Guess Where This Is In Stratford?

Isn't this a fancy bike path rest stop? I'm curious as to how many of you know where this is? We stumbled upon it completely by accident! Give it your best guess, then read below the "cut" for the actual location! It turns out that this beautifully landscaped rest stop is behind the sewage plant addition! The gates have been open as construction continues, and we found this while strolling through. It faces the water through a waving bed of flowers right in the back of DeLuca Field. Is this the start of the vaunted Stratford Greenway? There is no path leading to it or from it; it's as if it got lost on its way to somewhere else! Does anyone know of any other spots like this? Did anyone know about this, or was it publicized anywhere? This makes me want to go to that forum on the Greenway route that's coming up! Who knows what else I'm missing??
Read more of this observation!

Mayoral Government Creates Momentum

It looks like few think the mayoral form of government was a mistake according to the results of our latest poll. This is hardly surprising when one looks at the momentum the Town has finally gained in the last few months. Regardless of where you stand on the issues, it’s obvious that a strong mayor can bring the water to a boil much better than the town manager ever could. Serving at the whim of the Council, the Town Manager did not have the legislative strength to push the Council into action.

Despite my initial doubts as to the wisdom of the mayoral veto, this power does force people to come together and fight it out in the best interest of the town. Without the use of the veto regarding the Long Beach West sale, for instance, the Council would have done no further negotiating and would have sent an incomplete agreement up for a vote. Instead, the veto forced a few additional council meetings and reasonable concessions on both sides in order to give us the chance to vote on it.

Friends say that the Mayor was present for the entire study group session on Saturday regarding the new location for the animal control facility. Notably absent were council members (with the exception of a quick appearance by Councilman Stoomer). Granted, the town council positions are volunteer-only, but it’s nice to see the town figurehead making appearances at functions like these, the arts festival, and the various ceremonies he’s attended the last few years.

Are these things “plusses” for Mayor Miron’s re-election campaign? No, not really—we expect it from that position. Just as we expect him to push the Council into action and wield his veto power to force people to get off their butts and get this town moving again. Just as we expect him to make his own compromises and further the interests of all citizens. Just as we expect him to hold himself to a higher standard because he IS our representative to the rest of the state.

That’s why, despite all the talk about charter revision and James Miron in particular, we made the right decision five years ago. Even through the growing pains we can see th benefits down the line. Read more of this observation!

Stratford's Town Council Players Bomb Onstage!

As if the sitting Town Council needed another black eye, those of us observing yesterday’s proceedings were greeted with yet another installment of the three-ring circus of adolescent behavior that has become its hallmark. Chairman Henrick’s inability to maintain decorum was outshined only by a Democratic show of divisiveness and petty affront that once again reduced our political process to the laughingstock of Connecticut.

Remember when we used to get to laugh at Bridgeport’s political missteps? Those days are long gone, replaced by the childish temper tantrums that have come to define our town.

As Bill Hanney attempted to explain his plans to renovate and the Shakespeare Theater, Gavin Forrester engaged him in a spirited debate over why his estimate was so much less than others. In typical fashion, a good question went unanswered as the fragile egos of our representatives became more important than town business. Before Hanney could fully answer as to where his business plan was, the Town Council Players (thanks, Calvin) raised the roof themselves.

What followed included a grade-school argument between Forrester and Miron over whether Miron’s finger was too close to Forrester’s face, although I saw NO instance of a physical confrontation from my vantage (unlike what was reported in the Connecticut Post). Regardless, calling the mayor a “nut” in public council sets a questionable example.

In another instance of childlike petulance, Emma Brooks topped them both by storming out of the chambers rather than staying to try and restore order herself. What better metaphor for the actions of this Town Council the last few years: running away from the table because you’re too embarrassed to stay.

The upshot? As a result of the infantile behavior displayed by our elected officials, another night’s work was left incomplete. Another delay. Another round of “pass the buck.”

Another failure.
Read more of this observation!

The Referendum Conundrum

With the birth announcement from the latest Town Council meeting coming soon (“Town Ballot Gives Birth to Fourth Referendum Initiative and its Name is Long Beach West!”), the burden of making another difficult decision falls to us, the citizens of Stratford. The worry of those opposed to ballot referendums has always been the attrition rate at which people will only vote for the first few items listed. The more questions added, the less likely people are to answer them. It’s time to prove them wrong (cue the trumpets and the cheerleaders).

The Observer would like to pool the collective resources of its readership to see if we could generate an analysis of the referendum concept. The Town Council certainly seems reluctant to make decisions on its own, so it seems like it’s up to us to make the right decisions. I’ll get what information I can and post it here in the hope that some of you can verify it for accuracy.

First, I’d like to get a feel for how people get their news about referendums in Stratford. For instance, the option agreement for the sale of Long Beach is posted online, and I think the Mayor said he had a copy in his office, but how do people get it if they don’t know to find it? There are 50,000 or so folks in our town. There is a sizable senior contingent without internet access. I don’t know what the subscriber base is for the Stratford Star or the Connecticut Post in town, nor do I know how many issues of the Stratford Bard are actually read per week. I do know that the entire northern part of town doesn’t have Cablevision, so no Channel 79 or Channel 12 news. Many have satellite instead of cable, so again those outlets are of no use. Only a fraction regularly attend town meetings. I don’t believe the rest read online blogs to make up for the remainder, so we’re relying on word-of-mouth to reach them. This would be an interesting gauge of how “plugged in” our citizens are.

I’d also like to know how many people actually voted in the last five or six years. I have no idea what the voter turnout is on a typical Election Day in Stratford, but it would make sense to study the numbers about attrition that the Mayor has talked about to see how lower-ballot questions were skipped at a higher rate. If anyone has access to those please post them!

Lastly, it would be great if we identified the best avenues for disseminating information throughout Stratford for referendums like these. I don’t know what non-partisan machinery is in place to do this, or even if it even exists.

I’ll post in the coming weeks as the information trickles in. Read more of this observation!

The Deafening Silence of District Representatives

(CLICK PICTURE TO ENLARGE)
After reviewing the results of our latest poll, it looks like our elected representatives can do a better job of communicating with their constituents. This is not a surprise because the wording of the question itself was possibly skewed (beware, referendum-writers). Had I asked, “How well does your district representative communicate with you?” I would most likely have gotten a different result. Looking back, it was probably unfair. It also shows how easily the wrong ballot question can mislead and skew the end result.

But back to the task at hand: The Observer would like to see a simple system on the Town web site that allows each member of the Town Council (and the Mayor’s office) to explain their position on the key issues of the day. What better way to create a more informed public come Election Day than for each citizen to have the opportunity to read through the positions of those we’ve already elected? It doesn’t have to stop with the Town Council, of course: the Board of Education could certainly use it, as could others.

For example, after the recent votes on the Shakespeare Theatre renovations or Long Beach West sale, it would have been very informative to read why each Town Council member voted as he or she did. When those members who rarely speak end up voting on an issue, it’s never clear why. It would only take five or ten minutes to write a paragraph or two, and the benefit would be enormous. This Observer has no doubt that the practice of publishing a voting record rationale would head off many of these needless delays in Council decisions; what better disincentive for political posturing than constantly having to defend it? In other words, show us that you have some reasoning behind your actions, that you’ve read up on the issue and will stand behind your position.

We have district representatives who are complete mysteries to those of us who show up at the meetings on a regular basis. Some are disguised as empty chairs, others as bored mutes who seem content to let Mr. Henrick, Mr. Kubic, Mr. Julian or Mr. Forrester do all the talking. Rather than adding to the discussion, they seem happy to have a front row seat.

Some might say this plan is too much to ask of unpaid elected officials, but I say the opposite. They need to justify their place at the big table, to prove that they are part of a solution rather than the problems that have plagued Town Hall for years before now. They cannot claim that various “appearances” around town are adequate. Public forums are simply venting systems where few of the issues addressed ever receive any attention once our allotted time is up. We deserve a clear accounting for their voting record, and the implementation of this valuable tool couldn’t be any easier.

Originally, I’d hoped that the Town’s party systems would provide something in this regard. Unfortunately, their internet presence consists mostly of the same tired campaign photos and glitzy blurbs about their credentials for office. Where are they now that they have the office? Both William O. Cabral and David Mooney (the treasurer and chairman of their respective parties) seem content to let their web sites remain lifeless monuments to past elections with a shill for other figures in upcoming races thrown in for good measure. I’ve corresponded with Mr. Mooney about this, and while he was kind enough to respond, he made it clear he thought this was a non-issue. Again, I couldn’t disagree more. Both parties could benefit from making these sites more useful by keeping current updates on voting records/rationales and providing updates on party positions as major issues arise. If they believe their own platforms they will see this as a service to the town worth providing. Read more of this observation!

Update From Tonight's "Special" Town Council Meeting

Too crowded in room 110 of the Birdseye Complex tonight, folks, and I am angry. I arrived late and realized there were no seats left. A friend and I talked to folks as they came out and realized that the sale of Long Beach West will now go to binding referendum. The council has until the end of September to finalize the agreement before the vote, otherwise the current agreement will be the final one.

A few things were readily apparent. One, Chairman Michael Henrick continues to show a careless disregard for the people who show up to watch our elected officials in town sessions. This has become a growing bi-partisan complaint from the regulars who give up their time to fulfill their civic duty to stay informed. The ridiculous excuse of a council meeting from last week (where they made token appearances before the public and then ran into executive session for hours) was topped by his smug decision that we, the public, did not need to actually hear what was being said. After refusing to move the council meeting to Town Hall and asking the Zoning Commision to move to the smaller room at Birdseye (far too logical), he began the meeting by joking about an echo in the room. This swipe at the empty seats was quickly exposed as petty and blatantly wrong when people continued to file in. As I said, by 8:00 there were no seats to be had.

It was obvious that an embarrassed council did not want to face the wrath of the public who’d voted them in office. They have so little in the way of excuses for their poor behavior that the council is reduced to hiding at Birdseye in the hope that we wouldn’t find them.

It was an act of cowardice.

Have the decency to make it up to the public and present your decision in the Town Chambers we paid for, with the sound and video equipment garnered for this purpose. If this issue was as important as you all say it was, you should be ashamed what little regard you showed Stratford tonight. How dare you make such a monumental decision in the same room they use for dog obedience classes.

If anyone needs additional training, it’s the present Chairman of a council who feels they don’t need to answer to the people who put them there. Read more of this observation!

Jumping Without Parachutes

As the Town Council tinkers with the contract language that looks like it will end up on the November ballot, I hope they don’t forget the obvious. This cannot merely be a vote on “sell or don’t sell.” This issue is much more complicated than that.

Currently the discussion seems to be centering on creating a firmer agreement on which to vote in referendum. However, that only addresses whether the agreement is acceptable as an option; it does not offer the consequences should some feel that we could “do better.” This is a recipe for disaster.

Here is the analogy in simple terms. I put the following on a ballot: “Do you think jumping out of a burning plane spiraling to the ground would be a good idea?” Well, if the plane were burning and running out of fuel and the pilots incapacitated, I would probably consider it! However, I would be rather mad if AFTER I made my decision I was told other crucial pieces of information, like: “There will be no parachutes, so the fall will probably kill you,” or, “Oh, and you’re jumping into the mouth of a volcano.”

The Town expects us to make this huge leap without any knowledge of how things will work out if we choose one alternative. In this case, I would sell under some conditions, and would keep it under others. Without addressing all conditions of the sale (what would happen if we DON’T sell, for instance), the referendum is useless at best, misleading at worst.

For example, how much would it cost for the Town to properly maintain this property, as many contend we can do? Where will this money come from, and is it possible to sustain this arrangement for a considerable amount of time? If the answer is that taxes must be raised and more items cut from the existing budget, many would balk. On the other hand, if another funding source from grants or creative budgeting would minimize the tax increase, many would prefer to keep the land to ensure the access that the Fish & Wildlife Service cannot guarantee. Even if the tax increase were minimal, would it be sustainable? If we can only cover for the next two or three years and then we run out of money to maintain it, we’re right back where we started from.

Another factor is how we’ll pay for tearing down the existing structures. Some will hope to keep the footprint for future construction, while others would hope to keep it clear for future generations. Who wins out? If we vote to keep it, are we voting to sell it to the highest bidder or maintain it as open land? Is there any guarantee it will stay “open” if we keep it?

In short, are we jumping without a parachute, here?

If I ran my business the way this town runs itself, I’d have been ousted a long time ago. Bedtime stories are for kids, not town councils. Either come up with the facts and give us all the information we need to make informed decisions between two alternatives, or go back to the drawing board and get someone to help you do it right. Failing that, the vote I’ll be looking forward to is a referendum on the Town Council, not the sale of Long Beach West. Read more of this observation!