, Darien or Stamford? The people who post on this blog are a tiny fraction of the population and those who are educated enough to want to comment. We should be glad that there are enough of them to do that.

    As for why the elected officials do what they do, your question is a good one. However, if those folks don’t go into the situation with their eyes wide open and expecting that “all is fair in love and war (and politics),” then they probably should go back to the day job.

  • 14 Watchdog // Jun 25, 2007 at 11:24 am

    #11

    Why would you think that many posters aren’t already involved?

  • 15 just asking // Jun 25, 2007 at 11:51 am

    watchdog-because many of them post as backseat drivers, always giving the directions never driving to the destination. I was not refering to you sincce I have read many of your posts, even those on music preferences as well as your interchange with several posters and believe you are someone who is involved in many things in Norwalk although I don’t get the impression that you are an elected official. I enjoy reading the blog but once in a while I have to jump in and ask a question.

  • 16 anon parent // Jun 25, 2007 at 2:54 pm

    Good analogy just asking-looks like people often stray from what is really important and the ethics code is important as well as one for the children. I hope Ms. Romano presents it very soon so that we as taxpayers/parents can feel secure in knowing that the children are important and their lives and well being are protected. So, if anyone knows her personally they should encourage her to complete it and submit it before school opens and before we have any regrets. Its never a good thing to wait til something happens and then say “wish we had done things differently” As for the ethics code I for one hope it gets passed tomorrow. It can always be updated when the new committee is in place.

  • 17 anonymous // Jun 25, 2007 at 4:13 pm

    Ok, we’ve hashed over the Jazz festival way too much and we have bantered over the new city logo and we have discussed Mr. Brigg’s great grandfather. So now that we have all let out steam why not get back to the important things in Norwalk. Jazz is over, Logo is done and I would imagine the former Mr. Briggs has long passed. We have issues at hand that would seem very important that are right now and ready for discussion. Watchdog and Indythinker have weighed in on the ethics codes now how about Mr. Greenpeace, anon, Attendee, and all you anonymous posters. Care to give your view? for me I will stay anonymous for the sake of good conversation but will give my view. I hope the council votes in favor of the ethics code and I hope to be able to weigh in on the child safety code real soon.

  • 18 Mr Greenpeace // Jun 25, 2007 at 8:41 pm

    hello all I took the invite thank you by the way I didn’t realize this thread was stating the obvious protect our kids at any cost no matter what.

    I’m not sure if some of the people who opposed such stringent measures have rethought their position and decided go for it with all the bells and whistels.

    I not to long ago wrote about a course one must take in our church to simply chaperone or work along side any child in any program school or funtion. I did not take offense when the course was given and I was told the good the bad the things to look out for. After all me experience and yes there area couple of jerks out here thinking there he goes again shooting his words again/

    yes I do have experience from law enforcement to firefighting from the town, city federal level I have seen way to much in my lifetime to be csreful and not observe my surroundings. I was in the right place at the right time to witness the station fire in RI and see that kind of carnage because of piss poor planning and to think a news crew was there that night to witness the beginning in the guise of safety.

    I saw triage an hour later, went home to find one of my daughters aunts were inside,,yes I have seen the bad.My carreer started out when I was 17 12 people killed 35 severly burned in a explosion in a small town where I grew up again piss poor planning that was my first official response on the job.

    I figure I have earned the right when I served for our country to say what ever I want and have no one stop me,,I’m for street justice by the way!

    Protecting our children is a no brainer, any child put in any danger because we waited since april to act upon a very fundamental issue including children being the molesters and crimminals i would say enough act as if your life depended on it,,

    from what i have seen in Norwalk ethics need a fine tuning,did i miss another study by the way?

    I am sorry it took me so long to come this way and simply say what I tell my kids ,,”do the right thing”
    this city is filled with generous , kind, understanding who give all they can to any child or elder and then there is sadly enough scum ready to take what they don’t deserve and will take ones innocense in a heartbeat or is that New York Minute.
    Didn’t we just get a new domestic voilence person for the Norwalk court Ricky Goldstien wouldn’t it be prudent to run the language by someone in the District Attorneys office just for Sh— and giggles.

    Where are all the other informative resources including Probation officers who see how the system is skirted and cut the legs off of someone who doesn’t belong in our system designed for our children..

    Who else has been involved if not the courts what about a domestic counselor or two they know the lay of the land when it comes to child safety as well, isn’t there a whole office in Norwalk that supports child abuse..

    i know ethics , but what do we want to protect children so why not ask someone in the business that do it all the time know the shortcuts and the sliders who can find themselves involved with our kids..

    ok maybe not as good as it gets but i tried to show another perspective,,

    another rant by

    I’m not proofreading this one sorry

    Mr Greenpeace

  • 19 Joanne // Jun 25, 2007 at 9:36 pm

    Mr. Greenpeace and others, thanks for your input on child protection. I can assure you that I am working diligently on a code for our kids. No i am not an attorney and no I don’t normally do this sort of thing. However, I have always been will continue to be an advocate for all kids. I saw a need for Norwalk to have a code that would enhance the state codes and federal codes that would apply to Norwalk. Many people feel that state and local codes should be enough but for me I think municipalities also need guidlines in order to make sure that these kids are protected at every level. Once I have finished the preliminary code I will sit down with others and add or remove the initial parts as needed. What I am putting together is by no means a final draft and I am aware it will be scrutinised and discussed, changed and revamped but for me it is a stepping stone. I am a member of most of the national organizations for missing and abused kids and I recieve e-mails daily on the the atrcities commited against kids. I maintain a local informational website for missing and abused kids which I add to all the time and for me its just a natural extension of what I have been doing since 1998. People who know me, know that I will go to the ends of the earth when it comes to abuse of any kind. And no, for all you nay sayers this is not a politically motivated endevour like some tried to say because I collect supplies for the troops but a personal endevour that I wish I could prevent each and every child from being abused both mentally and physcally because each one is just as hurtful as the other. Whether a child is bullied, sexually assaulted, verbally abused or compromised in anyway, they carry it through life.

  • 20 Mr Greenpeace // Jun 25, 2007 at 10:41 pm

    Joanne, I must admit I didn’t realize you were the one doing this, I saw a last name didn’t put it together sorry, I respect your work , Nothing I wrote nothing I said was directed towards you. I’m the new kid on the block I don’t even know the name of the Islands so when I write I simply take out all the stops.

    suppose I try and say I was set up to comment on this,,he smiles :) I have my critics

    I was coming home from the Air show the other night and the first rest area in Ct southbound on 95 has a parking lot on either side one side for trucks and one for cars. I didn’t like what I saw in the lobby and went out to get Dad he was waiting for his two younger daughters to use the ladies room. They were being accosted by two truckers feet from their trucks,,well what I didn’t realize he was a Ct trooper with his family,,well the story ends well no problems but even he said at two in the morning I should of been more careful with my own two kids,,I of course love to bust em and said yes of all people with two teens…… we found some humor at that hour.

    The resource I suggested is the dep assistant District attorney she was at least 2 months ago at Norwalk Court. Maybe not her but someone who works for her or a referance she could give could suggest anything,,I was told by a local magistrate she was good and very advocate motivated and approachable.

    Only thing I can say from experience and I have been told i am a synic but :TRUST NO ONE” it works for me..and my kids..

    I thank you for being active on this I trust someday I will like as with others come from no where and quietly say hello I am

    Mr Greenpeace

  • 21 Joanne // Jun 26, 2007 at 9:34 am

    Good morning Mr. Greenpeace,

    Not a problem, I understood your message. Just wanted you to understand why I decided to take up this endevour. By the way, my typing and sp isn’t much good either since I type as I think and forget to go back and re-read before hiting send. Thank God for spell check when writing documents. Your experience on I-95 and the recent ruling in Stratford are good examples as to why individual municipalities need to have their own guidlines. People are unaware of how and who to report these incidents to.

  • 22 anon // Jun 26, 2007 at 11:07 am

    I would imagine issues like the ethics code and others on this site are way more important than continually discussing the would shoulda coulda of the Jazz Festival. Like how will the BOE spend the $$ coming from Hartford, or how will the vote go tonight on the ethics code and who will try to block it. Or perhaps other related stories that affect us all on a daily basis?

  • 23 nwlktaxpayer2 // Jun 26, 2007 at 1:55 pm

    Looks to me as if there are other issues to discuss as well, Folks, its election time, the festival is over and there are more important things to concentrate on. Mr. Greenpeace always has news for us as do many others. Lets try concentrating on that and what our elected officials are doing to support the taxpayers and their concerns. We keep going off the beaten path and wandering into places that are just so far away from the issues. try looking at the important posts and take from them the things that you want to see accomplished. Then look at the candidates and see who you really think can do the best job for Norwalk. This is the first time in recent history that the public actually has input so why screw it up by being negative. An old saying that comes to mind is “You can attract bears by honey faster than vinegar”. Ask questions, look at the answers and make the best decisions when voting this year. Don’t look at the party, look at the individual and I’ll bet we get representation that we deserve. Go through the blog, ignored the negativity and find the real issues. Pick up the paper and see whats going on and who’s doing it(well when the paper prints the actual story) and see who has the betternment of Norwalk as their only focus. For all this Herb bashing and Coffey bashing and Moccia as well, where is it getting us other than some fun reading when there’s nothing else to do? Its like when we were kids remember sticking your tongue out nah nah nah nah nah I got you last.Where did it get you? I know in my house it got me a huge chunk of Ivory soap and no dessert so think about it this is getting us nowhere.

  • 24 Grant's folly // Jun 26, 2007 at 2:55 pm

    Indeed Herb Grant’s actions and the Jazz Festival are very relevant as the Council considers the ethics code. Disclosure of private financial and business relationships is the very lyncpin of ethical conduct for people in public service.

  • 25 Looking for Ethics // Jun 26, 2007 at 3:29 pm

    Grants Folly:I think the response would likely be “it was disclosed and Grant recused himself from the discussion.” This kind of business relationship needs to be prohibited outright, as it was in the ethics proposal our council committee used as a model. Unfortunately, they removed most of the “teeth” from the proposal. also, unfotunately, as Matt Miklave, Chairman of the Ordinance committee has said, the proposal never came before the ordinance committee. Debate was stifled, and what this ethics proposal needs is extensive debate before the ordiance committee, the public and the entire Council. What’s the big hurry if it doesn’t go into effect until after the next election?

  • 26 anonymous // Jun 26, 2007 at 3:45 pm

    I am sure that the Democratic Norwalk Outers will vote to table or vote against the revised ethics code this evening. They will clearly show the residents that they oppose stringent ethics reform that is being proposed. Another good job dems !!!!

  • 27 Anonymous // Jun 26, 2007 at 4:01 pm

    Looking for Ethics-all you are looking for is to discredit Mr. Grant and anyone else you can so that your handpicked lackies will look that much better on election day. Fortunately for the majority of Norwalk we aren’t that stupid! Your little click will definately vote against or TRY to table the ethics code just like they have on each and every important issue. Hopefully some of the dems have the b–ls to not fall under your little ploy and this all important item will get passed tonight. You are really pitiful and just for starters, Mr. Grant did in fact recuse himself from any votes that pertained to the Jazz Festival(check the minutes of the meetings) so tuck your tail back under your butt and don’t go away mad..just go away! THERE! Hows that for negative, how does it sound coming from someone other than the usual nasty people on this site. Thankfully there are those like watchdog and Mr. greenpeace as well as a few others that have a shred of right and wrong.

  • 28 Anonymous // Jun 26, 2007 at 4:03 pm

    looking for ethics has an odd sense of the reality. Matt Miklave had plenty of opportunity to suggest changes to the ethics code, he chose not to. Most people don’t care, this has just become a political football that democratic insiders complain about. Vote against it if you are so concerned. Keeping a 3 paragraph code that prevents nothing sure sounds like the preferable stance of the democrat party.

  • 29 Grant's folly // Jun 26, 2007 at 4:11 pm

    #26 — Lord, I hope so, pilgrim. It means there are some folks on the Council who can see when they’re being bullied to accept a “Potemkin village” of an ehtics code.

  • 30 disgusted // Jun 26, 2007 at 4:18 pm

    Dems in this town are a dirty bunch. The only reason they want to fight the ethics issue to debate death is because they don’t want any of the teeth to bite them in the a$$. Who are they protecting and why? Why are they so afraid of being held accountable? Could it be that they want to slip in some old dems into cushy no show jobs after they retire? Hmmmm, wonder who that can be? Well keep on talking, the con is over.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All