YourCT.com header image 2
← Another Open Thread Norwalk: Ordinance For Joint BOE Council Committee? →

Norwalk: Republicans Meet & Greet


by turfgrrl


April 30th, 2008 · 18 Comments

Last night I attended the Republican open meeting. It was well attended by a mix of the old, ruh-roh some may take offense to that, and the new. The new people were the focus of course, since registration in the Republican party has been declining in Norwalk for a number of years. It’s not much help that the national field of Republican flavor is so inexcusable. But like Christine Todd Whitman has said, it’s my party too.

For Norwalk to meet the 21st century and evolve, both political parties have to grapple with the reality that what’s been the norm of operations for the last few decades isn’t working.  Which means that Norwalk’s political parties have to be run more like buinsess organizations than the social clubs of idealogues. That means that party members should be more like diplomats and ambassadors. The business at hand is to make Norwalk better. What better means is the stuff that lets you know what flavor party you belong in.

I’d love to see some readers here jump in and define what would make Norwalk a better place to live and work. Forget which party will get you there for a moment, and let’s think outside of stereotypes here.

Tags: Norwalk

18 Responses so far ↓ “Norwalk: Republicans Meet & Greet”



  • 1 DIANE CECE - Pesky Unaffiliated Constituent // Apr 30, 2008 at 9:49 pm

    Geez, TG, once again the silence is deafening. Either the city is pretty damned perfect right now, or there isn’t even one thing that can be done to make it nice to live and work here.
    Come on, Norwalkers, which is it? I’ll kick it off and be my eternal optimist self:
    Firstly, to paraphrase some smarter folks than I, IT’S THE QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES, dummy.
    Secondly, to paraphrase another smart person, ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL, starting right on my street.
    It is seldom the juicy headline agenda items that people care about, it’s about the pothole on their street, mis-timed traffic lights, crime, general lack of enforcement, loud garbage trucks, blaring horns & music, vandalism-grafitti, etc.I think the “party-goers” on both sides are too hung up on elections, etc. to get the real picture at the real level. Get rid of the bloviators(?) and get some real forums and discussions going that are easy for folks to attend, break the intimidation barrier, and provide a neutral, non-intimidating climate for people to participate. Folks may be at a breaking point of disgust with the 2-party system, soon. Although, adding a pesky unaffiliated third only makes it a 3-party system, doesn’t it?

  • 2 fed up // May 1, 2008 at 5:53 am

    go Libertarian

  • 3 Anonymous // May 1, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    Did Christine Todd Whitman say it before or after she LIED about the toxic air surrounding the World Trade Center? The air that she claimed was SAFE has killed many people and will continue to kill many more.

    Nothing to brag about, Turfie!

  • 4 nwlknative // May 1, 2008 at 5:58 pm

    I’ll agree with Diane Cece - it is the quality of life issues that need to be improved to make Norwalk a much nicer place to live. The loud music playing from passing cars, the construction crews with their back-up beepers going all night long (will they ever finish this project?), impolite drivers, who cut you off or don’t yield right of way, overcrowded stores, parking lots, traffic. Streets littered with paper thrown by passing motorists or pedestrians. Stop the out of towners from coming in and dictating our development (or overdevelopment). There was a time when people could walk anywhere in town and not worry about getting mugged or hit by a car, when neighbors watched out for each other and each other’s children and weren’t afraid to say something if the child was acting up, but that was long ago and seems like another lifetime. Norwalk is my home town and I would never think of moving, but sometimes it is difficult to justify staying here.

  • 5 old timer // May 1, 2008 at 6:30 pm

    “All Politics is Local”
    (Thomas Phillip O’Neill jr….”Tip”)
    There was a time all City jobs went to City residents. If you were not a registered voter, you need not apply. That seems like a long time ago, but it was a good rule. It was given up when the cost of living in Norwalk made it hard to hire. Taxpayer’s money went to taxpayers who worked for the city and spent most of their salaries, and most of their time, in the City. Do you think if everybody who worked for the City lived here, we might get better performance..? I do. We should start at the department head level and work down to the lowest paid starting laborer. If the department heads, and their families lived here, I believe a lot would get done better. It won’t happen overnight, but it should start soon. City employees, and employees of contractors with long term City contracts(OMI, for example) who live miles away cannot have the same interest in quality of life issues as people who live here. Some union contracts would need to be changed, and there would be a cost factor, but the money would stay here.

  • 6 Anonymous // May 1, 2008 at 7:01 pm

    old timer- The jobs now are given to the otherwise unemployable children of the politically connected. Case in point the curator at the museum, and Bruce Morris, and don’t forget the Bondis.

    Wouldn’t it be better to hire local taxpayers instead of having city employees commute from Waterbury everyday?

    We shouldn’t start with just the department heads, we should start at the top and get someone who knows what they are doing, and doesn’t just take orders from Zullo.

  • 7 DIANE CECE - Pesky Unaffiliated Constituent // May 1, 2008 at 7:17 pm

    Bravo, Old Timer. Although when I last asked about residency requirements for department heads and higher, I was told they are against state statutes. I’d like to know if that is a fact (this was back when I actually BELIEVED the answers I received from city hall. Now I know better and do as much of my own research as possible!).

  • 8 DIANE CECE - Pesky Unaffiliated Constituent // May 1, 2008 at 7:26 pm

    Here is part of a response from an OLR Research report:
    February 9, 2001 2001-R-0150

    RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR MUNICIPALITIES
    By: Michele L. Melley, Legislative Fellow
    You asked which Connecticut towns have residency requirements for municipal employees such as firefighters, police officers, and teachers.
    SUMMARY
    In Connecticut it is illegal to require firefighters, police officers, teachers, and other collective bargaining employees to live in town as a condition of employment (CGS §§ 7-460b and 10-155f). But, the law does not prohibit residency requirements for applicants for some of these positions. We surveyed 15 towns by telephone and found that one town requires applicants to be residents, three give residents bonus points on examinations, and one automatically considers three residents in the final selection pool. OLR Report 94-R-0255 attached gives a legislative history of the residency provision in CGS § 7-460b.
    Towns can require non-collective bargaining employees to be residents of the town or district for which they work. Such employees include police chiefs, fire chiefs, school superintendents, and other high-ranking employees. Usually, the residency stipulation is written in the employee’s contract.

    The full answer, which identifies a survey of municipalities and court cases, is at this link:
    http://www.cga.ct.gov/2001/rpt/olr/htm/2001-r-0150.htm

  • 9 old timer // May 1, 2008 at 8:21 pm

    There are several places in the law that mention preference for legal residents, at the municipal,state and federal level and call residence a hiring criteria. Examples I have seen of preference in hiring provide for additional points for the applicants getting preference. It used to be common to give preference to veterans by adding points to a score on testing for a job. To get the job a non-resident had to overcome the extra points advantage given.
    The State’s attorney has advised that certain permits cannot be refused to non-residents, but the price can be higher. For example, see the rates for using the City boat launch ramps, Or state-issued hunting licenses.
    Residence can be a hiring criteria carrying substantial weight, as long as residence out-of-town (or state) is not an absolute deal breaker. Many employers make relocation a condition of hiring. They will hire people from far away but insist they move within a certain limited time after getting the job. If the City wanted to favor locals in all hiring, it could be done. It is done on appointments now, and non-residents are not even considered.
    You don’t think anybody at City Hall would lie, do you..?

  • 10 turfgrrl // May 2, 2008 at 8:31 am

    Diane Cece: You touched off the old nativist chestnut. On the surface, residency requirements make sense for certain types of jobs. Like, first responders, who are on call perhaps because factoring a commute on top f response times makes some sense. But I don’t see an empirical evidence that says better performance can be had if only the employee lived in town. What I think most people are concerned about is the level of commitment towards Norwalk and its citizens from municipal employees. That is the important thing to focus on, not where they live.

    Having municipal employees who live in other towns brings a diversity of experience that Norwalk can benefit from.

  • 11 Democrat // May 2, 2008 at 8:46 am

    Hiring only Norwalk residents was the practice that resulted in rampant cronyism for many years in Norwalk’s history. Mayor Bill Collins changed that by establishing professional standards and hiring the best qualified people. The city government still benefits from this legacy.
    The other problem with the idea to hire only residents is that many or most can’t afford to live here.
    Promoting workforce housing would go a long way towards solving this problem, but our city leaders do not support it. The mayors of Stamford, Bridgeport and Danbury all support housing initiatives to promote the creation of workforce housing.

  • 12 Monika DAgostino // May 2, 2008 at 10:13 am

    Oh well, I have been thinking about that for a while. Like I posted in another area, I have been pretty disillusioned by the City of Norwalk and the way things are handled. We have been dragged to housing court over a dwelling unit for my 82 year old mother in-law while young boys are murdered down the street from where we live.
    I attended a community meeting last month where Chris Shays was present and he offered to come to my house to speak to the young people to gain better understanding of their issues.
    I am a Democrat and I agree that people might be getting disgusted by the two party system. Politics are local and the zoning board members were appointed by a democratic mayor, while Chris Shays who is a Republican seems to get involved where it matters. Go figure……

  • 13 Anonymous // May 2, 2008 at 11:50 am

    Monika, there are many people in this town who are trying to help but people have to actually attend meetings and voice their opinions. Some people in this town are actually trying to make a difference while others try to push them out of the way. I have attended several NNHT meetings and I recommend it to everyone I talk to with teens. Unfortunately they moved the meeting this month from Wed. to Thurs and I had made other committments. They are people willing to step up to the plate but people have to start showing up and letting them know whats on their minds. You should really check out their website. Chris Shays is a caring person but he can’t do it alone.

  • 14 Anonymous // May 2, 2008 at 1:09 pm

    Yeah, ask the families of the 4000+ dead soldiers about Chris Shays and his support of the disasterous Bush mismanagement of Iraq - what a caring person…

  • 15 D-voted for Chris and will again // May 2, 2008 at 6:25 pm

    #14-the dems were gung ho to go to war until they found out how unpopular it was. In late 2002, the House of Representatives approved an attack on Iraq by 296 to 133 and ….in the Senate, where 29 Democrats voted for war and 21 against.
    While I agree with Bush’s mismanagement, He cannot make the decisions without the support of both parties. And yes, Chris Shays is a very caring person. While we may not agree with this war, we can agree he has been a very effective Congressman for the 4th district. Its election year so we will have the usual political bashing going on so its open season for all.

  • 16 DIANE CECE - Pesky Unaffiliated Constituent // May 2, 2008 at 10:32 pm

    TG, actually, it was Old Timer who raised the point, one I think is valid at a certain level of responsibility, especially department heads who directly impact either a) serious budget dollar or B) seriuous quality of life, thus the school superintendent, fire and police chiefs and DPW director. What I always question is someone’s true vested interest in their job. I refuse to believe some go to work with the idea of being mediocre, but it often appears to be the case. In the absence of a test for “vested interest”, the very least of a measurement should be goals. What gets measured gets done.

  • 17 Old Timer // May 3, 2008 at 8:22 pm

    If a teacher lives in Easton, for example, and her children go to Easton schools while she teaches in Norwalk, where do you suppose her passion for excellence will focus?
    I am not picking on teachers.
    All elected people are required to be residents. Should we do a nationwide search for a qualfied Mayor? School superintendent? (we do?)
    I believe there are real advantages to give preference in hiring, for most City jobs, to local residents. Yes,there are some jobs where it doesn’t matter. If the qualifications of a Pennsylvania resident, like Colonel Alvord, a 30 yr Army Corps Engineer, put him high above any local applicant, then it made sense to offer him the job. The fact that he gets a nice federal pension, with benefits, should have made it easier to negotiate his salary and benefits. For him, it is a retirement job. It would make sense, when the job offer was made, to require a move to Norwalk within a reasonable period of time. Having a DPW director who lives in town and is subject to the local roads and failures of the waste water treatment plant, and other quality of life issues, would help him understand the people he works for.(us) He gets a nice salary($116,674.00/yr) and can afford to live here. Any City department is about teamwork and the effect on the team of bringing in a boss from outside can’t be good for the morale, or performance, of the team. It is hard to believe DPW hadn’t developed anyone qualified to run it. The fire or police dept heads are subject to call 24/7. and have always been local residents.(where does this fire chief live?) For police officers, who deal with the public all day, every day, hiring people who grew up here and already know a lot of people is a real advantage, even if we don’t pay enough for them to stay and raise families here. Some do, and work a lot of overtime to get by. They are now allowed to live out of town, within a certain distance, but hiring young people to come from far away to police this diverse City is not the best possible way. In some neighborhoods, they are seen as part of an occupying army, not as neighbors doing a difficult job.
    Do you think, for a minute, the odor problems at the sewer plant would be so difficult to cure if the colonel & his family had to endure the odors ?

  • 18 Anon4 // May 4, 2008 at 9:29 am

    While you can make a case for some of the lower level jobs that people would naturally prefer to be able to work here, where salaries are higher, and have a little commute and a MUCH nicer house by living up the line a little - the big shots who make the decisions that affect all of us make enough money to afford to buy a house here in Norwalk - and SHOULD have to live here so they’d know that their decisions and actions would affect THEM as well. There’d be a lot more accountability.

Leave a Reply