The first regular meeting of the "new" Hartford City Council was held last Monday and the public comment session was interesting. I wasn't able to attend in person and I just watched the recording of the beginning of the meeting, the public comment session.
I hope that Council President Shawn Wooden doesn't fall into the "Cal Torres Syndrome" as he gets comfortable in his new role. Torres had a way of treating the public with disrespect when it came to shutting them down if they were delivering a message he didn't like. Wooden seemed to fall prey to that as the session dragged on and he made numerous attempts to cut off one person who is a regular at meetings.
The real fireworks began though when one resident who is also a regular at meetings, Alyssa Peterson, raised legitimate and well documented credibility issues regarding Councilman Alexander Aponte. Aponte has had complaints filed and sustained against him for his practice as an attorney.A panel of his peers concluded that Aponte had engaged in behavior that they called "dishonesty, fraud and deceit". Aponte shot up in his chair and urged Wooden to shut down Peterson's comments when she questioned Aponte's integrity.
Read the original Aponte vs. Statewide Grievance Committee posting by clicking here
Aponte claimed that Peterson's comments were a "personal attack" and forbidden by Council rules. The charges and resulting decisions by the Statewide Grievance Committee are well documented and a matter of public record. As an attorney, Aponte should be well aware of the difference between "personal attacks" and legitimate documented actions. I think we call that "history" and if Mr. Aponte does not want his history quoted, he may not want to create it in the first place.
I realize that this was Mr. Wooden's first time in the President's seat, but he needs to be reminded that those members of the public who take the time to go to Council meetings to speak are his constituents and it is important that the Council listen to what they have to say and that they are treated with respect.
And since Ms. Peterson was shouted down by a belligerent Aponte, below are the documents she was referring to. You can read them and make your own decisions about Aponte's character and integrity.
Aponte Grievance Panel Finding of Probable Cause
Aponte has the morals and professional integrity of an alleycat.
ReplyDeleteHartford is a joke. The city government has become a joke. The Democratic Party in Hartford has become a pompous group of elitists who take care of only themselves. So disappointed in Pedro Segarra and the city council. Rational people have tried legitimate avenues to make improvements, but it seems there is a some kind of club in the Hartford Dem Party. They should be ashamed.
ReplyDeleteCouncilman duiech and aponte belong at burger king. Not running a city. Im glad i dont liv hear. Only collect a check.
ReplyDeleteThe most amazing thing to me is how someone like Aponte could get elected in the first place. I wouldn't trust him to take out my trash.
ReplyDeleteAlyssa Peterson raised legitimate and well documented credibility issues regarding Councilman Alexander Aponte.
ReplyDelete-------------------------------
I don't know Aponte, but at least he's not a Republican. I fail to see how it's appropriate at this point and at a Council meeting for his alleged malfeasance as an attorney to be a point of focus. If Peterson doesn't like him let her vote against him next time. In the mean time, let the Council do its business, such as it is, to the best of its abilities.
Peter you are wrong,Alyssa had every right to shine a light on this neer do well lawyer in the public portion of the Council meeting.The best disinfectant is the light of day and Alyssa did the public a service exposing someone who shouldnt be on the Council.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of lawyers, and Hartford's proclivity to hire a lot of them, we don't hear a lot about the City's defending its requirement of union workers on building projects. That is, the City is paying attorneys to protect its right to make construction more expensive for the taxpayer.
ReplyDelete-----------------------------
Wrongful exclusion
How much trouble is Connecticut in? So much that the state's capital city is being sued for an act of discrimination against independent contractors that is as obvious as it is odious. Yet, so beholden are Connecticut government institutions to Big Labor, the outcome is by no means assured. The details: Electrical Contractors Inc. sued the city of Hartford after its low bids on two school projects were rejected because the company refused to sign a project-labor agreement, which effectively compelled it to use union labor. The state Supreme Court ruled this month that ECI has standing to sue, so the case can go forward. ECI will emerge as the taxpayer's best friend if it wins the suit, since a ruling that allows nonunion companies to compete on equal footing with union firms will reduce the cost of public projects, without diminishing quality.
http://www.rep-am.com/opinion/
----------------------------------
http://case.lawmemo.com/ct/elecon.pdf
Kevin, are you on vacation?
ReplyDeleteI cant wait to hear more resolutions from members of city council. Not all are incoherent ramblings like that of Duetch , but wooden needs to silence this idiot before the city becomes even more of a joke.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of lawyers...
ReplyDeleteRich Wareing comported himself well at the confirmation hearing for school board appointees. Ditto, Mr. Poland from the library, although I don't think he's an attorney. It appears to me that the provision of the charter requiring the Mayor to appoint the part of the board is a good idea.
I was skeptical of Atty. Wooden's idea of confirmation hearings for school board nominees, but I watched a bit of the hearing and was generally favorably impressed with the tone and quality of the questions. (I wasn't watching when the divine Aponte had his turn questioning.)
Not that I expect much in the way of progress, particularly in the closing of the "achievement gap" all right-thinkers are so concerned about, but I'm grateful for the Board's work. Someone has to be on the Board, after all, and it might as well be well-intentioned, intelligent, committed folks. I wish the new appointees, the Board, and the District continued maintenance of slow progress.
As usual, one critical fact was downplayed or ignored in the discussion; the Board is an agent of the State, executing education policy of the State, not responsible to the council or the municipal government as a whole.
See Charter Chapter ix, section 2(g).