YourCT.com header image 2

Norwalk: Jazz Festival Prompts Ugliness


by turfgrrl


September 26th, 2007 · 44 Comments

Matt Miklave and Kevin Poruban apparently waited till after most of the press left last night’s common council meeting before launching in to a personal attack on a fellow council member. On a routine motion to approve the permit for the Norwalk Jazz Festival for use of Vets park in 2008, both Poruban and Miklave chose to fling accusations of corruption and malfeasance at Herb Grant. The thing was that Grant, was not in the room to defend himself, since he had to recuse himself from the vote.

Grant, a common council member, who chose not to run for re-election, produces the Norwalk Jazz festival, a private event. Last year, the event was staged at Vets Park, amidst some controversy over whether Grant was getting favorable treatment. Much of the controversy swirled over fabricated issues. Any private or non-profit or publicly owned entity can apply for a permit to host an event at the park. The same rules apply to all permit seekers, including fees for police, garbage removal and use of the park.

Miklave, according to sources at the common council meeting, called for the city to make the festival an “open bid process.” Miklave must be confusing Norwalk with New Haven, where New Haven, as a city, sponsors a series of Jazz concerts on the New Haven Green. The Norwalk Jazz Festival is not a city sponsored event, and thus, a call for an “open bidding” process was just stupid.

Many in the audience were stunned at the hostility and hypocrisy demonstrated by Miklave and Poruban. The Columbian Festival was a real problem this year explained a member of the audience. The Jazz festival was well run.

Council members were also critical of the stunt pulled by Miklave and Poruban.

Doug Hempstead said, “I was appalled and taken aback. It went over the top.”

Apparently so was council president Mike Coffey who grilled Miklave on why he was setting double standards for Grant when Miklave never bothered to disclose what his relationship was financially with all the “claims items” that Miklave recused himself from voting on.

Joanne Romano explained on the council floor, “We [Parks and Recs Committee] scrutinize each and evey request that comes before us, Mr. Grant was given no privilege not afforded to any other [applicants] who have come before us in the past. Afterwards, she said, “The personal attacks on Herb and the disgusting manner in which Matt Miklave chose to protray Herb Grant was at best disgusting and demeaning and was the worst political grandstanding I have ever seen.”

The charges levied against Grant was that no one knew how much money the festival made or what the staff was paid. An odd charge considering that details such as operating costs and profits are not disclosed by any of the other permit applicants either, including the recently held Oyster Festival.

At no point has either Poruban or Miklave filed an ethics complaint against Grant, prompting a few council members to speculate on the reasons why Miklave and Poruban were pursuing Grant. One stated it might be that Miklave was being vindictive since he was running for Grants seat on the council. (Grant was elected as the District A council member, Miklave was an “At Large”, and is now running as in district.) Another observed Bruce Morris in the audience ensuring further smear tactics against Grant whom Morris might view as a potential rival next year.

In the end the permit approval passed, with only Miklave and Poruban voting against it.

Tags: In the News · Norwalk

44 Responses so far “Norwalk: Jazz Festival Prompts Ugliness”


Pages: [1] 2 » Show All



  • 1 Anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 2:24 pm

    The behavior of Matt and Kevin are shameful and disgusting. Good job Turf for exposing this while our press ignores the shameless mud slinging these two have done. So much for hoping that our elected officials are doing the people’s business. Let’s see if Galen Wells censures these two.

  • 2 Anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 2:37 pm

    Don’t you know, much like cats and other animals the dems eat their young when they don’t meet their expectations.

  • 3 here we go again // Sep 26, 2007 at 2:45 pm

    yes it all reads bad, but do they have a point? I’m sure this is fueled by something,,

    course it wasn’t disgusting and shameful what the mayor did to the farmer at the market,,makes you just think tit for tat now doesn’t it?

    who suffered the most the residents who went to the market or the residents who didn’t go to the jazz fest?

  • 4 Anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 2:49 pm

    Truly disgusting. If you have disagreements do it in private, the public attacks are awful.

  • 5 I live in Grant's district // Sep 26, 2007 at 2:51 pm

    I voted for him, and I will now actively tell my neighbors to vote for anyone but Matt Miklave.

  • 6 dem in the know // Sep 26, 2007 at 2:53 pm

    here we go again-you are missing the point here. While your argument about the farmers market deserves attention, this was nothing more than, as one council person said, POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING at its worst!
    They should be ashamed of themselves for putting on such a display. To do this to one of their own is beyond belief. I understand Mrs Grant was in the audience and had to endure the display and rude and libelous comments put forth by these two people that we put our trust in.

  • 7 anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 3:51 pm

    And looky looky…Lil’ Brucie Morris is in the audience! You won’t have to worry about your seat next year “Mr. Morris is for himself”, we’ll all make sure you get put out to pasture. Why haven’t you resigned yet?? You don’t have the education or the qualifications to have your Board of Ed position, So why are you still there? Is Sal Corda and others got you under their wing? When people in the real world lie on their resume or turns out they don’t have the educational degrees they are required to have, they either resign or get fired. What’s your excuse Mr. Morris? The voters will have the last word concerning this lying loser.

  • 8 Anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 4:04 pm

    I hope Galen Wells is proud of her idiot Vice Chair of the Norwalk Democratic Town Committee. Alex should also be proud since he is the puppeteer that pulls the strings on Poruban. Yuck! what a lazy, two-faced jerk!

    Miklave should be ashamed of himself - and we all thought he was smart - Not!
    I hear that Dem candidates were in the audience. I guess it is better to hide out at the council meeting than be home making phone calls :)

  • 9 Looking for Ethics // Sep 26, 2007 at 4:05 pm

    No comments on anyone’s behavior because I didn’t see it. You are, however, off base calling asking for competitive bidding “stupid” for any festival that has Norwalk in its title. Also, any festival in which the mayor and staff members are contributing time and soliciting money from developers who came before the city agencies. Elected officials are not there to benefit from their relationships with city officials as Herb Grant was attempting.
    If they had competitive bidding, the city might have hired a professional company like the one who runs the jazz festivals in New Orleans and other places, and might actually make a profit for the city. What is wrong with that?
    Re: “An odd charge considering that details such as operating costs and profits are not disclosed by any of the other permit applicants either, including the recently held Oyster Festival.” This is an ignorant statement, you have been told on this blog previously that nonprofits, such as the Oyster Festival, are required to file detailed finacial reports on their fundraisers and also disclose the compensation of their employees. You can look on Guidestar.org and see the 990 reports with all financials disclosed, while a business such as HERB Grant’s is not required to disclose anything.

  • 10 anon // Sep 26, 2007 at 4:06 pm

    Accusing someone of being corrupt when he is not present to defend himself is an act of cowards. The rest of the council apparently did not agree with them, that should tell you all you need to know.

  • 11 here we go again // Sep 26, 2007 at 4:24 pm

    I agree with you number #6 ,i also have the feeling by the time we get through looking at all of our elected officials, the man with the 10 gallon hat isn’t looking that bad after all.

    I do hope we oust the bad apples they are not in the best interest of the city , time has shown this..

  • 12 turfgrrl // Sep 26, 2007 at 4:25 pm

    Looking for Ethics: Guidestar.org? You must be joking. Take a gander at the common council minutes and check out how many times Miklave and Poruban have asked about the full financial details on a permit for using any Norwalk public park. A shorter version, they haven’t.

    Secondly, no one goes through a competitive bidding process in order to to use the name of the town in which an event is located. There are countless organizations that start events and festivals, do what they can to raise money and stage the event, and survive or fail based on how well they operate. Norwalk, btw bestowed its name on towns in OH, IA, and CA. Good luck chasing that copyright.

    You seem to think that Grant shouldn’t be soliciting sponsors and advertisers for his event. Tell that to all the people who sit on boards and commissions in this town when it comes to their appeals for funds for organizations that they are involved with. Even the state’s ethics commission had difficulty in dealing with Jim Amann, his role as fundraiser for the MS Society, and his role as state rep and Speaker of the House.

  • 13 Looking for Ethics // Sep 26, 2007 at 4:38 pm

    Turfgirl,
    I don’t think full disclosure is a joke as you seem to, and that is what nonprofits who run fundraisers on city property are required to do.
    You have not commented on the fact that the mayor and
    city staff members helping an elected offical to make money for his business. That is cronyism at its worst.
    How are the the electorate supposed to have confidence in the people we trust with running our city? Also, here’s a quote from Tadd Diesel about the benefits to the city “There are very clear economic benefits to a festival like this”, - Tad Diesel, Director of Marketing and Development for the City of Norwalk.
    WHAT BENEFITS? The retail businesses I have asked about festivals at Vets park say they detract from their businesses because of the traffic problems.

  • 14 turfgrrl // Sep 26, 2007 at 5:14 pm

    Looking for Ethics: No, I find it tedious that someone who claims “ethics” in their handle can’t separate real ethical issues from fabricated ones. If you insist:

    1. Cronyism: n. Favoritism shown to old friends without regard for their qualifications, as in political appointments to office.

    So you are saying that if an entity say, like a boat show, comes to Norwalk, no one from the city should say and do anything positive to promote it? All of the suspects you’ve alleged are “showing favoritism” to Herb Grant sure are throwing that self same favoritism around. One would almost think that they actively encourage a diverse range of activities here in Norwalk. Some might call it economic development. One man’s Word Orienting Race is another’s cronyism. Go figure.

    2. Benefits: n 1. a. Something that promotes or enhances well-being; an advantage. So let’s see, you have decided to become the arbitrator of what is “an advantage” over the professional, Tad Diesel. Wasn’t it your earlier comment that decried the lack of “professionals”. Right. Somehow I think that Diesel is right about benefits and you’re wrong, since to myopically view the Washington street merchants as the sole beneficiaries of economic benefits certainly ignores the rest of Norwalk which also includes the hotels, services and other merchants who might just appreciate activities that attract more than the 87k people that live in Norwalk.

    3. Traffic Problems. Yes, there are quite a few traffic problems in Norwalk, however, the traffic generated by the Jazz Festival does not make the top 20 let alone the top 10 list. You might be confused by the Columbian festival, a one day event that generated 10 times the traffic and 10 times the noise. I’m sure you are concerned about the financial operations of that festival, the developers and the area merchants who were solicited as sponsors for that festival, and the city staff members that had to clean up after that festival on the tax payer’s dime.

    Lastly, look at the application for a permit before you leap. You’ll be surprised by what you will not find. Here’s a link.

  • 15 demsknow // Sep 26, 2007 at 5:16 pm

    Matt-is that you or Kevin? What you did is wrong just admit it!
    You took an opportunity to grandstand in front of all the candidates in the audience. I really don’t think they were impressed in the least. Too bad the press wasn’t there to see your display because then the voters could see your bias. The only ones that will know about this are the people who read this blog and those who attended the meeting. When I got a phone call about it today I was appalled. To think that I actually voted for people who act this way. I came to the blog to see if it was posted. earlier it wasn’t and then I guess Turf got the bug in her ear and posted for all to see. I’m glad your fellow council people took you bothy to task. This is a huge step backwards for the dems. This type of behavior will not get you elected. Kevin should know better since he lost the last election because people had lost confidence in him. Too bad the party decided to put him back on when Rev. Saywer left. That was an insult in itself to the voters because they had made a statement and that was to not re elect him. Lets see what happens this time.

  • 16 What a joke // Sep 26, 2007 at 6:02 pm

    For anyone who cares to know, DMG awared 2 scholarships to Norwalk High school and Brien McMahon in the amount of $1000 each even though there was overhead costes and low turnout. He followed through on his committment and for this these two bozo’s find the need to chastise, criticise and otherwise besmirch his credibility. This is nothing more than the two bobble heads from the last administration to tell Mr. Grant that they did not like his
    bi-partisanship. This was their payback. God only knows what they have in store for the rest of the council before elections.

  • 17 they were blowhards // Sep 26, 2007 at 7:17 pm

    Nothing like knocking a fellow Democrat in public right before elections. Makes the whole party look stupid. I’m disgusted.

  • 18 Dem who's Anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 7:34 pm

    I’m disappointed in the continued disarray in my party. If we could stop being so petty and move on to bigger issues, we might actually win an election or two.

  • 19 nobody // Sep 26, 2007 at 8:08 pm

    Non-profit organizations are required to file financial statements that are publicly available. Ask the IRS. They are required to file regardless of whether they use city property or not. Looking for Ethics, what’s your point? Are you saying that non-profits, publicly-traded companies, and private companies should all have the same financial disclosure requirements?

  • 20 musical fruit // Sep 26, 2007 at 8:19 pm

    Dick and Walter are probably sitting somewhere laughing their asses off thinking after this blogs get through with everything there might as well be a drawing for mayor, and the bean supper afterwoods to fart out the winners.

    I guess from this instead of election signs we should see for sale signs all over the city..

    thanks for giving us something to laugh about,,John did say he left the mainland for a reason.

  • 21 anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 8:53 pm

    Poruban and Miklave are an embarassment to the City of Norwalk. Hard to imagine that the fine people of this City elected them to the council in the first place. I forgot, Poruban had to lose the last election in order to get back on the council. Both men should be ashamed of themselves, but who am I kidding. Both appear to be products of this growing population of headline grabbing, sick generation of politicians.

  • 22 what they meant // Sep 26, 2007 at 9:56 pm

    What did Matt and Kevin really mean when they said Herb Grant was corrupt? Kevin filed an ethics complaint against Nick Kydes. Why isn’t he filing one against Grant?

  • 23 Anonymous // Sep 26, 2007 at 10:21 pm

    Did Kevin Poruban violate the ethics code himself ?
    The following is the state statute:

    § 7-148h. Ethics commission; establishment and powers. Interest in conflict with discharge of duties

    (a) Any town, city, district, as defined in section 7-324, or borough may, by charter provision or ordinance, establish a board, commission, council, committee or other agency to investigate allegations of unethical conduct, corrupting influence or illegal activities levied against any official, officer or employee of such town, city, district or borough. The provisions of subsections (a) to (e), inclusive, of section 1-82a shall apply to allegations before any such agency of such conduct, influence or activities, to an investigation of such allegations conducted prior to a probable cause finding, and to a finding of probable cause or no probable cause. Any board, commission, council, committee or other agency established pursuant to this section may issue subpoenas or subpoenas duces tecum, enforceable upon application to the Superior Court, to compel the attendance of persons at hearings and the production of books, documents, records and papers.

    § 1-82a. Confidentiality of complaints, evaluations of possible violations and investigations. Publication of findings

    (a) Unless a judge trial referee makes a finding of probable cause, a complaint alleging a violation of this part or section 1-101nn shall be confidential except upon the request of the respondent. An evaluation of a possible violation of this part or section 1-101nn by the Office of State Ethics prior to the filing of a complaint shall be confidential except upon the request of the subject of the evaluation. If the evaluation is confidential, any information supplied to or received from the Office of State Ethics shall not be disclosed to any third party by a subject of the evaluation, a person contacted for the purpose of obtaining information or by the ethics enforcement officer or staff of the Office of State Ethics. No provision of this subsection shall prevent the Office of State Ethics from reporting the possible commission of a crime to the Chief State’s Attorney or other prosecutorial authority.

    (b) An investigation conducted prior to a probable cause finding shall be confidential except upon the request of the respondent. If the investigation is confidential, the allegations in the complaint and any information supplied to or received from the Office of State Ethics shall not be disclosed during the investigation to any third party by a complainant, respondent, witness, designated party, or board or staff member of the Office of State Ethics.

    (c) Not later than three business days after the termination of the investigation, the Office of State Ethics shall inform the complainant and the respondent of its finding and provide them a summary of its reasons for making that finding. The Office of State Ethics shall publish its finding upon the respondent’s request and may also publish a summary of its reasons for making such finding.

    (d) If a judge trial referee makes a finding of no probable cause, the complaint and the record of the Office of State Ethics’ investigation shall remain confidential, except upon the request of the respondent and except that some or all of the record may be used in subsequent proceedings. No complainant, respondent, witness, designated party, or board or staff member of the Office of State Ethics shall disclose to any third party any information learned from the investigation, including knowledge of the existence of a complaint, which the disclosing party would not otherwise have known. If such a disclosure is made, the judge trial referee may, after consultation with the respondent if the respondent is not the source of the disclosure, publish the judge trial referee’s finding and a summary of the judge trial referee’s reasons therefor.

    (e) The judge trial referee shall make public a finding of probable cause not later than five business days after any such finding. At such time the entire record of the investigation shall become public, except that the Office of State Ethics may postpone examination or release of such public records for a period not to exceed fourteen days for the purpose of reaching a stipulation agreement pursuant to subsection (c) of section 4-177. Any such stipulation agreement or settlement shall be approved by a majority of those members present and voting

    The Norwalk advocate printed on September 23, 2007:

    Ethics complains targets member of Common Council

    By Tim Stelloh
    Staff Writer

    Published September 12 2007

    NORWALK - Common Council member Nicholas Kydes is the subject of an ethics complaint filed yesterday by fellow councilman Kevin Poruban.

    Kydes, a Republican and a member of the council’s Planning Committee, discussed a redevelopment plan earlier this year without disclosing that his brother is a property owner in that plan. The Planning Committee oversees redevelopment proposals.

    Last month, on advice of city counsel, Kydes recused himself from future hearings and discussions on the Poko Partners portion of the Wall Street redevelopment plan - an area that reaches from the intersection of Wall Street, Belden and West avenues to Isaacs and Leonard streets, and proposes 371 new housing units and 61,000 square feet of commercial space.

    The plan includes the former Globe Theater, a nearly century-old building partly owned by Kydes’ brother, developer Andrew Kydes.

    The complaint, which Poruban, a Democrat, released to the media and said he gave to Common Council President and Ethics Committee Chairman Michael Coffey, said Nicholas Kydes’ “announcement that he will not act improperly in the future does not erase his previous impropriety.” Coffey, a Democrat, declined to comment on the complaint, though he said any ethics issue would be handled by the Council’s Ethics Committee.

    The council adopted a new ethics code in June, which created an independent ethics board. But the new law does not go into effect until November, so the Kydes’ matter will be handled under the existing code, city attorney Peter Nolin said. Kydes dismissed Poruban’s complaint as election-year politics and called it a “non-issue.”

    “He’s using the media to get me,” Kydes said, adding that he will seek legal counsel to consider defamation charges.

    Kydes said his comments earlier this year did not pose a conflict of interest.

    In April, as the Planning Committee discussed the theater - and whether it should be used as a community resource under the new redevelopment plan - Kydes said the theater “is a private property and (developers) need to be sensitive to that fact,” according to meeting minutes.

    He did not disclose that the theater was owned by his brother.

    In March, Kydes made a similar statement when the Planning Committee discussed a change in eminent domain procedures that affected the Wall street redevelopment plan.

    “It is imperative that the property owner’s rights are protected,” Kydes said, according to meeting minutes.

    He voted on that change in procedure, which requires the Common Council to vote on property seizures on a case-by-case basis. Before the change, the city’s redevelopment agency could seize property without the council’s approval.

    City officials said last week the Globe Theater is one of four properties in the redevelopment plan not yet purchased by Poko Partners.

    Kydes said that even though he knew his brother owned the theater, he should not have recused himself from those meetings.

    “Government is such that if someone comes forward to a commission or committee, people know each other. What are you going to do, sit on your hands and recuse yourself? If so, government is going to come to a standstill,” he said. “I’m part of this community, and we’re discussing a potential plan.”

    After Kydes discussed the situation with Nolin in August, he decided to recuse himself from upcoming discussions of the redevelopment plan’s land disposition agreement - the contract between the city and the developer.

    Nolin told Kydes that if he knew his brother’s property was in the Poko plan, he should recuse himself from discussing it or voting on it. Nolin added that if “all the facts were known” during the meetings earlier this year, he would have advised him to recuse himself then, too.

    You decide.

  • 24 Mr Greenpeace // Sep 26, 2007 at 10:48 pm

    while we all read this, engine 5 is now on water, which would mean South Norwalk is without coverage the station is empty with no truck,,according to the marine channel. An Island fire maybe?

    I guess this will go over many heads while you deal with this crap, myself if I need help I’ll certainly will not depend on any of you political mongers,,the city is still in need of leadership, not comics.

    It feels good knowing you all are covering my back.. :( pathetic is the only word that comes to mind

  • 25 Anonymous // Sep 27, 2007 at 1:25 am

    Sure beats the Norwalk popularity contest we had yesterday. My vote is Straniti.

  • 26 Anonymous // Sep 27, 2007 at 7:40 am

    It sure looks like Mr. Poruban might have been doing some unethical stuff himself in his smear campaign against Mr. Kydes. Real nice behavior Mr. Poruban.

  • 27 high road // Sep 27, 2007 at 8:08 am

    Coffey released information to the press re Anne Carbone ethics issues — and he’s writing the ethics code! Kydes infomration has been in the press way before Poruban’s complaint. No violation on Poruban’s part; could be on Coffey’s.

    Also, anyone but another crony can see the ethics issue re Grant — specifcially, an elected official using his position for profit to his business.

    Dems they may be, but they are DINOs — and feeding at the Republican trough. No infighitng there…get these corrupt old boys out of politics. They are poison to true Dems and do not represent the values.

  • 28 What a joke // Sep 27, 2007 at 8:26 am

    I guess elected officials who live in and serve this town are not allowed to use the very facilities they help to maintain. So why should anyone bother to spend their time away from their personal lives to try to help the city. That crap! Everything is and was above board on the Jazz fest and since Mr. Grant will no longer be on the council it is no longer what some may refer to as an ethics violation so what the hell are all you people talking about. Apparently you realize that anyone wishing to use a public park may do so if they comply with the rules and procedures. This crap about making a profit is almost laughable. I suppose none of the oraganizations who use the parks make a profit? Yeah right! The vendors make a profit, the advertizers make a profit and the organizers of the events are making a profit.

  • 29 anonymous // Sep 27, 2007 at 8:41 am

    #26 - high road you are certinly “High” opn whatever road you chose. “anyone can see the ethics issue”?? Are you for real? Must be some strong stuff your geting high on! Grant was put under more scrutiny that any other citizen would be. Grant has also provided an excellent actration for our town. If the firm was not Grant’s and belonged to “Joe Smoe”, would it recieved any extra oversight? No, it wouldn’t.
    Herb Grant has voluteered his time on the council and his promotion company is his business. He was not afforded any other favors at all because he’s a councilman. “NO infighting there” HA! Pinch yourself and Wake Up! Just because several Dems on the council can think for themselfves and do not fall in step with Knopp’s cronies (if you look real hard, you can see the puppet strings hanging out of Pourubans shirt…follow them and I’m sure you’ll find Knopp & Wells holding them.) You can call the dems on the council, who think for the bemefit of all Norwalker’s, DINO’S all you want, It will Never change the fact that Pouruban, Miklave & Co are nothing more than DEMZ’s (Democratic Empty Minded Zombies).

  • 30 anonymous // Sep 27, 2007 at 8:46 am

    Here ya’ go #26 like I said - DEMZ’s
    Democratic Empty Minded Zombies!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a6YdNmK77k

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Leave a Reply