New Haven Register call to 'Fix Deathtrap on Morgan Lane'

Today's New Haven Register had two articles on last Sunday's storm with torrential downpours, and the horrifying and tragic death of Gladys Padula, who died when her van was submerged in flash flooding under Morgan Lane:

• Opinion: Fix Deathtrap on Morgan Lane
• Police Intensify underpass probe

My heart goes out to Michael Padula and the couple's two children.

Apparently there has been some finger pointing towards Public Works, Police Department, dispatching, Metro North Railroad, etc. Some have even accused the town of trying to save money by not forming an emergency crew -- but I really do find that hard to believe.

I think P0lice Chief Ron Quagliani states it well in the second article when he says :

"This was not a predictable event. This is not like a hurricane we could prepare for. This was a flash flood that I haven’t seen the likes of in years," he said, adding that flooding hasn’t occurred in that area since a retention pond was installed in that area in the 1980s.

Given the tight time line provided between the police first being notified of flooding at 10:37, and the call of Gladys' van going under at 11:05, I dont' think that anyone wasn't responsive to the problem. According to the article, the police were called, reponded to the initial problem and brought the initial car driver to nearby Bailey to meet up with a called ride, called dispatch who called Public Works, who assembled an emergency crew for the problem within 45 minutes of the initial call.

While it could be argued that the police officer should have stayed there to flag down drivers, they would have been on the wrong side of the problem, as best I can tell. I suppose had someone been on the scene, they might have jumped in after Gladys - but they might not have been able to help even then.

The southbound sign was obscured by brush (no good), and there was no northbound sign, which was the direction that Gladys was travelling. Given the visibility, that might not have mattered.

The bottom line is that we received nearly 7 inches of rain in a very short amount of time, flash flooding occurred, visibility was poor, and one would expect that Gladys didn't know that the water was there or that deep. While I agree that steps should be taken so this will never happen again, I don't think it could have been predicted, particularly given the work to prevent flooding from the area.

Breaking News from our Readers (Structure31)

This just in from one of our readers in response to the West Haven Taypayer Initiative ignored by Council post:

New news on the taxpayer initiative. The leaders of this group have said they will filing an election enforcement complaint tomorrow and possible criminal complaint. Appearently,AFTER Charles Marino got up at the podium on Monday and said he thought some petition circulators might have not been voters, he had Kaplowe and Grengas removed from the voter list on Tuesday. therefore, he was untruthful at the podium when he said they weren't voters (they were at the time of circulation)and then played with their constitutioal right to vote. The Taxpayer initiative leaders are calling it political retribution for circulating petitions and trying to take away the will of the people. stay tuned on that one.

The plot just keeps thickening.

HOWEVER... My memory recalls the scenario a little bit differently - I remember Charles Marino stating that some petition circulators were registered in two states at the same time at the time that the petitions were being handed in. The oath that the petition circulators had to give at that time, he said, indicated that they were still valid voters in their locale.

I may have it wrong, but it's my understanding that if you register in a new jurisdiction, the new jurisdiction notifies the old one the date as of which you registered in a new area, and as of that date, you are no longer considered part of the voter list for the old jurisdiction.

Can anyone point me to statutes that backup or refute this?

High Bacteria in Beach Water in Milford - does West Haven Test???

According to this New Haven Register article, high levels of bacteria closed 6 state beaches, including nearby Milford's Silver Sands Beach... does West Haven even test their beaches?

West Haven Taxpayer Initiative ignored by Council

Accord to this New Haven Register article:

A taxpayer-fueled petition, asking the City Council to lower the tax rate because signers feel financially overburdened by skyrocketing taxes, has failed to attract the council’s attention, let alone be placed to a vote.

Despite taxpayers’ repeated protests and pleas to save them from potential financial ruin, the City Council early Tuesday heeded the advice of Corporation Counsel Peter C. Barrett to avoid even entertaining the petition because he believes it to be a legal misuse of the city charter’s provision for initiative petitions.

Clearly, it wasn't worth staying through the full meeting.

According to the article, there were more than 4300 signatures, including the required 3025 that were verified by City Clerk Deborah Collins. It's unclear how many were affected by the allegation brought on by Charles Marino, who stated that 3 of the 54+ circulators were registered voters out of state.

According to the article:

Barrett’s opinion, citing case law, claims an initiative is meant to bring legislative action as opposed to stopping an action, like the 2006-07 budget, from being implemented. Barrett said taxpayers should have used the charter’s budget referendum provision. The deadline for that passed 30 days after the budget’s May approval.

What was also interesting, is that Barrett said that:

the petition, if enacted, would preclude the city from adhering to its statutory obligation to "sufficiently fund the budget."

From what was stated at the meeting by Robert Symmes, the budget WASN'T sufficiently funded, and that it didn't balance... it will be interesting to see how this one pans out in the end.

Reader Feedback: Some Background Information and Comments

Structure3 (formerly known as Structure) wrote in some interesting comments on The City Council Meeting post which help give more of the background information that I'm missing. These are unverified comments, but give some more insight from another point of view:

I want to give input to the council meeting. Although I don't get up and speak, I do listen to everything else that I hear from various sources and take it into consideration so that when people do speak I can understand where they are coming from. Some of it I have confirmed and some of it I have not. I may be a bit biased abuot the new administration and it's credibility but that does not mean I don't have an opinion and can't get out some thoughts for consideration.

The First is regarding Albie Towles. That is the name of the gentleman who spoke regarding property taxes. Albie, a democratic town committee member who endorsed the mayor, processes service papers for extra money. This is a very lucrative business and you get PAID for serving papers on the old taxes. The reason he is upset with the Tax Collector is because he, the mayor and the town chairman asked the tax collector to give this work to Albie of which Albie,their close friend, would have made a lot of money. The Tax Collector did not do this. And Albie is very angry with the Tax Collector over this. So unfotunately, it looks to me like there is a financial motive to his speaking.

Secondly, Mrs Larusso was mayor Borer's secretary and her and her sister Deb EVangeliste that works in the Registrar's Office sued mayor borer because the sister Deb Evanageliste who works in the Registrar's Office hours were cut. The city defended this law suit and won. Mrs Larusso and her sister donated and worked for Mayor Picard's election. The first item to put on the agenda for the city council when the mayor was elected was to give back Mrs Larusso's siter her hours back and give her full health benefits. A total of $20,000. So, while we are cutting everyone else and saying we have a fiscal crisis, these women were paid with increased hours and health benefits after the city spent that money defending the suit. There was a memo that was written and serves as an agreement between the council and the Registrar's office saying that this woman will get more hours and health benefits if she keeps the REgsitrar's office open all day and cleans up the voters list. These jobs are not justifiably full time. Also, since taking office both Mrs Larusso and her sister's sons have been hired by the city. This comes directly from Councilwoman Rossi who kept bringing this up over and over in the first few months only to be ignored and I haven't heard her mention it since.

Charles Marino, Mayor Picard's former campaign manager, works for the Voice, Deb Evangeliste (the sister who was given a pay back of full time hours as noted above) writes the columns for the Voice, and she does it on WORK TIME. So we pay her our tax money to write the VOICE.

On the hand out from Mayor Borer's sisterin law, maybe they shouldn't have handed it out, but maybe they have no other way to get any word out and challenge the administration. Seems to be one sided newspapers. If the taxes are being paid on the house that the mayor's wife's father owns than of course is a good thing. But he still owns its and they pay him. That is no different from renting. And if all those improvements were made that the mayor's wife mentioned, did they get assessed on them like the rest of us??

On the fire issue in the memo, I agree. Mayor Picard's campaign manager was Harold Burns Deputy cheif of the Fire Department in West Shore. Mayor Picard's Treasurer for his campaign is the Fire Commissioner, Tina Peckingham. So when the west shore had the fire tax vote, of course he couldn't come out and vote with the rest of west shore and reject the tax increase because that would be going aginst his campaign leaders. Now this group wants to consolidiate away from the city. Why? because the Deputy Cheif will be Cheif soon and they will control the hiring of all three fire districts but still be UNACCOUNTABLE for their budgeting and actions and taxes. The fox watching the hen house but now the hen house is bigger.

Tim Wrightington. Here is a person who was appoitned to the Ethics Commission by Mayor Picard in January and is suppose to stay nuetral. Need I say more?

Curtis Jordon, is not Finance Director, but appointed to the Finance Board by Mayor Picard.

I'm disappointed this petition issue died and I hope Paul Kalowe and BobSymmes can keep it together in a non-plitical way. Everyone's missing the point, it's not whether there should be a referendum or not,it's that 5,000 people said this budget is unacceptable and the council should be acknowledging the people in some way, rather than just rubber stamping a "no".

Unfortunately Charles Marino didn't mention who he thought lived out of the city and should not be circulating, but he should have had some numbers. If there were 3,000 signatures needed and 5,000 were handed in, even if 1,500 were wrong, it's still a valid petition. Charles Marino never said any numbers. Unless I missed them. He is the Registrar if he has issues he should have had numbers in hand. Just like the bond counsel with his news, but nothing to pass out ever, no way for us to ever verify anything these people say.

Reader Feedback from 'Bob Symmes'- unverified author, but credible sounding statements.

I received the following as a comment on the Clarifications of the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative post from a user named 'Bob Symmes':

We tried to keep the politics out of the Initiative process, but of course the Mayor and his cronies couldn't help themselves:

1) they took my illustration of a budget that could save money for the City...and used it as an actual proposal (showing it around saying "this is what will happen if they have their way")

2) they decided not even to entertain the petition itself.

While I have no way currently to verify the authenticity of the poster, the statements make sense in context of explaining the frustration exhibited by Mr. Symmes at the meeting the other night. His statements did indicate that not enough information had been given to him in order to present a revised budget proposal; and this made the statement by Curtiss Jordan about the Finance Committee recommendations to not accept the budget given by the WHTI odd. The comments above explain that.

Politics definitely do seem to continue to run thick in West Haven, despite many calling for non-partisan teamwork...

State Money secured for both West Haven and Orange Metro North Train Stations

Accord to the New Haven Register article entitled "$11M set for Metro-North stations in W. Haven, Orange", Jodi Rell has signed a bill that would set aside a total of $11M for train stations in both Orange and West Haven, with the bulk of the money going to West Haven (although it isn't clear how much of that it is.).

Each station is expected to cost about $50 million, with the bulk of the money coming from the Federal government. Rosa DeLauro has indicated that she has so far been able to secure $3M for both stations, including $1.2 million secured in June for West Haven.

The $11 Million contributed by the state will apparently be matched by Federal Government funds:

State Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Cooper said Monday that the $11 million will be in the DOT’s budget for the stations, with matching funds coming from the federal government.

"As it stands right now moving forward, both (West Haven and Orange) will get train stations as a result of this bill," said Cooper.

So, that looks like $25M of $100M (required to build both stations) has been found...
that's good news. State officials indicates that "Preliminary plans [for the West Haven Station] call for a transportation "hub," with bus lines, parking, condominiums and office space".

Mayor Picard indicated that preliminary plans have construction starting in January 2009 (why so far away -- maybe to raise $$$'s?) with completion in 2010, and hopes that this will help revitalize West Haven.

Public meetings are apparently on the way so that residents can understand what is happening with the projects -- stay tuned, as I think this is really exciting news for West Haven.

City Council Meeting Part II - Public comments

So, here's another day, and I wanted to highlight a few of the more interesting public comments. Remember, these are one person's statement - and they haven't been checked or verified by the town council (which is a very frustrating thing).

First off, I had made the comment in my last post that the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative vote was probably a moot point -- here's why.

The public comments section started with a bit of a bombshell. Chuck Marino, who works for the West Haven Voice, and who is the Democratic registrar of voters for the town of West Haven, dropped the following doozy. He stated that 3 circulators of the petition for referedum for the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative were no longer electors of West Haven, as they had registered in another jurisdiction, and effectively were on two voter rolls (sp?) at the same time (which is illegal, for obvious reasons). He stated that dual registration is a serious matter, as they swore under oath that they had properly completed the petitions, and that . As this might affect as many as 1/3 of the signatures, the petition would not have had enough voters to
force entry onto the city council or to force a referendum. He cited the following sections of code: 9-21, 9-21(a), 9-21(c), 9-357, 9-360, and 9-361. Finally he stated that he would be turning over the results of his investigation (once completed) to the Secretary of State for legal review.

I didn't stay for the final vote on the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative requests last evening, but I suspect that it was basically voted down.

Here are some other interesting (but unverified) points raised during the public comment section of the meeting (note this is roughly chronological, but isn't a full play by play - there's just too much to weed through for that):

• Paul Scanlon (head of an effort to increase arts in West Haven) discussed the potential city purchase of the Masonic Lodge, which apparently the city has received some grant money from the state in order to convert into an Art Center, and urged the council to approve the purchase at a minimum, so that the monies wouldn't have to be returned. He talked about making the Art Center into a destination 'anchor' that would attract businesses (such as boutiques, cafes, etc.), to spread the tax basis to business, and would attract people downtown. He also discussed his idea of Summer Theatre for the kids of West Haven, so that they'd have something positive to do.
  
  
• Three of the four questions that Brent Coscia raised were intriguing:
  
  1. If expenditures that are more than $3500 are supposed to go out to bid, why was the audit with Checkers not put out to bid?
  2. Why would the city idemnify Checkers from lawsuits to the City of West Haven?
  3. Did the city council understand that they were granting Checkers indemnification?
     

• Timothy Writington (sp?) mentioned that from 1998-2001, the city was working from a "False" grandlist, as $2M of the property listed included the already destroyed apartments on Sawmill Road.
  
  
• Timothy also stated something to the effect that the Police Retirement Fund budget was $55 million, but $78 million was allocated, and as only $55 million went to the fund, what was the remainder used for?
  
  
• Finally, he asked for the town council to address the large quantity and expenditure of overtime for the city since July 1st to the present date, where some individuals had already received as much as $6300 in overtime.
  
  
• One commentator mentioned that city council meeting minutes should be placed on the internet on a more timely basis, and that he felt that not enough information was being distributed to taxpayers so that they could make good decisions.
  
  
• The resource website of Connecticut Public Notices was mentioned (which I'll add to the useful resources on the right hand side). This site pulls public notices from local area papers, and includes tons of useful information about upcoming meetings - well worth while to look at.
  
  
• The budget cutting idea of reducing bulk pickup to twice a year was brought up, as well as eliminating the beach cleaning (personally, I think that the beach may be our greatest resource - we need to keep it clean).
  
  
• It was mentioned that New Haven charges its residents $100/day if junk is dumped on the curb, and that we needed to more rigorously enforce the 24 hour rule about putting garbage by the curb, and limitations of bulk pickup.
  
  
• An idea of restricting parking outside of the paid lots for 1000 feet from the beaches was brought up, as it was mentioned that many out of towners use our beaches, and don't park in the lots. Instead, only residents with stickers would be able to park on side streets for 1000 feet from the beaches, and that the stickers should expire every 2 years instead of 5 or 6.
  
  
• Paul Kaplowe (known as one of the leaders of the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative) brought up the Haverstraw (sp?), NY project as an example of what would be great for West River Crossing, that would move the tax basis from homeowners to businesses, and presented his writeup to the council. I am working phonetically on the town name, but I think he is referring to the Haverstraw, NY 'Encore Palisades' project.
  
  
• Paul Kaplowe also indicated that everyone should support thte town counsel, and we should all work together instead of fighting. This is significant, because of Robert Symmes' statements later on; one wonders if there is a split in the initiative, or if Mr. Symmes was reacting to the allegations of Chuck Marino.
  
  
• Paul Frosolone, of Citizens in Favor of Fire Consolidation and also the Republican town committee chairman, thanked the 8 of 13 city council members who attended the fire consolidation meeting, and mentioned that the next meeting would be on September 18th. He urged that we all become better educated on the pros and cons of the consolidation of the fire departments, and mentioned that ultimately, whether or not West Haven changes, at least those involved will have a better understanding of the situation. In addition to the consolidation of the 3 departments, he stated that they are also looking into whether or not control of the fire department should be under the City Council, or if they should continue to be separate. He mentioned that he respects every city fireman and their families, and asked them to respect him and his organization, too. He indicated that no one is out to hurt firemen, or look at individual pensions, etc., but instead that they are looking at the big picture.
  
  
• One point that Mr. Frosolone made was flawed, though. He indicated that although there are three fire chiefs, each individual household only payed for one fire chief. The flaw in this logic is that if there was only 1 firechief, and all of West Haven was paying for that chief, that the amount each of us would pay for a fire chief would be less!
  
  
• Curtis Jordan, the Finance Director, pointed out that the Allingtown fire district in 1998 increased their tax rate by 2.5 mills, clearly a sore point. He indicated that the 1996 study of fire district consolidation showed that we would save money, solve staffing issues, and solve the pension funding problem.
  
  
• Mr. Alan B. Toles (sp?) mentioned that there are $6M in delinquent taxes - or roughly 2 mills worth, and wanted to know why the tax collector wasn't doing his job. He indicated that the tax collector is an elected official, but only sent out 3 tax warrents in the past 2 years. (all facts unchecked).
  
  
• Marty Northum asked why the budget went up 5% but the taxes went up by an average of 20-40% .
  
  
• He also pointed out that businesses property taxes weren't re-evaluated -- only personal property owners, and that while businesses can raise rates to generate income, individuals can't! He called for the business taxes to be revaluated by October, to put them on the newest grand list.
  
  
• One speaker poignantly pointed out the frustration of the format of the City Counsel meeting, where questions can be raised, but there isn't a provision to answer the speakers -- so all questions tend to go unanswered.
  
  
• Mr. Robert Symmes stood up with some fairly strong statements directed at Mayor Picard. It's clear that he feels betrayed by him - that after he and Mr. Kaplowe sat down with him on July 29th, that he felt that certain information would be granted to him so that they could try to find common ground for a solution. By the time he sat down with the Finance Committee on 8/9, his FOI (freedom of Information) requests had not been granted, so they couldn't make a full recommendation.
  
  
• Mr. Symmes indicated that he would be filing a suit against the City of West Haven to force the mandates of the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative. He announced his frustration with the existing budget, saying that the current numbers do not properly add up, and that he found nearly $5M of income not stated, which he would provide to the Secretary of State.
  
  
• Another person read Curtis Jordan's letter to the city council regarding the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative, urging the counsel to turn down the initiative, stating that it called for the elimination of 28 jobs which were protected by agreements with the unions (local 681 and local 1103), which conceded raises to job protection. It was also mentioned in the letter that it is highly unlikely that any tax relief will happen this year.
  
  
• Sandy LaRusso, who appears to be a dis-enchanted former executive secretary for Mayor Borer (1991-1996), mentioned that Mr. Charles Marino and Picard were 'ousted' by Mayor Picard for not agreeing with bonding issues. She mentioned that she, her sister, and Mr. Marino also visited Haverstraw, and were also impressed.
  
  
• A woman from Allingtown wants to know why the Forest School project went from 8 classrooms to 6, and mentioned that she would welcome the state stepping in.
  
  
• A man who works nights mentioned that recently when going to the Walgreens on Campbell Avenue at 3am after his shift, he saw 13 teenagers out on the streets. When he talked to a policeman in the Walgreens parking lot, the police officer indicated that there was nothing he could do about it - that the parents didn't want them brough thome, and that there are no city ordinances regarding kids out at nighttime. He expressed great concern that the police have no control over 13 and 14 year olds in the city.
  
  
• A anecdote about paying taxes was also relayed, where 6 weeks after the taxes were paid, the motor vehicle department indicated that they were not, and a registration could not be renewed. The man relaying the story said that he went down to the tax department and asked to speak to the tax collector (who wasn't in), and that his payment was not in the computer. The women in the department had to look through two large boxes containing 100's of payments that had not yet been processed... he wondered how much interest was being lost.
  
  
• Councilwoman Nancy Rossi expressed concern that neither Levitsky & Berney nor Checkers are coming before the Council to answer questions about their findings. She also expressed concern that Levitsky & Berney were not releasing documents to Checkers. This was also echoed by Councilman Arutsky.
  
  
• Nancy Rossi also seemed to indicate that Corporate Counsel advised the City Council not to raise personal property rates for vehicles and businesses.
  
  
• Councilwoman Tracy Morrisey indicated that it was brought to her attention that a contract that went to Pittney Bowes for more than $3500 did not go out to bid. She wants both this fact and the the fact that the Checkers contract didn't go out to bid to be brought before the city council.

Again, just from these notes on the Public Commentary, I have no way of knowing what is fact, and what is fiction...

More on the Notice that was handed out will come later... got to get SOME work done today!

The City Council Meeting

I gave up on the City Council meeting at about 10:30 after sitting through 3.5 hours, and after the council broke to caucus, but before they voted on the West Haven Taxpayer initiative. As best I can tell, though, it was entirely a mute point by then.

The biggest impressions that hit me as I walked away from the meeting was one of disbelief that so much unchallenged mis-information could be presented in one meeting, and disappointment that so few residents attended. In our town of more than 50,000 people, there were only about 75 taxpayers in attendance.

For those who haven't been to a City Council meeting, besides urging you to attend at least one per year, let me explain how I understand the meeting to work (my experience with these meetings are not great - this is my first meeting). After the meeting is called to order, there is a Public Comment section. Anyone in the city of West Haven can sign up to speak; you must present your first and last names, and your address, and you can only speak once. There is no limit on how long you can speak, although one is urged to be brief. No one can interrupt your speech, and no one answers any questions you may pose. Others are welcome to come and respond later in the Public Comment time - but remember, they can only speak once.

Basically, anyone can say anything about anything on their mind... and say anything they did. 25 people spoke - from 7pm through 9:30pm. And sadly, because there was no official response section to each of the public comments, it's very hard to separate the truth from the fiction, even when some points were refuted by others later in the proceedings. Who's to say who was the correct responder?

Upon arriving, I received a hand-out, of which according to Mrs. Tara Picard (yes, the mayor's wife was one of the public commenters about half way through the session) had been suppied by former Mayor Borer's sister in law. There were definitely some half truths, half facts, and possibly some out and out mistruths on that hand out. Mrs. Picard urged the council to consider initiating a police investigation into political misdoings with the handouts, in that were political statements being distributed without proper identification of whose agenda it was (or something to that effect.)

Mrs. Picard also discussed the fact that her father's name was on their deed, stating that it really was none of anyone's business, but that her father's name was on the deed as their 'building advisors'. She also stated that she and Mayor Picard pay taxes on the property, and the leasing company pays the taxes on their cars. Truly, she has a point - the taxes are paid for the place where they live. However, I think people feel like she and Mayor Picard haven't financially invested themselves into this city, and find that uncomfortable, particularly as Mayor Picard's occupation is that of a financial advisor.

I'm not going to bore everyone by going through play by play - but there are a number of good points raised, and a few good highlights, which I'll go into tomorrow in more detail. There were also a bunch of political revelations to me, that explain a whole bunch of things, including why the West Haven Voice is pro-Mayor Picard, and anti-Mayor Borer - but I'll wait for tomorrow for that, too.

After the public session, the city council said the Pledge of Allegence to the Flag, paid some bills.

Then came a fascinating segment where the Bond lawyer that was retained back on Dec 29, 2005 came to speak on his findings for the School Construction Report. This investigation looked into the bonding pracices on 8 recent school construction projects.

He explained that West Haven's bonding ordinances were ordinary; that there were borrowing limits (total amount that could be bonded) and expenditure limits (total project costs), and that basically, the borrowing limit was found by subtracting the value of any state grants from the expenditure limits imposed by the vote of the city council. That's pretty straight forward.

However, it soon became clear that the school projects did NOT follow the ordinances properly.

In four of the projects, borrowing limits were exceeded by $4.4 million. In these projects, where the city council had authorized a certain amount of total expenditures for the project, 100% of the total expenditure had been bonded. Additionally, though, the city had received grant monies from the state, which were placed into the general fund and used for operating expenses.

It becomes more complex, though, as many of these projects also showed a negative balance. This occurs when money is advanced from the general fund which is earmarked for other uses. While this is an acceptable practice, the money has to be paid back into the fund. From those same 4 projects, the general fund is owed $9.8 million.

What the city has appeared to have done for some time, even prior to Mayor Borer's time in office, was to take those negative balances and bond out that amount. Groan.

So, as mentioned there were 8 projects.

1 was not bonded, and was not an issue.

For one project there is a negative balance to the general fund of abut $970,000. Had this amount been bonded, then there would have been about $575,000 in excess of the allowable bond by ordinance.

For another project, thankfully this one can be restored, and will not be overborrowed.

The final project did not have enough information to make a final determination.

The Bond lawyer, who I believe was named Mr. Thassy (my apologies for any mistakes - I'm worked by ear), then stated:

The pattern of non-school project bonding, however, is different from that of the school project bonding. For the school projects, while they were overbonded (i.e. we borrowed too much), we did not appear to overspend. Instead, the grants alloted to the school projects were diverted to the general fund, and then bonded as well.

For non-school projects, it would appear that we overbonded AND overspent. The lawyer then stated that he wanted the details and authorizations for all projects AT LEAST back to 1996... ugh.

... at any rate... more tomorrow.

West Haven Roads and flooding

According to this WTNH report, several cars (including one that was entirely submerged) were caught in rising flood waters under the train trestle on Morgan Lane last evening. From personal experience, I know that parts of Ocean Avenue were under 6-8 inches of water as well.

It seems that every time we have a good soaking rain, the storm drains are inadequate - what's being done about it??

Editorial Warns West Haven Residents about Checker's Audit

In the print version of the Sunday New Haven Register yesterday, former West Haven resident Richard J. Luby of Seymour wrote a letter to the editor regarding the Checker's Audit. Now living in Seymour, he talks about the audit that Checkers performed in their town and remarks:

It seems that whenever Checkers gets involved in politics it turns into a witch hunt. It gets paid astronomicaal amounts to bring down the former administration and does a fine job of it.

That's the suspicion I had too, Richard.

What's worse, he explains that the former first selection who was the person who was the center of the Checkers' audit in Seymour subsequently sued over the inflammatory remarks and won - which means that Seymour residents paid not only for the audit, but for a lawsuit as well. He states that even people in Seymour who originally requested the audit would no longer endorse Checkers.

Richard also poses some questions:

Did Major John Picard even put a bid out before having the Checkers firm do the audit? Don't the residents of West Haven question why he didn't bid it out? What was the motive?

Well, we know in West Haven that Mayor Picard did NOT bid out the audit. We also know that West Haven residents most definitely question not only his motive, but why that is the case.

Tonight's City Council meeting will be interesting - it will particularly be interesting to see if people turn out in full force, or if they're just resigned to pay increased taxes.

Insult to Injury for West Shore Residents

In a case of adding insult to injury reported by the New Haven Register, a Massachussetts insurance company, Andover Cos will be dropping customers along the shoreline who do not install and pay for new storm shutters. Customers up to 3/4 of a mile inland will be required to install the hurricane shutters, which can cost up to $100,000, or face losing coverage.

Thankfully, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is urging Susan Cogswell (State Department of Insurance Commissioner) to recind her approval of this underwriting change. Apparently, Allstate and Nationwide have ALSO asked for changes to limit their liability for storm damage, although what those changes are were not detailed.

St. Paul Travelers takes a different approach - they don't require the storm shutters, but offer discounts to those who have them.

Lien on property over MULCH PILE??!!??

Here's a new waste of taxpayer dollars. According to an NBC-30 news report, the city of West Haven has apparently placed a lien on a property because a neighbor complained about a mulch pile. The city apparently investigated and found several (unnamed) violations, and placed the lien, even though an unnamed city official even admitted that the law is subjective.

What a waste.

City Council To debate petition at Bailey Middle School - Monday August 28th 7:00 pm

I received the following from West Haven Lover today:

Urgent - I hope that you can post this. Today I finally got an update on where the petitions stand. It truly is imperative that we get as many residents as we can at this meeting. Here is the update:

The City Council got the petitions as of August 3rd. They're going to debate it at this next meeting....MONDAY, AUGUST 28th at 7:00 PM - BAILEY MIDDLE SCHOOL. It is expected they'll try to dismiss the petition as illegal (more on that later), so we need as many people to be there as possible. PLEASE ask all your friends & neighbors to attend.

As mentioned earlier, Corp Counsel has issued an opinion telling the Council not to act on the petition. Obviously, we'll challenge this in court; and are hoping for a quick decision.

It is now that we must come together to get some positive changes in West Haven!!!!!

It's time to stand up and be heard if you want your taxes lowered!

Two "Material Weaknesses" in 2004-2005 Accounting Practices

... which brings me to the second half of the story based on today's New Haven Register article entitled "W. Haven considers 3 options on deficit".

First, an aside... are we too poor to even merit spelling out West Haven? It's not exactly a space saver to go from West Haven to W. Haven... but I digress...

When the city auditors, Levitsky & Berney, re-audited the 2004-5 fiscal year, they included a supplemental report in which they said: "Two conditions were considered material weaknesses and were related to the misclassification of revenues and project overexpenditures of authorization amounts."

So why didn't they find it the first time? Former Mayor Borer would like to know, too.

The two weaknesses were:

1. 13 out of 145 capital projects reviewed for fiscal 2004-05 exceeded amounts authorized by the City Council because "internal controls are not in place."
2. The second weakness is identified as the city’s misclassification of revenues for school construction projects into the general fund instead of the capital account, creating a false general fund figure.

The reworked audit also showed almost half a million in overexpenditures in the school projects at West Haven High School and Thompson Elementary school... ugh.

Increased Debt may be 16M - Picard proposes tax hikes or more bonds

In the ever growing category of "You've Got to be Kidding me!", in today's New Haven Register article entitled "W. Haven considers 3 options on deficit", Mayor Picard says that he can only think of 3 potential solutions for the city to address the budget deficit:

1. Raise the tax rate again in 2007-2008.
2. Impose a mid-year tax-rate increase.
3. Issue deficit bonds
   

Sorry - these aren't acceptable... how about "Lower spending"? There is a lot of fat in the budget STILL.

Or maybe even more important, how about: "Include ALL of the incoming funds in the budget"? While Mayor Picard is quite happy to spread tales of doom and gloom about how we owe more money than we think we do, but he hasn't been explaining about how some monies have been 'found' that start to make up some of the multi-million dollar gap, which he says might be as high as $16 M.

For instance, what about the following articles I've previously blogged about:

• Unsolicited State Reimbursements for School Projects (worth $1.3-3.2 M)
  
• FEMA Funds from State (worth about $80,000)
• Revise extremely conservative estimates of revenues from state and grant monies to reasonable figures. (Who knows how much this is worth?)
  

Also, while you can't count your chickens before they hatch, why isn't he trying like crazy to get UI to move to town and bring in an additional $4M in tax dollars? Or what about talking to Governor Jodi Rell about assistance, citing the nearly $1 BILLION dollar state surplus?

More about this New Haven Register article shortly...

Citizens in Favor of Fire Consolidation - next meeting on 9/18/06

Today's New Haven Register article entitled "West Haven group discusses one district" discusses a newly formed, non-partisan group who had their first meeting on Tuesday night. "Citizens in Favor of Fire Consolidation" (CIFOFC) is looking to get the public discussing the ins and outs of consolidating West Haven's 3 fire departments into one department, and to ulimately put the question of Fire District Consolidation on the November 2007 ballot. 2,900 signatures are needed by July 2007 to force a referendum vote.

The West Haven city charter currently precludes the districts from merging under the city counsel control; it wasn't clearly stated how this can be changed, but it sounds like we would need to have a motion to ammend the city charter.

There are some very interesting statistics in the article:

The taxpayers’ commentary initially got off to an emotionally rocky start because most can’t fathom why a city of 53,000 people needs to pay for three fire budgets, including triplicate administrative salaries, for a total of more than $20 million annually compared to other towns. New Haven, for example, has 125,000 inhabitants and a fire department that costs $20.5 million annually.

Chairman of the group is Paul Frosolone (who also is the Republican Town Committee chairman), but the group is decidedly non partisan, also includes Democrats, A Better Future party (former Mayor Richard Borer ran as a member of this one), and includes city counselmen, too, including City Councilwoman Sharon Spaziani, D-3.

The crux of the problem is not having separate fire departments, but having three separate sets of administrators, and three separate budgets.

Refreshingly, this doesn't appear to be slam politics, but instead seems to be a fact-finding group; from the article:

Some taxpayers, like William Kane, noted that this group’s endeavor must also seek out the truth and not the too many "half-truths" that had already infiltrated the meeting because many taxpayers started singling out fire administrator salaries and other expenditures.

"You have to be honest if you’re going to bring this out to the public," Kane said.

Also at the meeting were members of Citizens For an Excellent Fire Service , who formed to oppose a proprosed city charter revision on Sept. 19, 2003 because some firefighters felt strong-armed. However, the group doesn't take an official stand on consolidation, and refreshingly, they just wanted to be included in the discussions.

Mayor Picard and the districts fire administrators and boards were apparently not directly invited to this meeting; however, Paul Frosolone promised to invite them to answer questions from the public in future meetings. Mayor Picard continues to support Citizens For an Excellent Fire Service, and urged everyone to carefully study the current 3 district situation as well as the effects of consolidation.

The group’s next meeting will be held at 7 p.m. Sept. 18. in City Hall, 355 Main St.

Hamden cites West Haven as an example not to follow

The Hamden Journal reports that their legistlative council approved a $77,000 bid waiver for a year's license for Munis, in the article entitled "Town Computer system undergoes an overhaul".

Munis is the same software which West Haven uses to run our town. The recent Audit with Checkers, however, found that we were not using the software to its fullest.

Hamden is determined to not have the same problems West Haven experienced with pushing the Tax collection portion of Munis live:

"[The Assessor's office] is the difficult part," he said. "We have to be ready for problems if they come up. We see the hard time West Haven is having with its tax system because they were trying to convert too quickly, and the timing wasn't right."

As an aside - wow - I had no idea how much the licensing costs for Munis were - for that kind of price, I truly hope we start using it properly.

Who Audits the Hiring of Auditors?

The New Haven Independent online has an interesting article on the long-time auditors for the city of West Haven, entitled "Who audits the audit-hiring?" that was published back in May of this year. Apparently, New Haven city council members were questioning the 8 year relationship with Levitsky & Berney.

Should the State Income Tax be abandoned?

WTNH reports that "Think tank says state's income tax should be abandoned". The Yankee Institute for Public Policy, a conservative think tank, indicates that the state income tax has hampered Connecticut's economy, and blames low job growth, increased homeowner tax burdens, and slow population growth on the income tax. You can read the report , entitled "Fifteen Years of Folly: The Failures of Connecticut's Income tax" online.

When the income tax was put into place by Lowell Weicker 15 years ago (remember, his campaign promise of "No State Income tax, because that would be like throwing gasoline on a fire"), I remember the fake "license plates" that came out that proclaimed Connecticut the 'Tax Us to Death" state. It certainly has contributed to businesses moving out... it's hard to attract good workers for reasonable rates here.

For those interested, there's an interesting article on the history of Tax Reform and the State Income Tax in the state of Connecticut - from 1993. While the story is angled to discuss the issues facing the progressives and Democrats, and that you can enact progressive tax reform and still win elections, it's still a fascinating read on the history of the state income tax.