When it comes to City Council members, government watchdog John Marshall Lee is like a chihuahua nipping at their heels. A few weeks ago he had addressed members of the city’s budget and legislative body about their city stipends. He had a request and restated it Monday night during the speaking portion of the council session: “Will each of you who are running for Council in November reveal what you received during the 12 months of the Fiscal 2013 year? And will you explain what the funds were spent on towards your representation duties?” Lee’s address to the council follows:
Two weeks ago on the Tuesday following Labor Day I appeared to address the subject of City Council stipends. I provided some information as background and asked some questions of you as individuals who are part of the Council structure. Three Council persons responded to me with partial accounting of their reimbursements. I want to thank them publicly. They know who they are. That means 17 of you did not hear me or felt that my concept of quarterly public accountability for reimbursement of Council related expenses is not worthy of action or response. I am a taxpayer, one of many in the City. My questions and thoughts are not so unique that they bear being ignored. So I will briefly re-state my request. Will each of you who are running for Council in November reveal what you received during the 12 months of the Fiscal 2013 year? And will you explain what the funds were spent on towards your representation duties? The public is interested.
What I also learned since then is that one or more persons were insulted by my comments. No one explained the cause of the insult during my 5 minutes of commentary. However, I apologize to each of you if you took the comments personally, but I am sharing a reality with you … the public at large is unhappy with failure to be accountable with funds, and your stipends are just one small piece of the City half billion dollar annual operating budget. There is a simple remedy and you do not need any other levels of government to enact it. (There are errors in City financial records regarding City Council stipends. They are small errors, but any errors cast doubt about accountability and transparency.) Report your stipend use!
As you know I take time to come to meetings, review documents, connect activity with Charter instructions and stay current with City governance. So let me point out the regular lack of public discussion or dialogue by the Council. Tonight I am participating in a “public speaking” session. You know that this is not attended by many of your members and that some evenings there are not a full complement of speakers. Is that public behavior positive in your mind for Bridgeport? Is it a sign that government is working effectively and efficiently in the City? If you are honest we only need to look back at last Tuesday for the answer when a small number of voters carried the day by electing challengers over incumbents in many cases.
Why did that happen? You have your own thoughts on the matter, but I wonder whether you contemplate any structural changes of regular and systematic formal interaction with the public. If you have been to a Board of Education meeting recently, you will hear members of the public sharing their insight, facts, or opinions with the BOE and public school leadership. Often they get a comment or response that indicates they have been heard. Do you realize that this meeting could function in similar positive fashion? There is no rule against this that I know of, is there? And your subcommittees could function in similar fashion.
Some of your co-chairs allow public comment and others do not. When it comes to Budget and Appropriations public input or questions are unwelcome. Why is that? What public responsibility or interruption of Council duty would place brief public comments, during a meeting and addressing agenda items only, a problem? Please let me know, or your constituents know as you address them and solicit their vote.
You have heard me mention the problems you face in responding to City initiatives and voting when you receive information too little or too late to make a proper vote on behalf of the voters. Yet you continue in the practice, when a public statement to your constituents or to the press, or to your President, might change the way the administration treats you. You know my major emphasis has been on fiscal issues facing the City. And the more I have dug into the information available, the less attractive the City looks to me in terms of their responsibility. And you accept Charter violations, or limitations of information flowing to you, or failure to promote good information about Capital budgets, public bonding and increasing debt including an annual meeting dedicated to soliciting ideas from the public.
Last Tuesday’s primary was a day where members of the majority party came out to vote and to a large extent voted their dissatisfaction with those who were incumbents or who were supported by the administration. That is not news to any of you. But it is never too late to bring governance practices about your own Council body, its duties and responsibilities, up to date. Share your ideas with your constituents. Listen to what they have to say. We must change our institutions and our outlooks to survive. You have a role to be active. Time will tell.
This is very inspiring and entertaining, Mr. Lee, thank you. It’s about time they were “called out” on their behavior, and in such a succinct way! Though there is no mention of a response from anyone, especially those indignant after your prior queries, I can just picture all, or most of them, sitting there…silent, maybe even embarrassed, but surely dumbfounded!
*** A simple request and simple solution if a “City Council Stipend Checking Account” is made, where all deposits, withdrawals or checks written are accounted for and on record with monthly statements from the bank for record keeping, no? An account where nothing but money received from the city for city council business is deposited. ***
This would require changes in banking privacy laws, rules and regulations. The Santiago 2008 Candidate Committee had $50,000 of taxpayers’ money in their bank account. The bank would not give any information regarding the account unless it is requested by law enforcement authorities or the treasurer of the committee. Just because it’s Public funds it doesn’t mean information about the account is public.
Joel,
I think you may be talking about a different type of account.
Currently, the CC is directed by an ordinance that talks about “reimbursement.” That may have changed during the past year without any drumroll or fanfare. There have been some who originally thought the $9,000 was intended to be a kind of “salary.” However it was called a stipend officially and then a former City finance administrator indicated it was probably a taxable sum (and reportable where active listing of expense and business purpose would be necessary to get a deduction). Some were not happy with this.
So sometime in the last year ‘debit cards’ have been issued and used by at least some of the Council members. One question immediately comes to mind: If I am provided with a loaded debit card, how can you call this a reimbursement? Perhaps the Ordinance changed? Or maybe not. And that may be a good reason to say nothing.
A fourth CC called me today for a conversation, maybe about this, or maybe about something else. Questions are good. Answers are better! Time will tell.
John, congratulations on another great investigation. This will become something to keep our honorable council members busy between now and November. Keep up your noble quests.
JML,
I have disagreed with you sometimes, but have retained my respect for you throughout it all and just want to say that respect still continues, and you still have a way of making a short story long. I don’t care, thanks for your unpaid dedication to our city in areas I wouldn’t understand.
Again and again–thank you, JML!!! You are appreciated beyond words!
Honestly, the City of Bridgeport is very fortunate to have an individual who takes his own personal time to investigate and educate. John Marshall Lee has a strong commitment to getting the fiscal house in order and Andy Fardy as well has attempted to educate the public. He is a great asset to the City and would be even greater if he were in a decision-making position. Thank you for all of your hard work.
It’s the JML fan club page! I wanna join in, too! Big love for John from this ballsy fan.
Andy and I are happy you are happy. We want you to know we have immediate openings on Budget Oversight Bridgeport (BOB). Believe it or not, but a few sessions can turn a frustrated or angry taxpayer into a fiscal investigator.
Bridgeport is a great town for Columbo-type sleuthing. Lots of things go undone though called for by Charter and ordinance. Many things done are incomplete or at least partially in error. And our current BOARD OF CHECKS AND BALANCES, the City Council is either unaware or uncaring about their failure to perform (and at the same time wish to keep their stipend use private).
Time for citizen questions, lots of them. It can work. Cultivation at the grass roots makes for a stronger plant. That’s a ‘green thumb’ tip Mayor Finch ignores, though it is true.) We have worked and are working with CC members (a few) and candidates to help them understand how complete a financial blackout has been imposed on residents. Want to help shine a light? Contact us for a chat … 203-259-9642. Time will tell.
“Nobody cares how much you know, until they know how much you care.”–Teddy Roosevelt