UPDATE, Curwen resignation
: On Monday Mayor Bill Finch will submit his budget proposal to the City Council for the spending plan that begins July 1 in an election year for the city’s legislative body. Budget submissions are not about where they start, but where they end up. There will likely be a tax increase in the budget proposal, but probably not as high by the time the council makes adjustments and it goes back to the mayor for possible veto action before the council sets the mil rate in June. In an election year, council members will need to tell their peeps we derailed a higher tax increase.
Historically the mayor and the council work off of the state budget that right now is a work in progress. Roughly 40 percent of city budget revenue comes from the state. The mayor’s budget will be referred to the council’s Budget and Appropriations Committee chaired by Sue Brannelly and Angel DePara.
Also Monday night there will be a “Presentation to Robert P. Curwen, Sr. for his dedication and service” on the City Council. Curwen had announced his verbal resignation from the council in January but did not submit a formal letter of resignation until Wednesday, hoping his son would replace him. It was not well received by council members nor members of the Democratic Town Committee from the Upper East Side district Curwen represented.
The name that most prominently is mentioned as Curwen’s replacement is Mike Marella, the long-time executive director of the Police Activities League, who wants to return to the legislative body that he served in the 1990s. Steven Stafstrom, a lawyer with Pullman & Comley, will likely replace Marty McCarthy who resigned from the council last week representing Black Rock. Steven Stafstrom is the nephew of John Stafstrom, former Democratic town chair, who serves as the city’s bond counsel through the Pullman law firm.
Council agenda for Monday is here.
Yes, this is it for Curwen. He is no longer a resident of the state let alone the City of Bridgeport. It is this type of municipal manipulation that makes this city stink. No? Time will tell. ***
I may have an interest in that council seat, also. I came very close the last time I ran, beating out all three of the other candidates at Longfellow.
Hector,
Saw you attending the Black Rock Cabinet session last week. Your post is just below info about Curwen from the 138th. Is that the seat you are in pursuit of, or did you make reference to the Council seat of Marty McCarthy?
By the way as a potential candidate, did you read any of the handout I presented to you? Any thoughts on needed changes? If you are thinking of running, these are easy softball questions to begin to set yourself apart from the machine, right? Time will tell.
It’s time to tell Sue Brannelly and Pullman & Comley LLC that BLACK ROCK, THE LARGEST TAXPAYERS in the NATION! will not tolerate another tax increase.
Black Rock too shall get what they elect. No exceptions to the rule. They had a chance to elect you and someone else, didn’t they?
Right on, Jimfox.
“In an election year, council members will need to tell their peeps we derailed a higher tax increase.”
Someone else should remind and make clear to these “peeps” back to back derailment of higher tax increases is still a high tax increase.
Last year, I suggested the mayor sticks it to the taxpayers (you get what you elect). I had warned and predicted a large tax increase before that. Bill Finch did in fact raise taxes but didn’t have the balls to raise the taxes as high as he needed to. As usual the council would play the game and cut the mayor’s proposed tax increase in half and claim some sort of victory. The problem is the cut to the mayor’s proposed budget the year before (last year) has left a deficit this year and complicated by the state budget cuts. The council’s move to cut the mayor’s proposed tax increase in half is mainly the reason they have a tougher budget this year. Now they are going to play the same game. Finch proposes a 4% tax increase for example and the council will cut it in half. The reality is the city needs an 8% to 12% tax increase to keep afloat. But then again, the council will cut half or a third of it just to say they did something. So just keep in mind if in 2011 the mayor proposed a 4% tax increase and got council approval for only 2%, and in 2012 the same is proposed and approved, it is still a 4% tax increase and the only difference is it was spread out over two years.
Nothing will change in the 138th when Curwen leaves. We will be stuck with an out-of-towner taking Curwen’s place. Anyone who believes Mike Marella lives at 120 Huntington Turnpike believes in the Easter bunny.
We will still have roads that look like they were bombed with mortars. We will still have the road collapse on Broadbridge Ave (2+ years). Crime rates will continue to climb (at least 14 armed robberies). We will still have the houses filled and I mean filled with SHU students. We will still have no NRZ committee. We will still have not one person on any board or commission. Our council people do not ride through the district, our district leader gets lost when she leaves her house to come into my neighborhood. So having an out-of-towner on the council will not help us and will put another Finch toadie on the council.
Think of the BUDGET as a ‘hot potato.’ Tom Sherwood has been sitting on it (get the picture) for months now. He knows the salaries of those currently employed (and benefit expenses), the debt payments, and all of the other ‘commitments’ and he knows the contingencies he must prepare for. But if he is provided two or three models of funding to account for unpredictable flows of State and Federal funds, he can baffle the City Council. They have not even had a discussion of what happened last September when more than 60 departments had Line Item 51000 changes to show a surplus for the year in Full Time Earned Compensation. Most of the GHOST POSITIONS were exposed as phony. Phony when they went into budgets “of years past,” phony when they were reviewed by the B&A “watchdogs” (the only ones we have) and phony when the City Council voted on them in years past!
In the past several weeks, both the B&A and the Mayor in Pension A meeting referred to HUGE OVERRUNS in public safety OVERTIME accounts. It’s been happening for two years, and the wizards are talking about it now? The Mayor takes credit for the appointment of a new Deputy Chief (the fifth Deputy Chief serving currently) who is the only one not a union employee to oversee and control use of overtime. What took so long? Reaction time in this city is feeble and indicative of a truly sick and broken municipal body. That is as great dreams of a green future with advanced economic development focused on green industries with “all students graduating college-ready” is wonderful in one regard, but are the dreams the consequence of drinking the medications for your illness or something in the tea leaves? Time will tell.
Hey 138th, remember this? It was Marella and Grossin who approved the purchase of a one-million-dollar insurance policy paid by the taxpayers for Joe Ganim.
How about this? Pat Crossin and Mike Marella … go from a $263 million surplus to a $80 million deficit (OIB story).
Fluck, that was a Joe Ganim stinker. Marella and Crossin had no involvement in Joe’s financial appetite.
Lennie, there was no indication Marella (I have my doubts about Crossin) knew of the insurance scam. First, the money for the insurance payments had to come from somewhere and that would or should catch the attention of the budget chairman who would have been Crossin. Now there is proof there was one City Councilmen who knew in advance of the $1 million insurance policy scam (actually there were at least two). He was among those interrogated by the FBI and he came clean after the feds came to him asking questions. Before the documents needing council approval were sneaked by the council, there was a meeting or group discussion between at least four individuals who were questioned by the feds. In this meeting or discussion, Fabrizi brought Andres Ayala into the mix by telling him of the insurance idea. I believe Ganim was also part of that group. After being told of the plan and asked to help out, Andres Ayala claims he wanted no part of it and made it clear to Fabrizi. It is reported Fabrizi put his arms around Andres Ayala and spoke with him in private and the meeting/discussion ended. Fabrizi and Andres Ayala knew of the scam or insurance plan before it was carried out. Who else knew?
Joel, the only person who knew about Ganim’s ultimate intent was Ganim because he lied to everyone about his intent, even fabricating a letter rescinding the arrangement.
Wasn’t the insurance company agent or broker convicted? He must have known something about the intent or at least the potential for fraud. Did you know about Ayala’s interrogation by the feds?
Did you read this one, Lennie?
www .ctpost.com/local/article/Judges-Shelton-developer-to-stay-in-jail-4394847.php
Lennie, that’s true.
But they both approved it, as Co-Chairs on the Budget and Appropriations Committee, while they turned a blind eye.
Fluck: Marella is also responsible for the leasing of the golf course that cost us over $1 million. He was the tying vote on the council that allowed Ganim to break the tie and thus the lease of the golf course. BTW this lease was manipulated by Marsilio and Murphy. This was the same deal in which I was offered five years of free golf and a free cart if I voted for another contender to lease the course. This was reported to the FBI but they did nothing. Only in Bridgeport.
If Mayor Finch proposes another tax increase it will be the second year in a row he has FAILED to keep his re-election campaign promise to “hold the line on taxes.” The City Council needs to do their job and tell the Mayor to send them a budget that cuts spending, does not raise taxes and does not borrow to fund operating costs. This City has not come close to doing what needs to be done to reduce spending and control taxes. In addition, City employees on the City Council should recuse themselves from all budget-related discussions and votes. They have a clear conflict of interest given their day jobs. Finally, any Council member who votes for a tax increase should be prepared for strong opposition in November. We are already an overtaxed city and higher taxes will only serve to reduce property values and further undercut the ability to attract and retain businesses and people in Bridgeport. It’s time for Bridgeport politicians to wake up and join the real world.
“… it will be the second year in a row he has FAILED to keep his re-election campaign promise …”
You have much to learn, Dave. Has anyone ever told you Bill Finch promised the voters a $600 property tax refund if elected back in 2007? Check your mail and let us know if you got your check yet.
*** Opinion from the outside looking in on the city’s golf course from back in the days where it seemed many Council, Boards, Commissions, City Employees and Pols, etc. played for free and might have been afraid of losing those perks if the course were leased. Also, was it a “lease it,” “sell it” or “lose it” situation pertaining to the golf course back then I wonder, where something had to be done? *** Moving on, Good Luck to Mr. Curwen & family who regardless of his politics while on the city council “good or bad,” served the city and his district for quite a few years, as well as the State of CT’s Dept. of Corrections. The city council’s remaining B&A committee will certainly go now from shade to complete darkness when dealing with the Mayor’s 2013 proposed city budget, no? *** MOVING ON! ***
Mojo, the fact is the golf course was making money for the city. The fact is the mayoral aide who offered me the bribe offered it for another company other than the one it was awarded to.
The fact is National Fairways came out of the blue and was a surprise as both city officials said it was the worst presentation they had ever heard.
The fact was the winning bidder had no assets and needed the golf course for collateral.
The fact is former councilman from the 138th Ed Green with the support of Tom Mulligan introduced a motion to the council that the course could not be used as collateral by National Fairways. Marella’s vote made the vote 10 to 10 and Ganim broke the tie.
Fact of the matter is all the park commissioners except me and Cruz Rosa were replaced with Ganim people, Cruz and I were left because our terms had not expired.
Sports Fans,
Technical point raised by Andy to whom we owe a tip of the hat!!!
When the Mayor lets Board and Commission member terms expire by failing to re-appoint the current sitting member or by replacing them in a timely manner, he creates an opportunity for seriously leveraging or creating conflicts of interest in their subsequent voting. Control not accountability is what Bill enjoys!!! Last Wednesday night Mayor Finch indicated he disagrees with what I report. He rarely stays silent. But on the subject of his disagreement he has stayed silent. People at the meeting saw it as he turned away from Don Greenberg’s question to take another question. HARRY TRUMAN paraphrase: IF YOU CAN’T STAND THE HEAT STAY OUT OF THE KITCHEN!!! The heat gets under your collar and assists you in continuing bad decisions, bad choices and failure to listen to those who elected you. Time will tell.
Andrew C Fardy, you said, “I was offered five years of free golf and a free cart if I voted for another contender to lease the course. This was reported to the FBI but they did nothing,” I think you should clear up that statement.
Ron, I will do my best. Ganim went against his word to me he would not lease the golf course. There were three applicants to take over the course. Arnold Palmer Golf, Jack Nicklaus and National Fairways.
The bribe and that’s what I consider it was to vote in favor of one of the two well-known golf names. The offer was made after we listened to all the presentations and came at a local watering hole.
I contacted the FBI with this information and after the initial talk never heard from them again.
Somewhere somehow and for some reason National Fairways was selected.
Well Andy, if you can’t beat them using tactics that are above board, maybe the thing to do would have been to think like them.
Maybe this could be brought to the attention of the FBI again? The tactic I always use is: Never delete an e-mail. You never know when you will need to divulge where the bodies are buried …
Andy, I played golf with the guy who represented Golden Bear (Nicklaus’ group) after National Fairways got the contract. The short story is Palmer’s group saw through Ganim’s bribe request in a heartbeat. Nicklaus’ group got the deal and when they sat down to sign and exchange a check, the Ganim rep asked for a $25,000 additional check for Ganim’s re-election campaign. Upon refusal by Golden Bear, Ganim’s reps turned to National Fairways and a check was personnaly written by Marc Bergschneider. The rest is corruption history as National Fairways left Bridgeport owing $1.4 million and a quality layout two-golf-course operation looking like farmland before plowing season. There was absolutely no vetting of National Fairways. Had Bridgeport done so they would have found out the entire operation was on the verge of bankruptcy while “borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.”
Bergschneider also was involved in trying to purchase property on the Weston/Easton border to develop another golf course. There he was opposed after being properly vetted by the local gov’ts.
Bob: The shame of it is they did vet all the applicants and they knew the history of National Fairways. I had a mole inside OPM who kept me posted as to what was going on.
National Fairways made a deal with CRX corporation who happen to be the largest lessor of freight railroad cars. The thorn in their side was National Fairways needed to use the golf course as collateral. That’s why I went to Ed Green my alderman and asked him to put a motion before the council stopping National Fairways from using the course as collateral, that’s where Marella’s vote came in and allowed Ganim to make the tie-breaking vote.
Same scenarios, same set of characters … nothing changes until those of sensibility with the goodness for Bridgeport actually do something besides talk.
Bob,
There’s a formula that can change Bridgeport, once again a Black Rocker ran for Mayor with no interest in people but the power of office.
Worked for Ganim. Failed miserably last time.
A person of the people with Black Rock money behind them can win.
Identify that person. Back that person.
Ms. Foster took her shot and it was a wet firecracker.
I still feel if she put her money behind John GOMES they would have had a chance.
Identify someone soon and gain two years of momentum.
Chosen 1: John Gomes had no chance of winning. There are many reasons why, not the least of which is his campaign had no money. He did what he felt he had to do considering the options in front of him and he was correct because John is a smart guy. However, Foster’s money could never have backed him. People donated to MJF because they believed in her. If those people wanted to donate to John they could have. In short, it was not John’s or MJF’s time.
I do agree with you, there is a formula that can win. That formula combined with a critical mass of pissed-off Bridgeporters can tip the scale. That tipping point will only manifest if the pressure is kept up.
Bond Girl,
I agree to a point but you help make my case.
John GOMES who represents the makeup of Bpt lost because of money.
Ms. Foster because people see through her.
If she really has Bpt in mind and not just fighting Finch, she will get her donors behind a GOMES type.
See through her? Really? Okay, I guess you have the right to perceive things that way. Just remember, the folks in Bridgeport who backed Mary-Jane actually VOTE.
I think we should agree to disagree, no disrespect.
None taken, we all have our opinions and this is a forum to air them.
It’s common knowledge Foster’s disdain for Finch outweighs her trying for a job that at her age and wealth is crazy to want or need.
Has anyone ever considered the mid-year tax increase scenario? The response to many of the CT Post questions (link below) has already been given here–on OIB.
www .ctpost.com/local/article/Will-police-and-fire-be-on-the-chopping-block-4396830.php
Any attempt to raise taxes mid-year would be tantamount to an admission of gross mismanagement. It should not even be considered in any event.
The fiscal year starts on the first of July. The City Council can try to avoid or prevent that all-out City Council challenge you’ve been announcing or warning about by delaying the tax increase until after the November 2013 election. On at least one occasion, the mayor had warned of a potential mid-year tax increase. If there were a time for such a move, 2013 looks like it. I think the Bridgeport machine knows regardless of when and by how much they raise taxes, you and many others will still call it “gross mismanagement.”
Dave, what would you be willing to cut in lieu of a tax increase?
Lennie, I know you did not ask me but here goes:
1. Cut all ghost positions.
2. Close the airport.
3. Lay off non-union political appointments.
4. Reduce salaries of non-union employees by 10%, this includes McCarthy, Osborne, Dunn and many others.
5. Corral police overtime which now is $3.5 million over budget.
6. Stop overtime for all appointed positions.
7. Privatize construction service presently manned by city employees.
Just to name a few things.
7. Get rid of the sick, lame and lazy workers off on extended sick leave or injury leave.
The mayor already privatized construction services. He brought in Epic Management, another back-door deal without going out to bid. He violated the purchasing ordinance by doing so. This is nowhere in the city budget. It will be covered somehow by Sherwood in the 11th hour.
Bruce, I was talking about city painters, masons, electricians, boiler repair and a few other jobs that can be put out to bid at a savings.
2. Sell the airport along with all the other cake job perk businesses the city is mismanaging.
6. No OT for anyone who is not labor unless an emergency or extreme situation. Anyone who is being paid OT should be performing some type of labor or task. Supervisory issues can be handled on regular time.
Lennie,
Andy’s list is a good start. I have a number of other ideas regarding cutting costs, including rescinding the Mayor’s and other senior managers’ significant pay raises from last year, and expanding the tax base. I think we need a state-appointed Financial Control Board to restructure the city’s finances, including its retiree health care obligations.
Dave Walker, there you go again, it’s like you have a national agenda to go after benefits for retirees.
Dave, do you really think a Financial Control Board would be able to fix the city’s finances without raising taxes? For how long will the fix last? You do know we were once under control of such a board and look where we are at. Why did Dave Walker decided to move to Bridgeport of all places? I’m sure this has been in the minds of a few OIB readers.
Joel,
The prior financial board was a Financial Review Board not a Financial Control Board. There is a big difference. A control board would have much broader powers. I believe the City can be put on a sustainable path through financial restructuring and thoughtful economic development. Higher property taxes are not the answer. Mary and I moved to Bridgeport for the home and the Black Rock neighborhood. We can also see Bridgeport’s potential if it had real leadership and was committed to transformational reform. Since arriving, I have seen how the city and state are “ground zero” of fiscal irresponsibility. I’ve also seen how Bridgeport’s political machine cares about its members, friends and family, and not the City or its citizens. As a big fan of Theodore Roosevelt, I know this situation existed in the past in NYC. It’s time for people who care about this city to say I’ve had enough, it’s time for real change to create a better future in Bridgeport. People can start by supporting Rep. Jack Hennessy’s HB 5724 that will eliminate clear conflicts of interest on the City Council and by opposing any additional tax increase. Both are essential and are issues that will be decided within the next 60-plus days. The time to act is NOW.
While we wait for Dave, here is one observation on the budget:
The adopted 2013 budget, #41648 titled Housing Authority Reimbursement of Police, shows a big fat 0 (zero). Why hasn’t anyone on the council or the mayor himself moved to demand the Housing authority pays for the cost of policing their housing properties? Especially the large projects like P.T., Marina Village, Charles F. Green and the Terrace. If you own a business or a home in Bridgeport and your alarm goes off for whatever reason (I believe more than three times) the business or property owner is given a fine and this potential source of revenue is noted under #41651 and #41652 titled Commercial and Residential Alarms. Why can’t the Bridgeport Housing Authority pay for the cost of police service? Isn’t it bad enough the Arena gets a free ride on policing too?
“Cut.” Why cut, Lennie? How about going after the Sal DiNardo type of delinquents first? Let’s start by cutting the bullshit laws that allow DiNardo and other LLCs to get away with not paying their taxes once and for all. This will never happen under the current leadership and the control Nancy DiNardo has over our State Government body. Hey, Dave Walker, have you heard of Nancy and Sal DiNardo? Maybe you should put your house under the ownership of an LLC.
As for Police overtime, it seems as if the City Council voted to carry the police overtime deficit over to fiscal year 2014 from 2013. In fiscal year 2013 adopted budget for police overtime (Regular, Regular 1.5 O.T. pay) item #51106, #51108. No figures or numbers were included. The budget anticipated no overtime cost for 2013. I can’t remember a single year in which there was no police overtime cost. Why was this obvious future cost/expense left blank? Obviously it was done to give the appearance of a balanced budget. This is what Dave Walker means by “gross mismanagement.”
Ron,
I am a widely recognized expert on retirement programs. Are you? Based on my experience, the retiree health care program for Bridgeport is the most irresponsible, unaffordable and unsustainable I have ever seen. You can either have them voided in a future bankruptcy proceeding or you can restructure them prior to that point. One thing is clear, they cannot and will not survive in their present form. Welcome to the real world.
Dave Walker, you said you are a widely recognized expert on retirement programs. Well tell us all some the retirement programs you have restructured. I notice you never talk about the unreal profits from the health industry or the insurance industry, you are silent about them. For the record I am a retired Lieutenant from the Bridgeport Fire Department and a four-year veteran from the U.S. Air Force during the Viet Nam era.
Ron,
I was the top official in the U.S. Government overseeing pension, health and other employee benefit programs. I also ran a global consulting practice that included employee benefit programs. By the way, I have a brother who is a retired Captain from Florida’s arson investigation unit. For the record, I had Congressional appointments to the Air Force and Naval Academies but could not attend due to a serious hearing loss in my left ear. The FBI tried to hire me early in my career but my ear problem was a disqualifier. Fortunately, it didn’t keep me from becoming the 7th Comptroller General of the United States.
Are you a Republican, Mr. Walker?
Chosen 1,
I have been a political independent since 1997. I have received Presidential appointments from two Republican Presidents and one Democratic President and have been confirmed unanimously by both Democratic- and Republican-controlled U.S. Senates.
What if Dave were a Republican? It wouldn’t change the reality! Our Healthcare and Pensions are in trouble. Don’t you think if this weren’t the case, the mayor would have been talking about the great job the investors are doing with our pension funds? One major market crash and I bet the funds will go broke. Keep in mind the funds are performing poorly as the market seems to be doing well.
Mr. Walker, what is out of control is Finch’s dept head salaries and their pension-inflating “perks.” They continue to grab whatever they can for themselves assisted by Tom Sherwood who has found a way to ensure his job security. It’s been written here before. If you want a true picture of what is happening, bring in a professional independent team of auditors. You will be shocked at what you find.
Bruce,
I’m for filling the long-vacant City Auditor position with an independent and qualified CPA. I also believe we need an independent performance and accountability audit.
Dave,
I’ll be happy with a comprehensive audit, then we throw the fluckers in jail.
Lennie, whatever happened to our OIB friend Bruce Hubler? It has been over a year since I’ve read a posting from him. Can you send out the OIB Search and Rescue Team to Black Rock?
Joel,
Bruce has been in Florida for the winter but I saw him yesterday in Black Rock. I am confident he will be one of many who will be informed and involved in CW4BB’s reform efforts. I’ll let him speak for himself on specific issues.
*** The only way Bpt politics can change is for the Republican, Independant and “new” wave Democratic parties in general to all come together and form a platform with candidates for city council, town clerk, city clerk, BOE and Mayor in the upcoming local elections with plenty of info to educate city voters. *** TIME TO GET THE WORD OUT ***
I agree. It is very important to form a platform. It’s now or never!
Mojo, Bridgeport is not ready for that because the fight will be who is in control.
The mayor is not scheduled for re-election in the upcoming local elections. Maybe forming the Repocratic Party is the answer.
I expect Mayor Finch to present several budget options tonight based on various assumptions for state and federal aid. He will blame others and try to confuse people. The “bottom line” is the federal and state governments are starting to cut back on spending and it’s time for Bridgeport to do the same. The Council should demand the Mayor present a budget that does not raise taxes, does not borrow to fund operating expenses and reduces spending by the amount necessary to make the numbers work. The Mayor is the city’s CEO and that’s his job. Mayor Finch also promised taxpayers he would “hold the line on taxes” during his reelection campaign. He has already broken that promise once. Any option that involves raising taxes is simply unacceptable given current tax levels in Bridgeport and the Finch Administration’s failure to engage in transformational reforms to the City’s structure and spending practices.
Dave Walker, your post has been stated before by John Marshall Lee and also stated it was against the City Charter to present more than one budget plan.
Ron,
Dave and I may have similar posts because of our understanding of the financial mismanagement ongoing. I am not aware of making a comment regarding the City Charter making a statement regarding more than one budget plan. Can you provide me where you saw that?
Several weeks ago, I saw Mayor DeStefano in New Haven had provided “three budgets” probably providing three potential revenue streams to his Board of Aldermen. Shortly thereafter I think the CT Post or Channel 12 showed the Mayor making a similar comment.
What is critical is only Tom Sherwood and the Mayor have the power to rapidly fashion a NO TAX INCREASE alternative in consideration of the plight of the taxpayer. The City Council apparently cannot even post its own hearing schedule in a timely fashion for the taxpaying public. Time will tell.
John Marshall Lee, my mistake. It was Bob Walsh and here is a portion of what was posted:
I just re-read the applicable provision of the City Charter. It does not contemplate the Mayor submitting more than one budget. That serves to reinforce my suggestion the City Council demand the Mayor submit a budget that will not result in an increase in total property taxes.
Regarding more than one budget submission, I see what you are saying because of the default language in the Charter.
However, if the Mayor said it (in similar fashion to the story from New Haven) and was reported for the comment, then it is another indication of his political use of the bully pulpit rather than showing his care and concern about City taxpayers. If the Council begins to ask questions to see what clipping and trimming is necessary to reduce a certain % then priorities across the entire community can be viewed. Department heads who live out of town, just as City Council members who are employees have a strong inclination to maintain and support the status quo, rather than challenge and change. Time will tell.
As long as Stafstrom doesn’t own an up-and-coming restaurant he’ll have plenty of time to attend City Council meetings.