Norwalk: BOE Debates Tonight

by turfgrrl

October 25th, 2007 · 34 Comments

Tags: Education · In the News · Norwalk

34 Responses so far ↓ “Norwalk: BOE Debates Tonight”

• 1 Anonymous // Oct 25, 2007 at 11:08 am

  Unfortunately, I won’t be able to attend, but let me suggest the following topics:
  1. The ridiculously generous contract given Dr. Corda, despite the district’s being on the NCLB list for poor performance.
  2. The BOE’s failure to reveal the terms of the contract until immediately before the vote to accept it, thereby denying the public any opportunity to comment on it.
  3. The superintendent’s, assistant superintendent’s and chief operating officer’s conspicuous absence from the schools. They should spend a great deal of time in the buildings, talking to students, teachers, administrators and parents, but they are never there.
  4. The waste of taxpayers’ money in hiring a consultant (friend of Dr. Corda) to find candidates for the principalships at NHS and BMHS. Also, why was there not an opportunity for others to do this work? This was a private deal done behind closed doors.

• 2 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 3:52 pm

  I’ve hijacked “overandout” postings for the record, it works for me,

  GOOD DEBATE ISSUES AFFECTING NORWALK,

  Connecticut Republican Gov. John G. Rowland ~convicted~

  Connecticut Republican Ben Andrews, Republican candidate for US Senate ~convicted~

  Connecticut Republican Mayor Phil Giordano and candidate for US Senate ~convicted~

  Connecticut Republican Paul Silvester, State Treasurer ~convicted~

  Connecticut: Republican Gov. Rowland’s 2 Aides Indicted, they join 7 other Republicans convicted at the state level.

  Connecticut Republican Party: Richard Foley ~convicted~

  Connecticut Republicans Refused to Return Tainted Money Received from Tom DeLay

  Read about Republicans convicted of Pedophilia (child molestation) over 70 cases.

  FOR OLD TIMES’ SAKE: CONNECTICUT REPUBLICANS CORRUPTION FUND. HARTFORD; OCTOBER 28, 1890 NEW YORK TIMES ARCHIVES

  by overandout — October 24, 2007 @ 11:15 pm

  C’mon there is no contest, when it comes to convictions Republicans win hands down.

  by overandout — October 24, 2007 @ 11:25 pm

  Hey, this is hot today. I really admire Republicans. When they have no issues that they could possibly defend with any sensible logic they are still lashing out.

  Republicans are losing thousands of party members nationwide by the minute.

  No funds left to run national elections in ‘2008 and running campaign deficits into the millions.

  Campaign contributions are non existent at all levels.

  A good number of Republican incumbents nationwide already decided to not run in 2008

  Walter Briggs outdid Moccia in third quarter contributions 2 to 1.

  Where do you go from here?

  Well, nothing left but trashy behavior and insults.

  I’ll add a few local Republican transgressions of my own.

• 3 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 5:01 pm

  What it means for Norwalk if Moccia gets re-elected,

  More developments by his construction cronies.

  More traffic without any realistic planning.

  More Parking nightmares at local shopping centers.

  More traffic jams on West Avenue, route 7, Connecticut Avenue, etc.

  No more Farmers’ Market in Norwalk.

  Supporting Republican Gov. Rell’s vetoes like the bond package where Norwalk was getting millions for the school system and 3.2 million in flooding funds. Opposition to Route 7 expansion. Wiped out by the stroke of the pen.

  More kids creating overcrowded schools.

  More property tax increases.

  More flooding. More neglect.

  Adding more “Box” businesses like the “candyman” Esposito did for 14 years.

  At last report, Moccia has taken campaign funds contributions from about 14 developers. Many doing business with the city and other hopefuls to get some, including the Kydes family (this is the councilman who said that he had no knowledge of his family was not involved in the Wall Street development)

  Moccia no longer resides at Ambler Drive, his ex-girlfriend threw him out.
  Moccia then moved to Wolfpit Avenue (ex-wife residence)
  she threw him out and he now resides at the Norwalk Inn. Moccia has a record of filed bankruptcies.

• 4 Anonymous // Oct 25, 2007 at 5:30 pm

  Got any links to back up that last paragraph? If there are bankruptcies on record they should be accessible online. Not a good background for someone who is running against a financial consultant.

  Maybe the only relationship he’s got left is with the old Chevy that he claimed is worth more than 93 East Avenue. Oh, that’s right, she left him too, I heard she ended up in the crisis shelter…

• 5 ENrwlker // Oct 25, 2007 at 5:43 pm

  norwalkphil — Moccia will win by at least 2,000 votes, and pull in at least 10 GOP councilmen with him. Better start stocking up on beer to cry in.

• 6 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 5:51 pm

  Moccia re-elected city sheriff, despite claims of bankrupcy Hour 11/5/97 pA3

  PDF]January-December 1997 95.9 FM “Fox” Media blitz …
  Moccia re-elected city sheriff, H. 11/5/97 pA3. Modem Media ….. despite bankruptcy, H. 12/18/97 pA3. Norwalk Wiz to stay open; 5 …

  norwalklib.org/HourPDF/Hour%20Index-%20JanDec97.pdf

• 7 Anonymous // Oct 25, 2007 at 5:56 pm

  Turffie does #3 meet your personal attack rule?

• 8 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 6:00 pm

  Candidates to public office are subject to scrutiny. Voters need to know.

• 9 turfgrrl // Oct 25, 2007 at 6:10 pm

  Well number 3 does kind of veer into the no-no land of personal attacks. Mayor Moccia does not reside at the Norwalk Inn, and what transpires in a candidates personal life isn’t part of the “public record.”

  Lately it seems that people like to come on here and say bad things about certain candidates. It detracts from real discussion of real issues. Please stick to the issues. Its not like there is a shortage of those.

  The Management.

• 10 high road // Oct 25, 2007 at 6:15 pm

  Does that mean that Moccia doesn’t pay any property tax in Norwalk?

• 11 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 6:19 pm

  10. Does that mean that Moccia doesn’t pay any property tax in Norwalk?

  by high road — October 25, 2007 @ 6:15 pm

  YES, that’s exactly what it means and the car he drives is ownned by the city, Guess who pays property taxes on that one?

• 12 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 6:37 pm

  #5 by ENrwlker. Another Republican “Nostradamus” Do you also have an insight on Weapons of Mass Destruction?

• 13 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 6:56 pm

  This is the first installment of my series, “As the Stomach Turns…”

  This applies to the BOE debates because it involves our children.

  I have a question for Norwalk’s women members of the Republican Party…

  Aren’t you repulsed, makes you puke and sick to your stomach that at least 70 cases of pedophilia (child molestation) have been brought up against convicted Republicans nationwide?

  Go to this link, but please do it before supper tonight or wait at least 3 hours after dinner.

  http://www.armchairsubversive.org/

• 14 Gottfried Achenwall // Oct 25, 2007 at 7:24 pm

  What is your purpose to present this propaganda?

• 15 equal time // Oct 25, 2007 at 7:37 pm

  #13-anyone who molests a child has any rights. I don’t care who they are. And yes it makes me sick because they are on both sides of the aisle.

  add these to your list:
  In 1990 the House voted to reprimand Frank when it was revealed that Steve Gobie, a household employee he had hired in 1985, was running a prostitution business from Frank’s apartment. Frank had dismissed Gobie in 1987 after learning of Gobie’s activities.

  REP. JOHN YOUNG (D-Tex.):
  On June 11, 1976, Colleen Gardner, a former staff secretary to Young, told the New York Times that Young increased her salary after she gave in to his sexual advances. In November, Young, who had run unopposed in the safe Democratic district five consecutive times, was reelected with just 61 percent of the vote. The scandal wouldn’t go away, and in 1978 Young was defeated in a Democratic primary runoff.

  REP. ALLAN HOWE (D-Utah):
  On June 13, 1976, Howe was arrested in Salt Lake City on charges of soliciting two policewomen posing as prostitutes. Howe insisted he was set up and refused to resign. But the Democratic Party distanced itself from his candidacy and he was trounced by his Republican opponent in the November election.

  REP. FRED RICHMOND (D-N.Y.):
  In April 1978, Richmond was arrested in Washington for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old boy. Richmond apologized for his actions, conceding he “made bad judgments involving my private life.” In spite of a Democratic primary opponent’s attempts to cash in on the headlines, Richmond easily won renomination and reelection. But his career came to an end four years later when, after pleading guilty to possession of marijuana and tax evasion - and amid allegations that he had his staff procure cocaine for him — he resigned his seat.

  REP. JOHN HINSON (D-Miss.):
  On Aug. 8, 1980, during his first reelection bid, Hinson stunned everyone by announcing that in 1976 he had been accused of committing an obscene act at a gay haunt in Virginia. Hinson, married and a strong conservative, added that in 1977 he had survived a fire in a gay D.C. movie theater. He was making the disclosure, he said, because he needed to clear his conscience. But he denied he was a homosexual and refused GOP demands that he resign. Hinson won reelection in a three-way race, with 39 percent of the vote. But three months later, he was arrested on charges of attempted oral sodomy in the restroom of a House office building. He resigned his seat on April 13, 1981.

  REP. ROBERT BAUMAN (D-Md.):
  On Oct. 3, 1980, Bauman, a leading “pro-family” conservative, pleaded innocent to a charge that he committed oral sodomy on a teenage boy in Washington. Married and the father of four, Bauman conceded that he had been an alcoholic but had been seeking treatment. The news came as a shock to voters of the rural, conservative district, and he lost to a Democrat in November.

  REP. DAN CRANE (R-Ill.) and REP. GERRY STUDDS (D-Mass.):
  The House ethics committee on July 14, 1983, announced that Crane and Studds had sexual relationships with teenage congressional pages — Crane with a 17-year-old female in 1980, Studds with a 17-year-old male in 1973. Both admitted the charges that same day, and Studds acknowledged he was gay. The committee voted to reprimand the two, but a back-bench Georgia Republican named Newt Gingrich argued that they should be expelled. The full House voted on July 20 instead to censure the two, the first time that ever happened for sexual misconduct. Crane, married and the father of six, was tearful in his apology to the House, while Studds refused to apologize. Crane’s conservative district voted him out in 1984, while the voters in Studds’s more liberal district were more forgiving. Studds won reelection in 1984 with 56 percent of the vote, and continued to win until he retired in 1996.

  REP. ERNIE KONNYU (D-Calif.):
  In August 1987, two former Konnyu aides complained to the San Jose Mercury News that the freshman Republican had sexually harassed them. GOP leaders were unhappy with Konnyu’s temperament to begin with, so it took little effort to find candidates who would take him on in the primary. Stanford professor Tom Campbell ousted Konnyu the following June.

  SEN. BROCK ADAMS (D-Wash.):
  On Sept. 27, 1988, Seattle newspapers reported that Kari Tupper, the daughter of Adams’s longtime friends, filed a complaint against the Washington Democrat in July of 1987, charging sexual assault. She claimed she went to Adams’s house in March 1987 to get him to end a pattern of harassment, but that he drugged her and assaulted her. Adams denied any sexual assault, saying they only talked about her employment opportunities. Adams continued raising campaign funds and declared for a second term in February of 1992. But two weeks later the Seattle Times reported that eight other women were accusing Adams of sexual molestation over the past 20 years, describing a history of drugging and subsequent rape. Later that day, while still proclaiming his innocence, Adams ended his campaign.

  REP. JIM BATES (D-Calif.):
  Roll Call quoted former Bates aides in October 1988 saying that the San Diego Democrat made sexual advances toward female staffers. Bates called it a GOP-inspired smear campaign, but also apologized for anything he did that might have seemed inappropriate. The story came too close to Election Day to damage Bates, who won easily. However, the following October the ethics committee sent Bates a “letter of reproval” directing him to make a formal apology to the women who filed the complaint. Although the district was not thought to be hospitable to the GOP, Randy “Duke” Cunningham, a former Navy pilot who was once shot down over North Vietnam, ousted Bates in 1990 by fewer than 2,000 votes.

  REP. GUS SAVAGE (D-Ill.):
  The Washington Post reported on July 19, 1989, that Savage had fondled a Peace Corps volunteer while on an official visit to Zaire. Savage called the story a lie and blamed it on his political enemies and a racist media. (Savage is black.) In January 1990, the House ethics committee decided that the events did occur, but decided against any disciplinary action because Savage wrote a letter to the woman saying he “never intended to offend” her. Savage was reelected in 1990, but finally ousted in the 1992 primary by Mel Reynolds.

  REP. BARNEY FRANK (D-Mass.):
  In response to a story in the Aug. 25, 1989, Washington Times, Frank confirmed that he hired Steve Gobie, a male prostitute, in 1985 to live with and work for him in his D.C. apartment. But Frank, who is gay, said he fired Gobie in 1987 when he learned he was using the apartment to run a prostitution service. The Boston Globe, among others, called on Frank to resign, but he refused. On July 19, 1990, the ethics committee recommended Frank be reprimanded because he “reflected discredit upon the House” by using his congressional office to fix 33 of Gobie’s parking tickets. Attempts to expel or censure Frank failed; instead the House voted 408-18 to reprimand him. The fury in Washington was not shared in Frank’s district, where he won reelection in 1990 with 66 percent of the vote, and has won by larger margins ever since.

  SEN. DANIEL INOUYE (D-Hawaii):
  In October 1992, Republican Senate nominee Rick Reed began running a campaign commercial that included a surreptitiously taped interview with Lenore Kwock, Inouye’s hairdresser. Kwock said Inouye had sexually forced himself on her in 1975 and continued a pattern of sexual harassment, even as Kwock continued to cut his hair over the years. Inouye, seeking a sixth term, denied the charges. And Kwock said that by running the commercial, Reed had caused her more pain than Inouye had. Reed was forced to pull the ad, and while many voters took out their anger on the Republican, Inouye was held to 57 percent of the vote - the lowest total of his career. A week later, a female Democratic state legislator announced that she had heard from nine other women who claimed Inouye had sexually harassed them over the past decade. But the women didn’t go public with their claims, the local press didn’t pursue the story, and the Senate Ethics Committee decided to drop the investigation because the accusers wouldn’t participate in an inquiry.

  REP MEL REYNOLDS (D-Ill.):
  Freshman Reynolds was indicted on Aug. 19, 1994, on charges of having sex with a 16-year-old campaign worker and then pressuring her to lie about it. Reynolds, who is black, denied the charges and said the investigation was racially motivated. The GOP belatedly put up a write-in candidate for November, but Reynolds dispatched him in the overwhelmingly Democratic district with little effort. Reynolds was convicted on Aug. 22, 1995 of 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice and solicitation of child pornography, was sentenced to five years in prison, and resigned his seat on October 1.

• 16 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 7:45 pm

  14. by Gottfried Achenwall

  Not propaganda, information dear fellow. I’ll put it in terms you’d undesrtand. If the opposition to the Third Reich of the late 1930s had been allowed access to free speech, perhaps the German people at that time would’ve had a chance to a different perspective on the situation, like the truth, as opposed to propagandistic slogans.

• 17 anon // Oct 25, 2007 at 7:53 pm

  The blog for this headline was supposed to be about BoE candidates, instead it’s a hissy fit—it’s boring, can you stop?

• 18 Aunt Bertha // Oct 25, 2007 at 7:57 pm

  This is not addressing the BOE and its members that are up for re-election. To be a good voter you must have the facts on the candidates. Please do not make it a Dem/Repub race. It is a who is the most qualified race. When you pull all this other junk it it pollutes the information people need to make an adult choice. I’m just an old person that has an idea that free speech should be honest and helpful speech.

• 19 norwalkphil // Oct 25, 2007 at 8:23 pm

  #15. by equal time. All cases you mentioned are valid as a matter of record, however, your references don’t even come close.

  While there is no excuse for unethical or criminal behavior at any level, your references include 4 cases of child molestation.

  When it comes to convictions on child molestation, there is no contest, Republicans win hands down with flying colors. Doesn’t it make you wonder about hypocritical Republican values?

  REP. FRED RICHMOND (D-N.Y.): (child)
  In April 1978, Richmond was arrested in Washington for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old boy. Richmond apologized for his actions, conceding he “made bad judgments involving my private life.” In spite of a Democratic primary opponent’s attempts to cash in on the headlines, Richmond easily won renomination and reelection. But his career came to an end four years later when, after pleading guilty to possession of marijuana and tax evasion - and amid allegations that he had his staff procure cocaine for him — he resigned his seat.

  REP. ROBERT BAUMAN (D-Md.): (child, no age stated, 18?)
  On Oct. 3, 1980, Bauman, a leading “pro-family” conservative, pleaded innocent to a charge that he committed oral sodomy on a teenage boy in Washington. Married and the father of four, Bauman conceded that he had been an alcoholic but had been seeking treatment. The news came as a shock to voters of the rural, conservative district, and he lost to a Democrat in November.

  REP. DAN CRANE (R-Ill.) and REP. GERRY STUDDS (D-Mass.): (child)
  The House ethics committee on July 14, 1983, announced that Crane and Studds had sexual relationships with teenage congressional pages — Crane with a 17-year-old female in 1980, Studds with a 17-year-old male in 1973. Both admitted the charges that same day, and Studds acknowledged he was gay. The committee voted to reprimand the two, but a back-bench Georgia Republican named Newt Gingrich argued that they should be expelled. The full House voted on July 20 instead to censure the two, the first time that ever happened for sexual misconduct. Crane, married and the father of six, was tearful in his apology to the House, while Studds refused to apologize. Crane’s conservative district voted him out in 1984, while the voters in Studds’s more liberal district were more forgiving. Studds won reelection in 1984 with 56 percent of the vote, and continued to win until he retired in 1996.

  REP MEL REYNOLDS (D-Ill.): (child)
  Freshman Reynolds was indicted on Aug. 19, 1994, on charges of having sex with a 16-year-old campaign worker and then pressuring her to lie about it. Reynolds, who is black, denied the charges and said the investigation was racially motivated. The GOP belatedly put up a write-in candidate for November, but Reynolds dispatched him in the overwhelmingly Democratic district with little effort. Reynolds was convicted on Aug. 22, 1995 of 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice and solicitation of child pornography, was sentenced to five years in prison, and resigned his seat on October 1.

• 20 Silence Dogood // Oct 25, 2007 at 8:44 pm

  Aunt Bertha, thanks for your comments.

• 21 equal time // Oct 25, 2007 at 8:45 pm

  I was just making a point. Perverts come in all shapes, forms and political pursuaion. They should all be behind bars!

• 22 Aunt Bertha // Oct 25, 2007 at 8:58 pm

  Silence do you know who is running against those who are on the Board? And will people get the point that maybe Jody is not the one to be the Chair of the BOE? Are the challengers smart people who will act on cleaning up central office? Can they work with the teachers and parents to improve the quality of education in Norwalk? Do they hold degrees in education or managment? These are the things I want to know. I could care les about all this nonsence that norwalkphil has to say.

• 23 Silence Dogood // Oct 25, 2007 at 9:18 pm

  Aunt Bertha, I cannot answer your questions because I don’t know the answers. I truly like and respect Jody and I know she is a very decent person, but I can’t forget her chairing the BOE that gave King Corda an unbelievable contract, a contract that he doesn’t come close to deserving. In fact, in my not-so-humble opinion, he deserves to be fired. My feelings are the same for Queen Karen and the Duke of Opdahl. Let us hope that Bruce Mellion’s lawsuit is successful in overturning the contract vote.

  If the BOE loses, the current BOE will have a pro forma discussion of the contract and then will approve it. If it’s done after Election Day, maybe there will be enough new BOE members to overturn it.

  Call me a dreamer.

• 24 Aunt Bertha // Oct 25, 2007 at 9:41 pm

  Thanks Silence. I like Jody, also, as a person not as the Chair of the BOE. What she allowed was wrong when she railroaded Corda’s contract through. I know in my heart that the teacher’s union will be successful in this lawsuit against the approval that was in great haste by the BOE. She is not strong enough to stand up to Corda. I saw this in meetings when looking for new principals how she was a quiet little mouse next to papa Corda. She was the voice of the people that fell silent when he had all his friends getting paid for jobs he handed them. That is why she should go. I guess I am looking for a nice person with a back bone.

• 25 itsridiculous // Oct 25, 2007 at 9:47 pm

  I had to work late and missed the BOE debate. I am now left to whatever media accounts will follow, and that is NOT a good thing. I wish now I had left work to go to the debate! Idiot.
  I trust turfgrrl will give us a pretty decent overview, but I myself may end up calling the candidates personally and interviewing them. I’d like to see who is “overly” defensive and tunnel-visioned and who is receptive and open-minded.
  Is there any other BOE debate scheduled? I heard or read that even just this one almost didn’t get organized in time. Turfie is right. This is the biggest spend of our money, and I hope taxpayers filled the auditorium tonight.

• 26 Mr Greenpeace // Oct 25, 2007 at 9:55 pm

  if the voters don’t absorb some of the facts on this thread it will be a landslide, but I have faith in the residents the taxpayers to do the right thing #24

  http://www.yourct.com/newzee/2007/10/23/norwalk-the-big-mayoral-debate/

  some of the facts are not adding up
  some new crime figures are out, I won’t start doing the comparisons on what was given in the past, now we can talk here and now.

  more crime deserves more police no matter where you live , I left the link to the page so anyone can see its not getting better its just getting more clear what the trend is.

  http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_04.html

  revised figures for 2005 this came from the mayors website it seems the 2006 figures are coming in as well against the 2007 prelims
  Download Printable Document

  The estimated number of violent crimes in the United States increased 1.9 percent in 2006 when compared with 2005 data.
  The estimated number of violent crimes increased in three of four regions, with the highest increase (3.0 percent) occurring in the West.
  The estimated number of murders increased in three of the four regions, with the highest increase, 3.6 percent, in the South.
  The estimated number of forcible rape offenses decreased in all four regions, with the largest decrease, 6.6 percent, occurring in the Northeast.
  The estimated number of robbery offenses increased in all four regions, with the largest increase (12.3 percent) in the West.
  The estimated number of aggravated assault offenses declined 1.6 percent in the Northeast and 0.9 percent in the West; however, the estimated number of offenses increased 0.6 percent in the Midwest and 0.4 percent in the South.
  The estimated number of property crimes nationwide decreased 1.9 percent in 2006 when compared with 2005 data. Among the Nation’s regions, only the Midwest had an increase in the estimated number of property crimes with a rise of 0.5 percent.
  The estimated number of burglaries nationwide increased by 1.3; however, the estimated number of burglaries in the West decreased 2.5 percent.
  The estimated number of larceny-thefts decreased in all four regions, with the largest decrease, 6.1 percent, occurring in the West.
  Nationwide, the number of estimated motor vehicle thefts decreased 3.5 percent. The Northeast experienced the largest decrease (6.5 percent) in the number of estimated motor vehicle

  the link was updated this sept

• 27 anon // Oct 26, 2007 at 12:18 am

  #14 - What’s up with these outrageous generalizations you present in this thread? What is your purpose? Do you intend to discredit the Republican candidates here? Think… they are sorely needed right now to balance the already discredited Democratic stronghold on this Board of Ed. If you feel that all Republicans are perverts, then what is your solution to this run-away team of bobbleheads who have given Corda et al complete power and a pension that will reach outlandish proportions year after year after year? Please stop wasting our time with silly political attacks. The candidates who are running on the Republican team are credible, honorable, intelligent citizens of Norwalk. Enough with the dumber than dumb remarks.

• 28 Charles the Hammer // Oct 26, 2007 at 5:52 am

  Greenpeace, what do crime stats have to do with the BOE debate? Answer: Absolutely nothing…they are merely offered as an oblique attack. norwalkphil, how does a reprise of Democrat perversions going back three decades advance our discussion here? Answer it doesn’t. It’s just an exercise in tit-for-tat squabbling.

  There are enough boneheaded actions by incompetent officials of both major parties to cause us woe. The discussion here should focus on strengths and weaknesses of the individual BOE candidates running.

  The debate revealed that the challengers are coming on strong, infused with the energy of reform. Jodi and the incumbents were tired and on defense. The record should be their demise.

• 29 watchdog // Oct 26, 2007 at 7:02 am

  Charles, I couldn’t agree with you more.

• 30 Gottfried Achenwall // Oct 26, 2007 at 9:35 am

  First I am patronized and then I am blamed. This situation is not good. The talk about education is better.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Leave a Reply