Former City Councilman Tom White, in a letter to State Senator Cathy Osten, writes “In the meantime and in the case you continue your opposition to this bill, I hope that you will recuse yourself from all further deliberations relating to HB 5886 and abstain from voting so this legislative exercise is not compromised by your apparent bias. Letter follows:
I attended the public hearing for bills before the Planning and Development Committee on February 13, 2015. I gave my verbal testimony five hours into the hearing after elected officials completed speaking and the general public was allowed to speak.
I spoke in favor of HB 5886 AN ACT PROHIBITING MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES FROM SERVING ON CERTAIN MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE BODIES. I submitted written testimony for the record the following day.
In the time prior to my testimony, committee members asked questions, sought clarification and shared their observations as part of the public hearing process.
In contrast, you expressed strong opinions, especially regarding HB 5886. You expressed a strong bias in opposition to this bill which borders on hostility. You commented that there are communities who oppose this bill suggesting that it would discourage people from serving in small communities like those you represent. What is this statement based on?
Senator, either you do not understand the bill and the resulting amendment, or your strong bias resulting, perhaps, from your experience as a government employee union organizer has prevented you from an objective view of this legislation. Based on your comments during the public hearing and reflected in the Connecticut Post (Bridgeport’s conflict of interest proposal debated, Friday, February 13, 2015) you appear to be an active participant in the effort by organized labor representing state and municipal employee unions to misrepresent the intent and impact of this legislation.
Your comments during the public hearing regarding your dismissive view of the situation suggests that you see no need for Bridgeport residents to have the same protection from the effects of conflict of interest that residents of other Connecticut towns have as reflected in the current CGS Sec 7-421.
Senator Osten, I hope that you will make an effort to fully understand the current guidelines required by CGS Sec 7-421 and the amendment requested in HB 5886. Representative Jack Hennessy has submitted written testimony which clearly states the need for the amendment and its intent. Perhaps you can meet with Representative Hennessy and Senator Marilyn Moore, who co-sponsored the bill, to discuss the bill and address your concerns.
In the meantime and in the case you continue your opposition to this bill, I hope that you will recuse yourself from all further deliberations relating to HB 5886 and abstain from voting so this legislative exercise is not compromised by your apparent bias.
Tom, doesn’t she remind you of City employees serving on the City Council, past and present? No fundamental regard for government conflicts, probably in someone’s back pocket. I’m sure if you check her campaign finances you will find an oblique trace of Union influence (full disclosure, I am pro-union all the way, as a very young child I remember my father praising the positive aspects of unions; I believe that today). But this insensitive wacko should tend to the responsibilities of her district, and if she refuses to help Bridgeport by casting the right vote, then she should recuse herself.
Lisa, like so many of us, my father was a union man (Bridgeport Brass) and he reminded us the union helped put dinner on the table.
I am finding the synergistic relationship between Democrats in the Connecticut General Assembly and government employee unions is more blatant and disturbing than I first thought.
I am not accusing Frau Osten of having a conflict of interest, but she has an obvious bias against anything that may reduce the influence of government employee unions in local and state government.
She is not alone in her loyalty to unions rather than to the efforts of good government. Hopefully she will come to realize what her proper role as a legislator is.
This explains the synergistic relationship: the same union leaders who failed at Bridgeport Brass are the same people who unionized state workers. Same bread; different table.
I hope Osten ignores your plea.
She does not have a clear conflict. She’s just a puppet of the public employee unions and she evidently doesn’t believe in home rule and good government principles. She is an example of why Connecticut is ranked so low in so many categories.
Tom White, thank you for taking the time in addressing this issue as well as following up. In the end I think Bridgeporters will acknowledge the garbage on all fronts and finally have a call to arms. While the City may be counting on some positive public relation ads to carry them through another administration with a very good P.R. man in tow, there are many issues that are coming to light that can be very disturbing. The issues on paper are mounting. Ironically, those individuals who imagine they are running for Mayor are silent. I could easily debate the pros and cons. The Hennessy Bill does make sense. Those who believe in supporting it would stop people running for office, I say that’s the point. If running for office gives you a job, then there is something not kosher. Not everybody cares about kosher.
Very strong letter, Tom!
Speak truth to power.