Open Thread Thursday

by turfgrrl

August 16th, 2007 · 40 Comments

Tags: In the News · Norwalk

40 Responses so far ↓ “Open Thread Thursday”

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

• 1 #21 of #25 // Aug 16, 2007 at 10:01 am

  I would like to thank all of the Zoning Commissioners who voted Gault down last night.

• 2 ENrwlker // Aug 16, 2007 at 10:13 am

  “After a tumultuous year, Common Council Democrats came together late Tuesday night to pass a contracting ordinance designed to support local workers and apprenticeship programs.” Linsey forgot to add “by increasing project costs, which will be paid by local taxpayers through higher property taxes.”

• 3 Anonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 11:48 am

  It is facinating to watch the East Norwalk candidates compete to see who can do a better job of bashing condo owners and their “life styles”. You can be sure that the owners of condos on the water in ENorwalk, who have been there for at least 30 years would like to hear their opinions, perhaps over a little coffee, about how they are unwelcome because they don’t have lawns to mow, etc.

  Laurel and David, you make ridiculous arguments. Just say that you don’t want anything on the property because new people might move in and be happy there, because new people might be strangers, because new people are - new and ENorwalk is for old timers - you know conservative old fuddy duddies like you. If they are possibly different or from out of town or, heaven forbid, young, you don’t want them there. Let’s just leave the place an abandoned, crumbling building and you two can go and cut the lawn.

  You clearly don’t see the value in condos as perfect first homes for young people, or perfect for empty nesters who don’t want to mow the lawn any more - and perhaps these are places that would be more affordable than stand alone homes. Glad I don’t have to choose between the two of you.

• 4 I live there there and I know // Aug 16, 2007 at 1:26 pm

  #3-you apparently don’t understand the concept of over crowding Strawberry Hill. Because of a grandfather clause the home next to Fitch is allowed to conduct a landscaping business in their back yard. Now at 6-8am each morning you can usually find an 18 wheeler trying to maneuver its way into the sloping driveway, therefore cutting off traffic both ways. Add to that the other landscaping businesses that pull into this yard because they but materials from these people then add a cluster of condos next door, commuters going to work and on an average of 10-15 school buses each and every morning. My friend, have you any idea how bad Strawberry Hill is? Believe me, politics always rears its ugly head in these matters but I can tell you, I know more than one local politician is dead set against this and hopefully they will come out on our behalf.

• 5 nwlknative // Aug 16, 2007 at 1:39 pm

  Well said, #4. I also live in the vicinity of Strawberry Hill and know how bad the traffic is. Buses, trucks, speeding cars, people cutting over to Westport Avenue and avoiding East Avenue. What we don’t need are any more condos or large multi-family developments.

• 6 anon // Aug 16, 2007 at 1:52 pm

  Why don’t we make every street between easy av and strawberry hill one way or a dead end. Or better yet, private roads so only residents can drive on them. Whose brilliant idea was it to let cars use roads to get from one place to another??

• 7 Dennis Santpietro // Aug 16, 2007 at 1:58 pm

  Whose brilliant idea was it to let cars use roads to get from one place to an

  Blame that damn Henry Ford.

• 8 I live there there and I know // Aug 16, 2007 at 2:01 pm

  #6-no one is saying to make all roads one way. What we are concerned about is the impact this development will have on the entire area. Look at what theya re proposing in Rowayton. Perhaps some of those people should come to east Ave and Strawberry Hill one day and see just how many trucks pass by. I don’t mean little ones either! There are 3 schools on Strawberry Hill where children walk each and every day and the speeding cars and trucks are a hazard. Add to that anther 1.2 cars for each unit proposed and you are talking a huge mess. Making comment like yours is counter productive to what we are talking about.

• 9 Robert Mouio // Aug 16, 2007 at 2:01 pm

  Watching the Zoning comission last night, I got the feeling that most of them would rather be having lighted Bamboo slivers driven under their fingernails, than sitting there all evening.

• 10 #13 of the Miserable 25 // Aug 16, 2007 at 2:08 pm

  I have a question, does Cablevision 12 News have any reporters that cover Norwalk happenings? It seems that they are all over the state, but you stand more of a chance of finding news from Norwalk in the “Calcutta Gazette” or on “Aljazeera TV” than you would on channel 12.

  Is it just me that notices this?

• 11 anon // Aug 16, 2007 at 2:10 pm

  Oh. I thought they changed a few streets between the two roads to one way, causing a huge traffic increase on fitch st. But those east Norwalk residents don’t count. If only laurel would move to fitch st.

• 12 norwalkfan // Aug 16, 2007 at 2:33 pm

  Anonymous 3 you are about as clueless as they come. Are you sure you are not the same ANonymous who loves the developers because you are related to one or more of them?

• 13 One of the 25 // Aug 16, 2007 at 2:35 pm

  Look what the residents of Rowayton have been able to accomplish by forming and coalescing their efforts to fight traffic on 136.

  Why can’t the same be done to fight the condos and traffic on Strawberry Hill? Is it that there’s more awareness and willingness on the part of Rowaytonites to use the power of their voices to get what they want done?

  Guess we won’t know until someone in East Norwalk tries to do the same thing.

  Oh, BTW, ENrwlker, you forgot to mention the next paragraph in Linsey’s article: “The Norwalk Responsible Contractor Ordinance” had already garnered the support of trade groups, both the Republican mayor and his Democratic challenger and even the state Attorney General.

  I think this was a good, collaborative, bipartisan effort,” said Democratic Council President Michael Coffey…”

  Nice try, no cigar. Cherry picking the info as usual, trashing the Dems but, oops! forgetting to mention that the mayor supports it too.

  By your logic, Moccia also supports “increasing project costs, which will be paid by local taxpayers through higher property taxes.”

• 14 ANonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 3:23 pm

  Nope. #3 isn’t me, but he sounds like someone who makes a lot of economic sense. Could be part of my extended friend and family network. I have shared this site with a lot of like minded friends. I thought maybe you guys would like to hear from some fiscally minded people who are concerned about lowering taxes.

• 15 #13 of the Miserable 25 // Aug 16, 2007 at 3:26 pm

  who are concerned about lowering taxes

  SORRY
  Only happens in fairy tales

• 16 L'arlequino // Aug 16, 2007 at 3:27 pm

  Building new properties in Norwalk won’t lower property taxes, just as giving preference to local businesses won’t increase them. Both arguments neglect the true culprit, which is the proportion of ECS funding we get from Hartford.

• 17 nwlknative // Aug 16, 2007 at 3:35 pm

  #9 - their “local as local news gets” is laughable. There is very little cable 12 local coverage and after watching the first newscast in the morning, it is just repeated over and over for the rest of the day. Channel 3 and 6 have more Norwalk news and that is next to nothing.

• 18 nwlknative // Aug 16, 2007 at 3:35 pm

  Oops - I meant #10. Sorry.

• 19 ENrwlker // Aug 16, 2007 at 4:22 pm

  #13 — I didn’t cherry pick anything — I quoted the only part of the article set forth at the top of this thread.

  “By your logic, Moccia also supports increasing project costs, which will be paid by local taxpayers through higher property taxes.”

  Absolutely correct — he does. He supported this as an unprincipled pandering for union support in the election (let the taxpayers be damned). It isn’t the first time he’s thrown Republican principles to the wind to play political games with Coffey.

• 20 anonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 4:35 pm

  Enrwlker: It was Moccia and Coffey that led the charge to cut taxes and keep the city’s AAA bond rating. They have done a great job of holding the line on taxes and being true fiscal conservatives.

• 21 #13 of the Miserable 25 // Aug 16, 2007 at 4:37 pm

  Channel 12 is changing their by line to

  “As Yokel as Yokel news gets.”

• 22 Anonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 4:51 pm

  #13 I think the miserable 25 are changing my mind, you do have a sense of humour with the Yokel line, but again I can not agree about 12. Considering that they have to cover so many towns from Greenwich to I think Stratford, they do a decent job. So maybe you would give a 12 1/2 on the miserabble rating instead of 25. They could cut down on the weather reports however. Hey, that gives me a thought about 12 1/2 T’Shirts for people who are miserable only half the time. Just a joke do not take the miserable part too serious.

• 23 Anonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 4:52 pm

  Nice to see its the Moccia and Coffey hour!
  Where do you think Moccia would be without his Reps on the council? Why not trying to give them some credit for leading the charge againstoverspending by the BOE and holding taxes at bay as well as pushing for funding for flood victims etc etc etc. How about the Reps who pushed for eminent domaine reform, why is it always Moccia and Coffey that seem to get all the credit? The reps tried to put time constrints on the new ordinance on Tuesday and the dems shot them down. They tried to make sure that Norwalk was not going to bare the burden for projects already in place and Coffey and friends shot them down. No, I’m not dem bashing but reality is reality folks and these people never get credit for what they do for us.

• 24 anonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 5:40 pm

  Are you re-writing history about eminent domain reform in Norwalk. Mike Coffey has been tirelessly leading the charge, along with Carvin Hilliard and Bill Krummell against eminent domain. They pushed the first ordinance in the state for Norwalk that was unfortunately not passed due to ALex Knopp’s opposition. This Council did pass reforms that were again led by Coffey and some of his coffee klotsch.

• 25 Mr Greenpeace // Aug 16, 2007 at 5:58 pm

  #23 your right , now where is the new police officers, and the brownfield report.What are we doing with the landfill and where can we find a place for busses to park for the aquarium,what about the safety of our residents,,and the list goes on..

  This morning busses were found in a lot next to SONO seafood on water street, one bus driver from the Bronx said he was given a map to Vets park, yet it was locked and so wasn’t other area’s suggested by the Aquarium,,he simply said I’m a Vet and shook his head when I told him how we as a city treat tourist.

  I guess its the small things in the city that no one cares about,,if its not seen or brought up it isn’t a problem,,imagine a trailways bus among others swinging in a lot on water street not big enough for a compact car to make comfortably.

• 26 Watchingandlistening // Aug 16, 2007 at 6:04 pm

  As an unaffiliated voter, I enjoy all you dems and repubs “shooting” at each other. But let’s set the record straight on who kept the BOE budget under control and who was looking out for the taxpayers.
  The republican controlled Board of Estimate and Taxation started the ball rolling by recommending a budget cap that recognized that increased spending increases taxes. The Common Coucil held to the preliminary cap with the “Coffey democrats” supporting the Republicans. This combo resisted the subsequent “sky is falling” BS from Corda and held together when the final cap was set. Yet when the state gave Norwalk an additional $1 million, Moccia and his republicans and the “Cofey democrats” caved and gave it to Corda and his cohorts; despite the position they had taken that the BOE could live with the budget they had been given. (For the record, Mike Lyons on the BET was the only one who tried to give some of the million to the taxpayers). So who should the taxpayers respect in this scenerio: Initially, the repubs and the “Coffey democrats”. But in the end, none of them.

  On the subject of the contractor’s ordinance, #13 and #19, WE WILL NEVER KNOW HOW MUCH IT WILL COST THE TAXPAYERS, because Coffey refused to send the ordinance to the finance department for an economic evaluation, before sending it to the Council, though he was requested to do so at the public hearing.

• 27 Anonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 6:08 pm

  Another ordinance that wasn’t forwarded. Starting to sound like a pattern here.

• 28 taxpayer // Aug 16, 2007 at 8:00 pm

  Question? What is with the proposed “Act of God ” tax? We are going to get charged a new tax (fee)for rain water run off. This will be like a Utility charge says DPW, ms. bardon and we will pay ? per month? Now we pay for the sewers (not called a tax). One more (not called a tax)fee for storm/rainwater run off.

• 29 Anonymous // Aug 16, 2007 at 8:39 pm

  Moccia and Coffey get credit because they are the LEADERS of the city. The rest of the council members can pat themselves on the back, but no one knows who you are, or cares. That’s just they way the government works. Rell, Amann, and Williams get the blame and credit and that state level.

• 30 Active PTO Parent // Aug 16, 2007 at 9:24 pm

  Number 26, it was more like the Coffey democrats taking the lead and the council republicans following in regards to holding the line on taxes for the past two years. I disagree with your characterization on the democrats and spending. I was at several school meetings where Fred Wilms told parents they could blame Democratic Council President Mike Coffey for the tax cuts. Carvin Hilliard as the finance chairman has held the line on taxes for each of the past two years. I guess some people now want to re-write history. I would like to thank Mr. Coffey, Mr. Hilliard and some of the other dems for taking the lead on holding the line on taxes.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Leave a Reply

Name

eMail (not required)

Website (not required)