Search This Blog

Saturday, March 6, 2010

MY RESPONSE TO A COUPLE OF "ANONYMOUS" COMMENTS, RESPONSE #2

And a response to another comment

Anonymous said...
OK Brookman, Here's your chance to be in two places at once. Isn't the coronation of RubInStain scheduled for the same time as the council meeting?


Just by the tone and the wording of this comment I have a good idea that I know who posted it, but I would hope that that person would have the integrity to post it under his real name, the same as I do when I refer to someone as "Rosie".

Ok, so moving on.

My phone has been ringing almost constantly since Tuesday's election, almost every call focuses on the election for the Democratic Town Committee Chairperson. I'll post a few of my thoughts here that I will say to either candidate, many of them I have said already to Bruce Rubenstein, but Sean Arena chooses not to take or return my calls, so maybe he can read it here.

First off, the selection can't be called a coronation. A coronation is usually full of pomp and circumstance and the pageantry shows hope for the future. Neither candidate can be proud of what they are inheriting, or in the case of Arena, what he has the Democratic Town Committee to have become.

A once proud powerhouse that was the Hartford Democratic Town Committee of years past, has over the last several years become a cesspool of corruption and incompetence. Strong words, yes. Untrue words, no.

In years past candidates for political positions clamored to be accepted and endorsed by the Democratic Town Committee. Now I think most candidates view the Hartford Democratic Town Committee as a necessary evil that they have to approach as part of the process. They most definitely approach keeping in mind the recent Grand Jury, the arrest of the Mayor. They keep in mind the frequent hearings at Elections Enforcement for absentee ballot fraud.

They keep in mind the Mayor's fines for misusing taxpayers funds for political purposes, also known as the "Hartford Educator". They now can keep fresh in their mind the recent Superior Court decision detailing the illegal activity by the Democratic Registrar of Voters Olga Vazquez. That ruling should help, just in case they might have forgotten the first time in 2004 when she was fined $500.00 for almost identical illegal activity.

Like I said before, a cesspool of political corruption.

Although many people seem to think we have had enough and it is time for change, what exactly is the change?

The poster of the "anonymous" comment I'm sure misspelled Mr. R-U-B-E-N-S-T-E-I-N's name out of ignorance rather than anything intentional, but some might read into that another meaning.

For anyone familiar with either candidate, ask yourself if you know where they stand and what their direction would be for the Democratic Town Committee.

Since Mr Arena refuses to return phone calls, I honestly can say I have no idea where he stands. I have never heard him make a comment regarding the arrest of the Mayor. I have never heard his thoughts on the corruption and extortion charges against the Mayor and Abe Giles. I have never heard him make a comment about our Republican Councilwoman Veronica Airey-Wilson and her arrest on corruption charges.

That's probably a cheap shot about the Republican though, how could he say anything when the Mayor is as bad, if not worse, than her. Like Airey-Wilson once said "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones". That was before her arrest, so maybe she thinks differently now.

Can anyone honestly say they don't know where Mr. Rubenstein stands on political corruption? I sometimes think if he could get onto the roof of City Hall, he would be up their shouting his thoughts out loud about political corruption. He's done it everywhere else, almost to the point of making me nauseous on Cityline on courant.com, on public access programs, and even here on "we the people".

He even voiced his opinion to the entire state on WFSB's "Face the State". Although Rubenstein came out loud and clear, the two councilpeople on with him refused to take a stand against corruption.

Is that a bad thing to let people know where you stand? Absolutely not. Is it a bad thing to remain silent and say nothing, almost giving the perception that you condone corruption? Absolutely.

And while Arena refuses to return phone calls and discuss issues with those who might disagree with him or challenge his actions, Rubenstein seems to thrive on it. Maybe it's the lawyer side coming out, but Rubenstein seems to live for a good argument and having the chance to present his side.

Here's a perfect example I know first hand.

Although I wasn't around during the Carrie Perry years, I recently learned how Rubenstein operates and his potential as a leader. I had heard that some perceived Bruce as "arrogant" and somewhat "heavy handed". I had a couple concerns about Rubenstein's "style and decided to approach him with a couple of my concerns.

The first concern was that people were tired of Eddie Perez's "tyrant" style of management. Cross Perez and you were done. I was someone that really hadn't worked with Bruce before, yet I found him knowledgeable and his concern for Hartford seems sincere.

Well, I approached him and told him I was concerned about his frequent comments about when he "used to run Hartford". No matter how it was meant, I knew I was turned off by it, and others were making comments to me about it also. If he was anything like Eddie Perez, I figured that was the last conversation we would have.

In case anyone has or hasn't noticed, I haven't heard Bruce comment on how he used to run Hartford since that day. He does talk about being inclusive, committees to interview and select candidates, a public relations committee to educate voters and improve the image of politics. He seems to be open to suggestion and creative ideas.

I'm not going to get into a stump speech here, I think it is already clear where I stand. I do have to ask though what is more important in a leader. Would I prefer a Chairperson who is silent and condones the Mayor's behavior no matter what or would I prefer a Chairperson who can be arrogant and confrontational when it is needed?

Would I prefer a Chairperson who may not be liked by everyone but who's commitment to fair and honest government isn't in question? Or, would I prefer a Chairperson who has shown his commitment to Hartford by beating us out of motor vehicle taxes by registering his vehicles in New Canaan?

Bruce Rubenstein may be a lightning rod, but change doesn't come by remaining silent and accepting business as usual. I have already seen more change brought about just by Rubenstein announcing his run than by an movement by the current Democratic Town Committee over the past couple years.

Change doesn't come about by doing nothing. If it did, Sean Arena would be the unanimous choice for another two years.

And for those unsure of which way to go in the Town Committee vote, let me give you another Len Besthoff "southernism",and in the interest of full disclosure, it's a term I've heard him use, not an endorsement of any political activity

"If you stay in the middle of the road, your gonna get run over"

Make a choice, it may not be popular, but you know what you have to do if we are really going to see change in our city. Forget the personalities, forget the gossip, forget the rumors, forget the backstabbing. Do what you know you have to do if we are going to return Hartford to the proud city it once was. If there was ever a time for political enemies from the past to now come together for the public good, that time has come.

It's a matter of leadership, pure and simple.

MY RESPONSE TO A COUPLE OF "ANONYMOUS" COMMENTS, RESPONSE #1

The first comment I think is actually a fair question, any one who wasn't at the hearings would probably make the same comment.

Anonymous said...
wasn't rose representing olga as the registrar? i mean, the suit was regarding things olg did/did not do as registrar of voters. so, where is he defending the slate?



The comment is accurate, John Rose as Corporation Counsel is pretty much obligated by the City Charter to represent city officials. He did that in the case of Olga Vazquez. Sometimes it was a little difficult to keep track of who he was representing by his comments before the Judge. At one point he stood and said "the Registrar blew it" and "the City won't be harmed" if Judge Peck vacated the stay . That is all part of his job, as required by the Charter.

The question of if and when he crossed the line and began representing the Giles slate is an entirely different issue. After Rose stated that the Registrar blew it and the city won't be harmed, he seemed to begin arguing for the Giles slate.

Rose continued on and stated that if the Judge lifted the stay that the Giles slate "will be dead, they will be done" and further stated that they would be "murdered at the polls". Does that sound like he is arguing for his client, Olga Vazquez OR advocating for the Giles slate?

It seems pretty clear to me. If the Giles slate felt that their chances were dead and they would be done, that is their problem then and they needed to hire their own attorney if they felt aggrieved, the same as the Kirkley-Bey slate did when they felt Olga Vazquez stepped on their rights.

Whether your question was meant to be sincere or sarcastic, I know there aren't many that understand the issue if you weren't in court to hear it. Regardless, I hope this has offered some clarification to those trying to understand this mess. Hopefully at Monday's Council meeting it might become clearer. If there is a side I'm missing that you think can justify Mr. Rose's arguing for the Giles slate, please feel to post it here.

WFSB COVERS LATEST JOHN ROSE CONTROVERSY

Channel 3's Len Besthoff covered the latest John Rose controversy in the Friday evening broadcasts. My version was reported here yesterday also. In an interesting twist, I asked John Rose for the memo's regarding the meeting, and he turned them over to me also immediately.

To view Len's story, click here

More to come on this after Monday's Council meeting

HARTFORD POLICE SEEK HELP IN LOCATING MISSING MAN



PRESS RELEASE FROM HARTFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT

Hartford Police Seek Public Assistance in Locating Missing Hartford Man

(Hartford) - Detectives of the Hartford Police Department's Juvenile Investigative Division are seeking public assistance in locating a missing Hartford man. Miles Douglas Wiles was last seen by his family on February 19th, 2010, at approximately 5 p.m. as he left his family's residence on foot.

Wiles, shown in the photo below, is described as a 28 year old, 6 ft, 240 lbs, light skin Hispanic male with short black hair and brown eyes. He was last seen wearing a khaki shirt and trousers. Family members indicate to police that it is unlike Wiles to not return home or not be in contact with his family.

Anyone with information on the whereabouts of Miles Douglas Wiles is asked to contact Hartford Police Detective Ivys Arroyo at 860-757-4236, or Hartford Police Sergeant Matthew Eisele at 860-757-4242. Confidential tips, for cash rewards, may be made by calling Hartford Crime Stoppers at 860-522-TIPS (8477).


As a sidenote, from what sources are telling me, Miles Wiles is the grandson of Hartford politician Abe Giles.

Friday, March 5, 2010

HAS THE HARTFORD CITY COUNCIL FINALLY REACHED ITS LIMIT?

Monday nights Council agenda promises to be full of action.

The meeting starts with the obligatory State of the City address by Mayor Perez. This in and of itself could prove historic as this might be the last State of the City Address by Perez before he heads off to prison, depending how his upcoming trial goes.

Two items added to the agenda also might prove quite interesting.

The relationship between the Council members and Corporation Counsel John Rose has been contentious almost from the start. After several recent incidents, it appears that at least some Councilmembers have decided enough is enough. Councilperson Deutsch had called for a vote of "no confidence" in John Rose. This is more symbolic than anything else. According to the City Charter, the Mayor hires and fires the Corporation Counsel. The Council does have the power to remove Rose, but only after a hearing and a vote that would require seven votes.

If nothing else has been learned, councilmembers this past year realized they need to learn to count their votes. After the unsuccessful overthrow attempt of former Council President Torres, councilpeople quickly learned how to count to seven. Any attempt to remove Rose most likely wouldn't be able to get the seven votes with Councilpeople Torres and Winch almost definitely siding with Perez. Cotto and Airey-Wislon typically do not agree with the majority of the Council when it comes to an "anti" Perez move.

Another surprising twist though is an agenda item introduced by Counciperson Kennedy. Kennedy had requested the Council go into executive session to discuss the role of the Corporation Counsel.

Apparently John Rose, upon hearing of the agenda items, sent a memo to Council President Segarra demanding that any hearings be held in public and be an "open and public hearing and airing". Rose further demands that all actions be conducted with the "sunshine law's" also known as the Freedom of Information laws. I know, I know, I'm thinking the same thing also, but FOI does apply to everyone.

Numerous questions have arisen regarding the actions of the Corporation Counsel and has even forced the City Council to hire outside counsel to advise them in their performance.

The 5th District Town Committee suit over the past couple weeks has also raised issues as to whether Rose was representing the City or the Town Committee slate. The City of Hartford is his client, the Giles slate is not.

This meeting promises to unveil a couple more chapters in Hartford's Theater of the Bizarre beginning with the State of the City Address

Rose to Segarra 3-4-10

Segarra+Reply+to+Rose+4!3!10[1]

Thursday, March 4, 2010

FAIR AND BALANCED



Earlier in the Giles post, I asked readers to be sure to check out Jeff Cohen's blog at WNPR. I have been reminded that Cityline is well worth checking out also by its new proprietor, Steve Goode.

In an effort to keep peace in the neighborhood, please be sure to head to cityline after you finish here. The order you visit WNPR or Cityline is up to you, as long as you start here first.

Here's the link for cityline, just click here