Windham: Closing Down Transparency, Part 1 0f 3

Windham: Closing Down Transparency

DeVivo

Observing the local political process and those that make (or don't make) it happen, I often wonder what goes on in the minds of those newly elected on election night. Exactly when do they become the "authorities" or the "experts" that many become? When do they shed that pre-election humility and concern for those that look up to them and support them? When does their listening ability cease?

Do these things happen when the last ballot is counted or is it a slower evolution?

On Dec. 6, 2011, Windham's Town Council majority returned to their authoritive mode after the November elections. Election time is when most politicians pretended to listen to their constitutes. (Hard work, but a fact of life at election time.)

Councilmen voted 7-4  to change how the Council operates meet­ings, including the controversial elimination of the second public comment period.

Rivera

Voting in favor of the change were Councilmen Charles Krich, Thomas DeVivo, Joe Underwood, Kevin Donahue, Arnaldo Rivera, Christel Donahue and Jerry Iazzetta -- all members of the majority party.

Dissenting were Tony Fantoli, Lorraine McDevitt, Mark Doyle and Windham Mayor Ernest Eldridge.

The rationale behind the proponents' decision was to make council meetings more efficient. "We were finding people were coming to speak twice. This will encourage people to focus on what they have to say."

Being a one-party town  for years, there has been no incentive to inform the town's civic society nor to listen.  "The less they know, the easier it is to keep being re-elected."  Being re-elected guarantees the "good old boys and girls" keep doing the same old thing -- driving Windham to an unknown place. Wherever that may be.


December 2010 brought our schools a failing report from The Nagg School of Education, commissioned by the State Commissioner of Education. The Report of District Governance devoted  many paragraphs to the lack of or poor communication between the various town boards, the board of education and town citizens. They further emphasized that this major problem could be fixed with little or no cost.  They suggested that communications was the root of Windham's troubles.

The decision to eliminate the second public comment is deeply disturbing when put into context of other  moves the town council has made in recent years.

• The Granicus Proposal:  To replace the audio-video system from the Philo Farnsworth era, used to broadcast meetings on the town cable channel.  The proposal has been lost in sub-committee

Krich

• Ad-Hoc Open Government Communication Committee: To promote communications between government and citizens with a focus on enhancing interest and web-based communications  The first meeting took place in Sept. 2010, 19 months have passed without a second meeting.
• Meeting Minutes:  According to The Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission, all towns are required to upload the minutes of a committee or commission meeting within 48 hours of that meeting to their website.  If the town is unwilling or incapable of complying they must shut down their web site.  In 2010 when this law took effect many towns choose to shut down their sites including the neighboring towns of Scotland and Andover. Windham flaunted the mandate.If there was an FOI  jail many Windham officials would be behind bars today. Of 140 meetings listed on the Board of Finance website, 65 have no minutes.  Interestingly enough, most occured under the tutelage of previous chairman McGrath -- and most occurred during budget season. The Town Council has improved the timing of uploading minutes, but is still non-compliant. Chances are, agendas are uploaded after the meeting occurs.  The Administration & Finance, Health & Human Service sub committee to the Town Council, and the Town Council-Willimantic Service District fail miserablely informing their citizens. The Town Council Recreation & Public Works Sub Committee has a commendable record.
• Political Caucus: "A closed meeting of party members within a legislative body to decide on questions of policy or leadership." Windham, being a one-party town has used this legal mechanism for decades to successfully control town boards.  It is a  method for party leadership to control their members through intimidation. Most party members who perceive themselves to hold a minority point of view will be less likely to speak out for fear of being isolated, thus a few control the party, hence they control the direction of town government. For the taxpayer following the council's process of changing the meeting procedures, there was no need to offer an opinion or get excited. This particular legislation had been pre-decided in secret session. Eliminating the second council public comment option had been written in stone before the sham council vote.  Call it theatrics, call it smoke and mirrors, call it "Houdini-ism" -- I call it distrust in the neighbors we elect.
• The Upstairs-Downstairs Magic Show:  The town hall renovated ballroom became available for overcrowded meetings in the 2010-11 budget season.  While this hall maybe great for social events, it is not up to snuff  for meetings.  Acoustics are non-existent, lighting feeble, the setting sun blinds both spectators and meeting participants, and best yet (for politicians) the room lacks both audio and video equipment.   Finance Chair, Barbara McGrath  used this room to her advantage.  When a hearing was expected to draw undo negative comments in her crusade to provide more funding to the school board, she would move the finance board hearing to the ballroom (no TV coverage) even if a sparse crown was in attendance. Conversely, when the school board filled the meeting room, hallway, and out the front door of town hall with those sympathetic to her cause, she chose to remain downstairs -- forsaking the much larger hall on the second floor. (TV coverage)
• Playing Favorites:  We're splitting hairs here, but why should an "important person" be allowed an extra 45 seconds to talk over "Just Plain Joe" -- or someone with "more stature" be allowed to interject his thoughts during a meeting.  It doesn't happen often, but when a citizen is limited to exactly three minutes why are others accorded special status?

Underwood

Iazzetta

Kevin Donohue

Part 2 0f 3

Going through Town Council minutes on the Windham web site proves interesting. Sixty two meetings, 124 opportunities to speak ( 9- 21- 2009 to 12-. 6- 2011). Public hearings not included. The findings:

• Total comments: 605
• Early comments: 391 (2/3)
• Late comments: 224 (1/3)
• Most comments: July 20, 2010, 54 first comment session, 10 second comment session
• Heavy participation always occurred during the first comment session when controversial items were on the agenda: union issues, ballroom naming, drinking in town hall, wrestling club, Card Street, senior citizens issues, magnet school concerns. 
• Budget season 2011 saw a reversal in public comment.  More people spoke during the second comment session.  
• Budget season 2010, near equal citizen participation.

"We were finding that it was the same people coming to speak twice,” those councilors voting to eliminate the second comment period claimed. “This will encourage people to focus on what they have to say.” In fact: 

• (Nov. 2009-Dec. 2011), 81 citizens took advantage of both the first and second comment period at least once. Familiar names such as Stone, Santucci, Lary, Crane, DeVivo, Hoxie, Niles, Galucci, Fantolli, Montalovo, Veins, D'Auteille, Millard, Giordano, O'Brian, Jeffers, Doyle, Council members Iazetta & Underwood (who voted to elimanate the second public comment,) and Quercas.
• Of the 81citizens speaking twice, 64 offered different subject matter during late comment. 
• 14 contributor's repeated themselves to some degree.
• Three speakers definitely repeated themselves. 

The most recent buzz at town hall is adding a third polling place. Windham's voting results have sunk to embarrassing levels. The November 2011 municipal elections saw a turnout of less than 15% ... Budget referendums, even less. Our authorities say the convenience factor is a detriment to voter turnout.

But, convenience has little to do with voter turnout:

• Poverty and voter turnout go hand in hand. As poverty rates increase, voter turnout descends. When you don't know where tonight's supper will come from or how your fuel bill will be paid, voting is quite trivial.
• When government shuts down citizen participation and stymies public engagement government suffers.
• When government becomes hearing-impaired and forgets how they got where they are ...When government considers their position a God-given right ... ... we are on the brink of government breakdown and moral  bankruptcy.

Maybe someday a third polling place will be required, but first our councilors must change their tune. The town council should offer citizens increased -- not fewer -- opportunities to participate in policy-making and to provide town government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information.  Public engagement enhances government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions.

Government must be tuned toward a bi-lingual format.  We are currently shutting out hundreds of voters and potential leaders.

For once politicians must serve the town first, not their party. Our government cannot withstand power plays.  Yes, we know that one party controls town government, they always have.

In 2009, then state representativeWalter Pawelkiwicz concluded a speech for a Main Street substance abuse center dedication with these words: "Windham, may be the the second poorest  town in Connecticut, but we have heart."

Heart ain't going to do it, nor is closed government going to solve Windham's problems:

• We need leaders with integrity and intellectual honesty.
• We need politicians who respect their political opponents, treat their constituents like adults, and promote openness and transparency in government.
• We need leaders with compelling ideas -- and the ability and vision to turn those ideas into action.
• We need leaders who can see beyond the next election cycle and who have the political courage to lay the foundation for Windham's future success -- even if it means making unpopular decisions today.
• We need leaders who are willing to work with those from across the aisle to get things done.
• Most importantly we look for men and women who are not afraid to challenge their party’s leadership when that leadership is putting politics and partisan mudslinging above what’s best for  us all.

And so, Councilmen Krich, DeVivo, Underwood, Kevin Donahue, Rivera, Christel Donahue and Iazzetta ... when did it happen?

When did you grow too big and stop caring about the people who elected you? When did you see them as a herd of the needy that comes to you to find purpose in life? Oh come on, if you keep up this attitude, the herds of people will soon start disappearing. And what are you without your little people ? Who will consider you the authority that you pretend to be if there is nobody to listen to you?

Listen to us. Respect us. We'll do the same.

You May be interested in:  follow up, Windham, Closing Down Transparency

Windham: Closing Down Transparency

Part 3 0f 3

On January 5th and 6th 2012  I sent a query to the seven councilors that voted to stop the second comment session at town council meetings. (see sample below)  I wasn't really interested in their  response, I wanted to see the councilors reaction. On March 1, 2012 I sent a second query to those that did not respond initially.  The results:

• Kevin Donohue:  Timely, thoughtful response
• Christel Donahue: Timely, thoughtful response
• Jerry Iazzetta: No resonse
• Arnaldo Rivera: No reponse
• Joe Underwood: Unable to contact
• Charles Krich:  Thoughtful reply but prefaced that I couldn't use his quotes because of the media (email) used.
• Tom DeVivo: Responded with a "no comment"

Your comments maybe published

Dear Councilor

Your rational for cutting citizen participation  in half at Council Meeting.?  Would you consider rescinding your vote?

 Thank you

John Monaghan

Windham Voters don't vote

Attributes of a good listener

Transparency in government

What makes a good politician

Uninformed voters

Free Speech Protecting your rights