Last week Speaker of the House Brendan Sharkey endorsed Andre Baker for state representative over Democratic Party-endorsed Ernie Newton, saying at a fundraiser for Baker public trust is the first quality voters should consider when choosing who will represent them. Newton, who faces an August 12 primary from Baker, has fired back charging Sharkey caved to the city’s political establishment that killed a government reform bill in the legislature prohibiting city employees from serving on the City Council. “Where was Sharkey about the public trust then?” asks Newton.
“You can’t serve two masters,” Newton says, referring to checks and balances between the legislative and executive branch of government. “Sharkey feels its okay to violate the Bridgeport charter because his political pals are doing it. Then he talks about public trust when it comes to my election?”
Bridgeport’s charter prohibits city employees from serving on the City Council to avoid conflicts of interest, but a loophole in state law allows it. State law bans municipal employees from serving on boards of finance, but Bridgeport’s legislative body also functions as a board of finance. The proposed bill advanced by State Representatives Jack Hennessy and Auden Grogins seeks to extend the law to include all government bodies that serve as a board of finance. Sharkey did not get behind the bill when it was first proposed last year, he said, because he wanted full support from the city’s State House delegation. All six members of the State House now support the bill.
Newton says if he’s returned to the legislature he will vote for the government reform bill. Supporters of the bill maintain the legislation enforcing the charter would eliminate conflicts of interest such as city employee councilors approving their own wages and benefits.
State Senators Anthony Musto and Andres Ayala, both of whom represent Bridgeport, are the current legislative roadblocks to the bill. Fearing he’d alienate City Council President Tom McCarthy, a city employee, Musto opposed the bill. McCarthy’s supporting Musto’s reelection.
A few days ago Newton’s lawyer announced he will ask a state judge to throw out election law charges against Newton after he produced an audit conducted by state election officials he says will exonerate Newton from claims his client falsified donations to trigger an $80,000 grant under the state’s public financing program during his 2012 run for State Senate. If the case goes to trial it will not take place until after the November general election so Newton could be elected to the State House with charges pending.
Sharkey supported a bill approved by the Connecticut Legislature that prohibits Newton’s participation in the state’s public financing program.
Newton and Baker seek the seat being vacated by a retiring Don Clemons. Connecticut’s 124th State House District covers the East End and portion of the East Side.
As I have stated previously, I am not an Ernie Newton supporter, however I must agree with him on his point. If a politician runs on a platform of giving the average Bridgeport homeowner a $600 property tax refund, is then elected and then fails to issue even a $10 refund; hasn’t the elected official betrayed his constituents’ trust? If a politician proves his/her word means absolutely nothing, why should the electorate support and vote for that politician again? Betraying the public trust is more than just a financial betrayal, it should also include the commitments made by a candidate seeking the support of others on the campaign trail. Once again, this is just my opinion.
Maria Pereira, so who are talking about and give us a list of all the things they betrayed.
Ron, my message is in regards to every and any politician who fails to keep their campaign promises. As far as local elected officials, this would apply to Mayor Finch, Andre Baker, Dave Hennessy etc. We have a current council member who knocked on doors in their district and told voters they should not vote for Bonney and Blunt because they were city employees and were serving on the City Council in violation of the City Charter. Once they were elected, at their very first city council meeting they voted to elect Tom McCarthy, a high-level city employee, to be the City Council President. Does this person deserve to be re-elected again? In my opinion the answer is an absolute no.
Yeah, like an elected group that promised to provide our children with an education but continually resist groups, agencies and organizations that come to town to provide that education.
When did Baker promise us a $600 property tax refund?
SPY, are you completely unaware Baker, Hennessey and Gardner ran on a platform supporting true public education and in opposition to charter schools and privatization? The three charter school proponents/supporters went down in flames in the Democratic primary. Can you cite where I stated “Baker” promised a $600.00 property tax refund? I never said that.
I am aware Baker ran on a platform supporting true public education. I am unaware he chose how to fulfill that commitment before being aware of all the options. Ohhh, that is right. He didn’t. By choosing charter schools over the BOE history of failure, he did support true public education by providing a true educational opportunity to the students. You see, in the statement ‘supporting true public education,’ you are obsessed with the public part. I can understand that, you being a former executive of a 2+ billion dollar private corporation that profited on the backs of our students and a teacher. I am more concerned with the education part, me being a parent of a BPS school student.
SPY, when you compare all the state charter schools located in Bridgeport vs. all the magnet public schools, the data clearly proves every single magnet school outperforms every single charter school. They are able to do this while serving the exact same number of students who qualify for free/reduced-price lunch as the traditional BPS. Every single charter school in Bridgeport underserves this exact same demographic by up to 23% when compared to the traditional BPS. Charter schools must be compared to magnet schools because both conduct lotteries to gain entry. You cannot simply walk into the main office and enroll your child, unlike traditional public schools.
In your opening post on this topic you state, ‘If a politician runs on a platform of giving the average Bridgeport homeowner a $600 property tax refund, is then elected and then fails to issue even a $10 refund; hasn’t the elected official betrayed his constituents’ trust?’ So that statement does not apply to Baker and we could leave it out. If we left out all the statements that do not apply to Baker, your opening statement would read ‘I agree with Ernie. This is just my opinion.’ Is that about right?
SPY, I believe I made it clear I supported Ernie Newton’s point of view on this matter, not Ernie Newton. Can you explain how I profited on the backs of “students and teachers” by working for Scholastic Book Fairs? A five-year-old purchases Scholastic Book Fairs books with their parents’ money, not theirs. Unless of course a 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 etc. year-old is allowed to be gainfully employed in CT. Teachers are usually adults who earn an income, therefore if they choose to buy a book at the book fair, which in turn raises money for the school, what is the problem with that? If a child, parent or teacher purchased a book at Barnes & Noble, is that more acceptable? They are also a for-profit company.
There is a big difference. Scholastic is in the schools. Parents are pressured to give their kids money. It is the same reason they put the candy near the checkout in the grocery. Why not let McDonalds put their new health meals into the schools? It would be a way to get kids to eat veggies. Parents have to choose to bring the kids to B&N. The parents can monitor what the kids buy. A parent gives the kid $5 for a book and the kid buys toys at the book fair. How is that good? If you cannot see the point I am making, further explanation is futile.
It is the parent organizations and librarians that ask Scholastic Book Fairs to schedule a book fair in their school. Who is pressuring parents to give their kids money? Are you honestly trying to compare the selling of books to selling candy or McDonalds to children? If a parent doesn’t want their child to attend the book fair then all they have to do is notify the administration. A parent can also attend the book fair with their child. Over 80% of CT book fairs are held during report card conferences, back-to-school nights, holiday gatherings etc. In other words they are held during parent events. Any school can set a policy a child must purchase a book first and can only use the remaining change to purchase an eraser, pencil, etc. We set that policy at Cesar Batalla when I volunteered on several of their book fairs. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Ron,
I believe what Maria is saying is if she helps you in an election and you win you owe her every vote she wants. If you say you are against something and the underlying facts, circumstances or assumptions change, if improvements to a proposal change, you still owe her your vote. The only change that would be acceptable to her would be if her mind changes which would then require you to change your vote.
Bob Walsh, now I understand.
Bob, you absolutely do not speak for me and you are out of line for doing so. Once again, take me out of the equation. I was speaking in regards to any registered voter, not myself exclusively. If you vote for a presidential candidate because he runs on a platform claiming he/she will close loopholes for the wealthy and that is one of the issues dearest to you, then he/she becomes elected and decides to support legislation to expand loopholes for the wealthy, does he/she deserve your vote in his/her next election? This elected official betrayed every voter who voted for him/her based on his commitment to close loopholes on the wealthy. I believe that to be a reasonable and sound argument.
Maria Pereira, once again who are you talking about and give us a list of all the things they betrayed? President Obama DIDN’T keep his word about a lot of things that were very important to me but I still voted for him for his reelection because there is a bigger picture because Mitt would have made things worse but it seems like with you it’s ALL or NOTHING, time will tell.
Ron, you have every right to vote for whomever you choose to vote for. However, people vote for a particular candidate for a variety reasons. I am a voter who believes in holding politicians accountable for the promises they make to supporters and potential voters on the campaign trail. If they fail to keep their commitments once elected, I will hold them accountable at the polls and encourage my neighbors, family and friends to do the same. I believe I previously responded to your question on the “all or nothing” position so I will not spend time responding yet again.
Maria Pereira, wow, I don’t mean any disrespect but wow, that’s a very weak reason but that’s YOUR reason you are entitled to but …
Ron, you find holding politicians accountable to their campaign promises “weak” reasoning in whether a voter should vote for a candidate or not. I find it to be very sound reasoning. I would consider a “weak” reason to vote for a candidate to be they have a nice smile or dress well. I will no longer support or vote for a candidate based on what they say on the campaign trail. I will base my vote on their actions.
Maria Pereira, let me tell you a short story. I was in a meeting with Mayor Ganim, Donald Day and myself because we were having some problems but the point I want to make is Joe said look, we might be dealing with five issues but we agree on three of them let’s not become enemies if we don’t agree on the other two issues because we are ahead of the game and let’s take time to work on one of the two other issues to see if we can work that out. Maria, you’re not going to get everything you want from someone you support, what you should do to get 100% of what you want is for you to run for that office and you call the shots.
Bob, you are right on the money. I know first-hand the vengeance of Maria. I said one word out of line and she began a campaign against my wife and Ann Barney that is now being investigated by the secretary of the state. Btw, my wife and Ann lost.
I didn’t campaign against anyone. I campaigned on behalf of the six candidates I chose to support. I didn’t make one negative or derogatory comment against your wife or dear friend. I worked in front of Thomas Hooker for 14 hours and asked voters to vote for the candidates I supported. If anyone asked me about the other candidates, I simply stated I was not supporting them and spent my time explaining why they should vote for the six candidates I chose to support. You chose to make a derogatory comment about me and someone I care deeply about on this blog while I was going door to door in 16-17 degree weather to circulate petitions to help your wife and your dear friend qualify onto the ballot. I wasn’t a candidate and I have never been paid to work on a campaign. I was asked to help and I did so. In addition, I raised more money for that slate than any of the candidates themselves, including a $500 contribution I personally made. I contacted you about your disparaging comment and left a message with your wife so we could discuss the matter and you never even gave me the courtesy of a return phone call. In the end, you have every right to make any comments you make and I have the right to support or not support any candidate of my choice. After all, we live in the United States of America where freedom reigns and democracy is the foundation of our country.
Bfd!
Bob, why do you repeatedly try to portray I am the only individual who supported his BBOE candidacy who is no longer supporting Andre? The reality is I honestly do not know of a single volunteer who really worked on his previous campaign who still supports him. I have repeatedly asked you to list those who are still actively supporting him and you have never responded to the question. Whether you want to accept it or not, many people have turned their backs on him, not just me.
It would seem most of the people who bothered to comment have turned toward him. It seems like a lose one gain a dozen situation but you couldn’t vote for him anyway so you don’t count.
SPY, I don’t believe any of those who have expressed support of Andre Baker are able to cast a vote for his primary in August. Unless of course you live in his senatorial district.
Hey Lennie–happy birthday to you!
Maria, you are an out-and-out liar. You stood at the polls with the committee campaign literature with my wife and Ann Barney’s name and photo blocked out. You used that literature to try to beat my wife and Ann. Maria you act like the most picked-on person in Bridgeport politics.
You also made telephone calls to people with absentee ballots and told them not to vote for Pat and Ann and we have that documented.
Maria, I made a comment on the blog about you and Carmen Lopez. Maria, you never, never called me to discuss what was so bad on the blog.
You know what is so sad? You could have come out of this a political powerhouse instead of how you ended up.
Maria, please don’t wave the flag in my face. I served my country for six years and I served my community for 40. You have all these rights but there are still laws that need to be obeyed and you need to know that. Maria, I have no plans to keep up a running battle with you on the blog, so Good Bye.
The one thing I am definitely not is a liar. Anyone who really knows me will tell you I say what I mean and I mean what I say. I don’t run behind people’s backs when I disagree with them, I tell them directly. I will state it again, I NEVER made a disparaging remark about either your wife or your dear friend while door knocking, phone banking or at at the polls on election day. I suggest you take a look in the mirror. I also suggest you check the absentee ballot results for Thomas Hooker. Your wife and your dear friend received more AB votes than every other candidate except two. The day I received a call about your comment on OIB, I called your home and spoke with your wife. I explained I was looking at the blog and discussed your comment with her. I explained I wanted to speak with you about it and she informed me you could not come to the phone because you were cooking. I said that was fine but I still wanted to speak with you. I never received a return phone call from you. Thank you for serving our country but you were paid to serve this community for 40 years and received a comfortable pension for your service. Please don’t act as if you did it out of the goodness of your heart and volunteered your time for 40 years.
Maria, you can tell all the fibs you want, you can say you called my house about my blog comments but what you say is all BS.
Now you are right, I was compensated for 23 years at a time the city was being burnt down and firefighters shot at. Am I looking for accolades and such? NO, just a statement. The other years were for community service and running and financing a baseball team.
You see Maria, you are just a small insecure person looking for a friend. I can tell you that wont happen on this blog, people know you.
My wife would not have said that, she would have said I was cooking and then called me to the telephone. Read my other blog, we have the absentee ballot telephone calls you made documented. I am done with you, I have other things to do better than arguing with a wannabe.
Andy–What ever became of your election complaint?
It was reviewed by the Secretary of the State’s Office and was put on the schedule to be investigated. I don’t know how far along it is but it’s there.
Andy, I absolutely and unequivocally called your house and spoke with your wife regarding your comment on the blog. Either you were not informed I called or it is you who is telling “fibs.” If I am a “small, insecure person,” what does that make you? I could care less what absentee ballot telephone calls you have documented, the certified AB results speak for themselves. There were 18 candidates for Democratic town committee and your dear friend and wife placed third and fourth in the AB count for Thomas Hooker.
NFG.
Maria,
I love how you constantly refer to me as Andy’s Dear Friend. I have a name, you know it, use it! It is Ann Barney!
I am his dear friend. I don’t believe for one second you called him.
You claim to mean what you say, you claim to be direct and not talk behind people’s backs.
What a farce.
You slandered me. I called you and addressed the situation via phone with you. I had not even read the blog or known about Andy’s comments. My phone and email started blowing up from people telling me you were campaigning against me. So I called you.
You never contacted me, yet held me responsible for another adult’s right to free speech.
You recruited me to run, you interviewed and vetted candidates, you put together the slate with the help of others. You worked hard for the slate. Then your ego was bruised, you put yourself first and campaigned very hard against Pat and I.
Your selfishness is obvious. The 138th could have easily won all nine seats. But your needs came before those of the rest of the district. And we only took six seats. I give you credit where credit is due. You worked hard and successfully to make sure Pat and I were not elected. So be it.
But in the meantime let it be known the Secretary of the State’s office and the Election Commissions think there were enough violations of election laws to launch an investigation of your actions.
So your so-called victory of preventing Pat and I a seat on the DTC is very tainted by your own actions.
There are no perfect candidates. There are no perfect incumbents. There are no perfect people. Compromise is mandatory in office and in life in general. No compromise, no progress, no solutions, no relationships no nothing. Something or someone always has to give. Idealism is a wonderful thing, but it cannot stand alone. Action requires well thought-out strategies that take into account the best for the most. That’s the lay of the land and it always will be, no matter how much anyone hates it. Always.
Political change requires action and “action requires well thought-out strategies that take into account the best for the most.”–Mustang Sally
Yes! And that ain’t what we’re getting with the Finch follies.
Newton’s reasoning makes no sense. Sharkey was against the government reform bill. Sharkey made a speech supporting Baker. By induction that would make Baker against the government reform bill. That is a stretch for induction logic. From Baker’s history we can see at times he supported issues that were backed by mayor Finch. At times he opposed issues Finch supported. Baker has shown himself to be a person who votes his conscience. He remembers he works for the people of BPT and votes for the option he believes will best fulfill that obligation. Like any mortal he is not always correct but he has shown he does not vote a party line, whether that line is DTC, WFP or CEA. He is the kind of politician these groups would refer to as a ‘wild card.’ The only line he votes is BPT.
SPY, please share all the votes Mr. Baker has taken in opposition to issues Mayor Finch supports as it relates to the BBOE. By the way, there is no such thing as a “CEA” party line.
Baker was a frequent Finch critic when he served on the City Council. Baker ran against the machine Dems in the election. Democrats Dave Hennessey and Andre Baker, who opposed the leadership of superintendent Paul Vallas and Mayor Bill Finch. Councilman Andre Baker Jr. cast the lone vote against the new deal for the Vibes concert, citing a lack of financial data.
I know not all those things are BBOE issues but you could hardly believe he opposed Finch in the city council but crawled into his pocket while a member of the BOE. Why would he? Finch saw to NOT get him elected to the BBOE.
SPY, you haven’t listed a single BBOE vote in which Andre Baker voted against an initiative Mayor Finch supported. I absolutely do believe he “crawled into his pocket while a member of the BOE.” You asked “why would he?” Well one only has to look at who asked him to run for senator, who is working for him and who is supporting his fundraising efforts. Mayor Finch and his henchmen, that’s who.
Then why is Newton the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate? That makes no sense. DTC supports Finch and Newton and Finch supports Baker. Wouldn’t it make the DTC mad if their guy supported another guy? I don’t believe your theory.
SPY, you are clearly unaware there is significant division in the DTC. Only the town committee members who reside in that senatorial district get to vote for the endorsed candidate, not every member of the DTC. It is not a theory. Finch only controls one vote on the East End and one JFK vote. Finch is completely and utterly against Newton.
Good point, BOE SPY. On another note, Maria P used to have more credibility in my opinion but after seeing some of her tirades and rants I got turned off. Presentation matters. It’s like have Chilean sea bass on a paper plate with flies swarming all around. Presentation matters, and even if she brings up good arguments, I can’t get past her presentation these days–too many rants. too much me talk, too much “I did this and that” and too much anger.
On that note, the name ‘Chilean sea bass’ itself is presentation. The real name of the fish is Patagonian toothfish. They made up the trade name Chilean sea bass so people would eat it.
So are you saying Maria P is an alias?
BptPorter, I take a position on an issue after I have done homework and research and not in a vacuum. My decisions are well informed and well reasoned. I do not “rant” and I honestly don’t recall attempting to brag about what I have or haven’t done. Nevertheless, you are entitled to your opinion.
Sometimes the cure is worse than the illness. You bring up important issues Bridgeporters need to be aware of but you need better delivery. Instead of trying to prove you are right, why not just take this as constructive feedback? Allow yourself the flexibility to evolve and grow. Black and white thinking is good and it is good to uphold standards but you will not evolve and you will lose credibility and severe ties with people who could be allies. I am not saying you have to agree, but at least allow yourself 15 minutes to reflect on what I am saying.
BptPorter, I have absolutely no idea who you are. Why should I take advice from an individual who does not even disclose their identity? I did not ask you for your guidance, feedback or suggestions. As I have stated here previously, I seek the advice and guidance from those I trust and respect, not from an anonymous blogger. The reality is you could be Adam Wood, Andrew Nunn, Ruben Felipe, Tom Sherwood, Megan DeSombre etc. I choose to sever ties with people I cannot trust and whose word means absolutely nothing. I do not choose to be allies with people I cannot trust or betray that trust. If an individual makes a commitment or promise and then fails to keep that commitment, they have demonstrated to me their word means nothing, therefore they are not to be trusted. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
Ms. P, I am Adam Wood, Andrew Nunn, Ruben Felipe, Tom Sherwood AND Megan DeSombre. I am all of the above. I am anyone you want me to be. I am you and I am me. I am who am, and I am Sam I am.
I must assume Maria has never voted for an incumbent except herself.
Bob, not surprisingly, your comment has no basis in fact. I have never been an incumbent in an election, therefore I could not cast a vote for myself as an incumbent. And although I am in no way obligated to respond to your flippant remark, I have voted for incumbents in local, statewide and national elections. I have also voted Democratic, Republican and independent.
Please Maria, a list of all these incumbents who have never changed their minds on a topic, altered their stance on an issue or spoke half-truths in their deceptive campaign practices.
Maria and Carmen were gung-ho to support HB-5724 until the grandfather clause was added, saying current city employees could retain their council seats until they were voted out of office. The clause was the only way Hennessy could get legislative support for the bill. Once that clause/compromise was written, the support was withdrawn by Maria and Carmen, with many legislators they had lobbied copied on the email withdrawing their support. I left my phone at home for a few hours one July 4 and had a couple of missed calls on my cell phone from Maria, with no message from her. I assumed pocket dials in error, until a mutual friend sent me texts informing me Maria had called him very irate and told him to tell me she was never speaking to me again because I was avoiding her calls. Absolutely no compromise and assuming the worst about someone has been my experience.
Ms. Buchanan, I went to Hartford to personally testify on behalf of Jack Hennessy’s HB-5724. I did not agree with the amendment but I neither spoke nor emailed Jack Hennessy or any other legislator regarding withdrawal of my support of HB-5724. I never lobbied a specific legislator regarding the bill and I never emailed a single legislator notifying them of my withdrawal of support. My decision to not interact with you had nothing to do with you not taking my calls. It had everything to do with you making inaccurate and uninformed comments about me. This comment just serves to prove my decision was a sound one. Since you have publicly claimed I emailed legislators withdrawing my support of HB-5724 due to a proposed amendment, it should be easy enough for you to post the email on this blog. I assure you, you will not be able to do so. This should be good. Please post the email.
Dear Jennifer,
As you know from our meeting this morning, I am at the State Capitol today.
I had an opportunity to ask Rep. Hennessy if there was any truth to the rumor that a deal had been reached with the machine and the labor unions.
He confirmed that a “compromise” had been reached.
Under the compromise, the 6 members of the current city council who are city employees will be exempt from the legislation, and will be eligible to run for re-election to their council seats for as long as the machine wants them.
As I said to you this morning, this is unacceptable to me.
All that this does is sanction conflict of interest for 6 people.
On what basis does the General Assembly decide to treat these 6 people differently from any other City employee in the City of Bridgeport?
This is nothing more than a face-saving device for Mayor Finch and the Machine.
Our legislators undoubtedly led by Rep. Groggins, will claim to have done something significant, but will have changed absolutely nothing.
They will all claim victory and once again, we the people will be the losers, as they pat each other on the back.
This is politics at its worst, and I withdraw my support from this legislation.
I would rather have the issue, than this sell-out.
Maria Pereira has authorized me to advise you that she joins me in this position.
Thank-you,
Carmen L. Lopez
Ms. Buchanan, this email was only sent to you and I. You wrote “once the clause/compromise was written, the support was withdrawn by Maria and Carmen, with many legislators they had lobbied copied on the email withdrawing their support.” Where is the email that was sent to “many legislators?” I am still awaiting the email that supports your claims. Please post it. You can’t find such an email, can you? It does not exist.
Ms. Buchanan, interestingly enough you did not post your response upon receipt of the email you posted. You wrote “Hello … Maria, I understand and appreciate your thoughts and feelings. I have such great respect for both of you–from your very public reputations to stand up and fight for what is right, and after spending time with both of you, I am even more impressed. I of course am at your service in the future if you should ever need a worker bee to help you with anything–I do hope we stay in touch. Best, Jennifer.” Where were your concerns about reaching a compromise bill in your response? It didn’t exist, did it. You are clearly a deceitful and insincere individual who just demonstrated a complete lack of credibility and integrity.
Ms. Buchanan, by the way your hero Dave Walker was opposed to the amendment as well. I await the email that can substantiate your assertions. I assure you, I will be waiting a lifetime.
Ms. Buchanan, you also failed to share with everyone that Jack Hennessy himself withdrew his amendment to HB-5724. You are concerned about my withdrawal from the bill because of the amendment yet you do not say a word about the legislator who introduced HB-5724 withdrawing his own amendment. Dave Walker, your dear friend, was also opposed to the amendment and you think it is appropriate to focus on my withdrawal? Please, get off your soapbox.
It must be exhausting being you.
Ms. Buchanan, the work I do is exhausting. Unlike many of the residents of Bridgeport, I don’t just complain about the problems in the city I love, I get up off my sofa and do something about it. Now back to the subject at hand, are you able to post the email you claim I sent to “many legislators” withdrawing my support of HB-5724? You have asserted I have and all I am asking you to do is to provide the email that supports your claim. It is a simple yes or no question. If you choose not to answer the question, that will in itself be the answer.
Ms. Buchanan, it has been almost 24 hours since I requested you post the email I sent to “many legislators” withdrawing my support of HB-5724. It has also been almost 12 hours since I asked you if you have the email in question. It is a very simple yes or no question you are choosing not to answer. I understand, you must feel quite embarrassed and you have chosen to be silent in the hopes it will all go away.
Let me try this, Lennie! Today’s topic is:
onlyinbridgeport.com/wordpress/newton-claims-sharkey-talks-out-of-both-sides-of-mouth-when-it-comes-to-public-trust/
Well Joe, nobody liked the topic and quite frankly I am tired of Newton and his crew. There are more pressing issues in Bpt than Ernie Newton. The topic sucked.
Too bad HB-5724 in some form didn’t pass. Can we do something about that? I hope so.
In 2013, I worked as a volunteer to pass a bill on banning indoor tanning for teens based on overwhelming evidence, much of it generated by Yale medical researchers, some of whom were my professors and colleagues there.
We had to accept a compromise or else the bill would have died and … not been permitted to be brought back to committee the following year.
The ban is now law. It’s a ban on indoor tanning for under age 17 instead of, as we’d hoped, under age 18. Since, the FDA has issued a regulation requiring black-box warnings to be put on all commercial tanning beds. Building with an in-state and national coalition, we’re going for under age 18 soon. If it were up to me, the ban would be even more far-reaching; but I’m not able to dictate such.
Had we turned away completely at the 11th hour, the effect would have been to kill the ban legislation for making it to law. How do I know? The bill’s sponsors assured us of this … and it was near the end of the session.
Whether a citizen activist is for or against a “grandfathering” amendment for HB-5724, it seems counterproductive to just walk away from HB-5724 because it has or doesn’t have grandfathering.
I’m for the first time reading this missive by Carmen Lopez, for herself and Maria P., regarding their position on that bill. Fair enough. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion.
Beyond that, as we know, the bill, w/grandfathering, passed the lower chamber of the statehouse. HB-5724 was then blocked from getting to the state senate floor for a vote by State Senators Musto and Ayala.
To me, the issue is this: How do we come together and elect state senators who will get the bill to the senate for a vote? Climb the wall one handhold at a time … or you may fall back to where you started and be worse off.
You know Pete, this is how SOME people look at the grandfather clause. Although not perfect, if it had passed then FORMER council members Warren Blunt and Richard Bonney would be banned from beeing on the council as long as they remain city employees.
However since the bill was not passed, they can run again next year and be elected again which would not be allowed if the grandfather clause had been adopted.
So much for righteous principles.
Bob, here is a copy of your written testimony regarding HB-5724. It was also featured in this OIB story. Where does your own testimony indicate you are in support of a compromise or “grandfather clause?” The testimony is quite emphatic that the Charter should be adhered to in its entirety.
onlyinbridgeport.com/wordpress/troll-votes-bought-and-sold-on-the-city-council/