YourCT.com header image 2
← Rell Says Trains to Penn Station A Good Idea Norwalk: By Request Open Thread Thursday →

Norwalk: Ordinance Committee Votes to Recommend Child Protection Policy


by turfgrrl


August 9th, 2007 · 43 Comments

The aftermath of the Pagano incident has spawned a recommended policy to protect children that anyone in working on behlaf of the City of Norwalk and working with children can refer to instead of having different policies in different departments. Joanne Romano has been working on the policy for many months stated in an email, “anyone in the City of Norwalk, working with children understands that we must protect our kids and offer guidlines that will help ensure that everyone understands the procedures.”

The policy resolution is linked to here.

The apologists who defended the stonewalling cover up perpetrated by the previous administration and its politically connected tentacles should be shamed for not contributing one detail to ensuring that the procedures and policies were in place to respond with the best interests of the children. Many kudos to Joanne Romano for following through on this.

Tags: In the News · Norwalk

43 Responses so far ↓ “Norwalk: Ordinance Committee Votes to Recommend Child Protection Policy”


Pages: [1] 2 » Show All



  • 1 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 10:11 am

    Snore. Get over it already. This is a dead issue.

  • 2 anon parent // Aug 9, 2007 at 10:20 am

    This policy is a good one. It doesn’t look like as though it is geared to one place or subject. The Pagano incident is a dead issue but every day we read more and more in the papers and watch on TV all the horrific stories about child abuse . It appears to begeared to Norwalk as a whole and the above comment is dumb. Child protection is not a dead issue, it is a very real one and anyone who thinks you can look the other way is living in a world with rose colored glasses.

  • 3 Edward Levine // Aug 9, 2007 at 10:26 am

    Anonymous in post #1 wrote

    “Snore. Get over it already. This is a dead issue.”

    It is never a dead issue. I know you don’t have time to make a sensible reply, as you may be too busy looking at kiddy porn on your computer.

  • 4 sour grapes // Aug 9, 2007 at 10:40 am

    Looks like Turffy got Galen to rear her ugly head on this issue again in anonymous 1’s shameful post. No the issue of protecting children is never dead, and shame on anyone who suggests it is. Way to go Joanne.

  • 5 confused // Aug 9, 2007 at 10:42 am

    Forgive my ignorance on this issue, but is this specific to the city’s summer employment issue, or is this an ordinance that will apply to every employer in Norwalk. If so, this would seem to be a huge undertaking, and somewhat ambiguous ie. Provocative dress. Where will funds come from for investigation and enforcement?

  • 6 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 10:58 am

    This is not an ordinance but instead a policy that the city should use as a guidline when there are implications of child abuse. This is nothing more than an enhancement to laws already in place under the state and federal child protection laws. basically what it does is give guidlines to City officials, schools and other entities that deal with children a chain of events to follow in order to keep themselves within acceptable compliance of child protection laws. It was never meant to be an ordinance code. Therefore each entity can use this to guide them towards proper procedures and to hopefully deter those who may have harmful intensions tward children. It should also serve to protect various entities from claims of child abuse by having these guidlines readily available to their employees. The state, local and federal government have stringent laws in place that must be followed and this policy is only an enhancement for the city of Norwalk. There is no need for special funds.

  • 7 confused // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:02 am

    Sounds reasonable. If be worried though about telling my employee that they are dressed to provocatively for fear of a sexual harassment suit.

  • 8 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:18 am

    are there children in your company that would be affected by this? This only pertains to places that would affect children. If you do not deal with children on a daily basis it would not have any impact. If howvere, you work in a school, daycare or youth facility where you are in contact daily with children or if you are part of the Summer Youth Program and employ youngsters under the age of 18 you should probably be aware that provocative dress is somewhat inappropriate.

  • 9 curious // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:28 am

    I guess that is my point. What is provocative? Who is to decide.

  • 10 anon parent // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:34 am

    That usually is a policy of most businesses as to what is and is not appropriate for office attire so I would have to assume that one would use common sense when working with kids. Other than that can you see anything that a normal person would object to? I think its a pretty good feel good policy that will on serve to enhance awareness of a very real problem.

  • 11 confused // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:37 am

    Guess I will have to tell my people if they come to work wearing anything provacative than what 16 year olds see on mtv, they are goin to jail.

  • 12 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:43 am

    Again, common sense prevails and this is not an ordinace so there are no repercussions. Can’t someone just understand it for what it is? It is a feel good policy that people have strong feelings for and choose to put forth for others so that everyone is aware of a very important issue in todays society. Why all the negativity and dumb comments? Obviously the State and Federal laws are in place and are strictly enforced so why should this policy give anyone reason to make bad jokes. Kids safety is very important and if someone can find ways of bringing this to our attention in a positive way then I say KUDOS to them for caring enough.

  • 13 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:43 am

    Sounds like you’re being deliberately obtuse, curious. There are already a raft of regulations about dress codes - no tube tops or miniskirts; guys have to wear belts…I don’t know Norwalk’s specifics but that’s not the point.

    When I think about these regulations I think they are mostly gearded toward students but I’ve got to beleive there’s already a policy about dress - either written or understood - directed toward those overseeing the students.

  • 14 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:50 am

    BOE should adopt these dress codes for students.

  • 15 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 11:54 am

    Wouldn’t it be great if the BOE cared enough to enforce them?

  • 16 curious // Aug 9, 2007 at 12:00 pm

    Sorry. I am being obtuse. Thought ith was an ordinance since it came from the ordinance committee. Was worried that it was more vague regulations on business that we would have to interpret on our own. Hopefully common sense would prevail.

  • 17 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 12:07 pm

    The policy must come from a committee in order to be passed to the council as a council resolution so the ordinace committe who did look at and thought it was a good policy did not vote on it, only voted to approve sending it to the full council for them to adopt as a Common Council Resolution Policy that is only to say that the Council wishes to put forth apolicy that will enhance laws already in place and give City officials guidlines to understand the need for child safety.

  • 18 curious // Aug 9, 2007 at 12:25 pm

    I would be interested in an attorney’s opinion on whether a private business adopting this resolution in addition to regular workplace policies and regulations would increase their exposure to civil litigation. Especially in the vague areas of the resolution.

  • 19 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 12:54 pm

    I don’t believe a private business, unless participating in The Summer Youth Program would have any reason to adopt this policy in addition to regular workplace policies but only to use this as a guideline when in doubt of how to report such instances if in fact they occur in that business.

  • 20 Anonymous // Aug 9, 2007 at 12:56 pm

    Again, it is only a gudline policy and should be viewed as such. It is not an ordinace and therefore has no bearing other than to be used as a guidline to educate poeple that are faced with situatiuons of child abuse.

  • 21 just wondering // Aug 9, 2007 at 12:58 pm

    Can someone explain why there would be so much controversy over a feel good policy as stated above that would only prove to be a helpful tool?

  • 22 Joanne // Aug 9, 2007 at 1:11 pm

    Ok everyone,
    I will lend my 2 cents since I actually did the resolution. It is an effort put together from months of scanning the internet for policies from many different states and countries and rewriting them to enhance policies and laws already in place by the City of Norwalk, State of CT and The Federal Government in the effort to put in place a policy that everyone in Norwalk can understand and work with when entrusted with our children’s safety and well being. This policy provides guidelines to protect our children from physical/mental abuse, bullying, sexual preditors, racial discrimination, negligent treatment and other exploitation,

    The City of Norwalk takes pride in our children and strives to protect them in every way possible. Therefore, I have spent many hours trying to put together the very best policy that will act as a guidline for all those who work directly or indirectly with our children.

    I have taken guidelines from international organizations as well as private organizations and cities and towns and tried to put together a comprehensive policy that will ensure that our children are protected from those who wish them harm and from those who are not aware of what constitutes child abuse.

    This policy in no way is meant to be an ordinace or a law written in stone but only a resolution, hopefully adopted by the full council to ensure that the residence of Norwalk feel a safety net when it comes to our kids and to give guidance to those who are unaware of how these situations can be handled.

  • 23 anon again // Aug 9, 2007 at 1:28 pm

    Joanne et. al.

    This is an important policy. However, reading through it, I get the impression that it was thrown together from bits and pieces without a clear focus on the what and why for Norwalk. Some of the job titles and references don’t apply to the city, there are unclear definitions, the scope is way to broad, and I beleive that there are areas that could trap the city in a legal quagmire. Has this been vetted by corp council and langauge approved? It seems much too broad and too vague to have any value beyond being an excuse to litigate. Plus there are typos and elisions that should be fixed before going on, but I’m sure you’re aware of that and are working on it. All in all, tightened up and more focused, it could provide valuable guidance. As drafted, it is useless. Even as “feel good” guidelines, I think the council deserves a more focused document.

  • 24 anon again // Aug 9, 2007 at 1:30 pm

    As an afterthought, specifc reference to the relevant laws (local, state, and national) based on your extensive research would add a great deal of value to the resolution.

  • 25 curious // Aug 9, 2007 at 1:38 pm

    Not objecting to the policy in principle, just would be hesitant to officially adopt it at a workplace. Any document to agree to can be used against you in litigation, and you have to hope a judge agrees with you on why you felt an employees attire was provocative. Anyone who has been involved in terminating an employee knows that vague gets you in trouble.

  • 26 Joanne // Aug 9, 2007 at 1:49 pm

    anon again, this policy can be tweeked to better fit Norwalk and it can be changed. What it is is a guidline. I am sorry that I missed a few things but yes there was a lot of copying and pasting throughout and although I have gone over it several times, I too find errors. So, with that being said I’d like to offer this, the legal departmentmay at any time change wording, add or subtract from the guidlines and tweek it as much as they feel necessary to avoid excuse to litigate.

    As for : As drafted, it is useless. Even as “feel good” guidelines, I think the council deserves a more focused document.
    I don’t feel it is useless and I researched this in order to provide focus to a very serious problem in our society today. As I said last night at the committee meeting, I have been a member of most of the national organizations for missing and abused children and see so much hurt that comes from child abuse and many people don’t understand what actually constitutes child abuse. If we as a council can put focus on this I think it is more than a feel good policy. But then the resolution is just a format to accept a finished policy and does not mean that in fact this one will be the final word for word draft.

  • 27 Joanne // Aug 9, 2007 at 1:52 pm

    P.S. I am sending Turf another copy of this policy since I have once again gone over it and found errors. then I am sure the corp council will also have input as to legal language. Again, this is a stepping stone to a good policy.

  • 28 curious // Aug 9, 2007 at 2:00 pm

    I guess I should give an example of what I am talking about. For example, a school dress code could say that provocative attire is not allowed. There are huge differences among parents, teachers and administrators may perceive as provocative attire. If a student is suspended under the “provocative attire” rule, they may have grounds for litigation. However, if the dress code were to say ie. Shorts to cover the knee, shirt tucked in, no bare midriff, shirt sleeves to elbow, no exposed cleavage”, you eliminate personal and cultural opinions from the mix and reduce grounds for litigation.

  • 29 turfgrrl // Aug 9, 2007 at 2:19 pm

    hot diggity y’all are working together to improve the language in something. If only we can get this adopted by the posters on some of our other issues.

  • 30 Joanne // Aug 9, 2007 at 2:19 pm

    Excellent! I will take note of this and forward it on to corp council for their opinion. I am always open for suggestions. and thanks for your input.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Leave a Reply