In a letter to Connecticut House Speaker Brendan Sharkey, David Walker, the former U.S. comptroller general, implores him to support the government reform bill that would enforce the City Charter prohibiting city employees from serving on the City Council. Walker issued the letter prior to the bill’s co-sponsor State Rep. Jack Hennessy adding a grandfather provision for the five current City Council members on the city payroll, an effort to build support for the bill. Hennessy says he believes there’s enough support in the State House if put to a full vote. Letter from Walker to Sharkey:
Dear Mr. Speaker:
I am writing you on a matter of great importance to the State of Connecticut and the City of Bridgeport. I moved to Bridgeport, CT from Mt. Vernon, VA over three years ago to found the Comeback America Initiative (CAI). CAI is a non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization that promotes fiscal responsibility and sustainability at the federal, state and local levels of government. As a political independent and former U.S. Comptroller General (1998-2008), I am widely viewed as one of the nation’s leading independent experts in the areas of government finance and transformation.
After living in Bridgeport, CT for three years, and conducting a significant amount of due diligence, it has become clear that it is “ground zero” of fiscal irresponsibility in America. I have also discovered that the State of Connecticut has the highest liabilities and unfunded promises per taxpayer of any state in the union.
One of the primary reasons that Bridgeport is in such poor financial condition is due to the serious conflicts of interest that exist in its governance structure. Specifically, because of a loophole in a state law that was passed in the 1990s, five of our twenty City Council members, including the President of the Council, are City employees. This is a direct violation of the City Charter that was ratified by the citizens of Bridgeport in the 1980s. It also is in direct conflict with basic good governance principles and the concept of “home rule.” Furthermore, I have seen first hand that these people, especially the Council President, do not recuse themselves on issues where they have a clear conflict of interest.
As you know, Representatives Jack Hennessy (D) and Auden Grogins (D) have introduced HB 5724 as a means to right this wrong. It has been reported out of the Planning and Development Committee and has cleared the Steering Committee. It is my understanding that it is on your desk and ready to be called for a vote of the full House.
I was recently surprised to hear that, even though this bill relates to a number of Cities and Towns in the state, you have allegedly said that you will not allow a vote unless a majority of the Bridgeport delegation supports it. Candidly, a majority of the current Bridgeport delegation is part of the political machine that is killing the City. In addition, it appears that they lack the ability, integrity and courage to do the right thing for the City and the citizens of Bridgeport and Connecticut.
As a nationally recognized expert on government finances and transformation, I can assure you that failure to address this issue will eventually result in either a state bailout of Bridgeport, or more likely, a bankruptcy filing by the City of Bridgeport. Neither would be in the interest of the state and its citizens and you can help make sure that neither happens.
I hear good things about you and hope to have the opportunity to meet with you at some point in the future. In the interim, I hope that you have the ability, integrity and courage to support HB 5724 and allow a vote on it this session.
Thank you, David Walker … well said and well done!!!
Sharkey is a believer in regionalization as a method of making government more responsive. If the City Council in Bridgeport is allowed to operated as it has for too long, no one in this region will look to partner or venture with our political leaders. What legislators would not countenance in their own communities what they are visiting on the population of Bridgeport, against their own Charter language, out of some twisted sense of ‘courtesy,’ political variety. What a waste of human energy and taxpayer money. Time will tell.
Interpretation, please.
No extra credit here. I’m stumped.
Taking control from the citizens of the city or town and centralizing it by county government or by state government. All laws will be passed and decisions made by a county or state elected official, it’s like what they have in Russia.
Jim, Regionalization is something Sharkey has featured and supported. Rep Grogins has brought that message to Bridgeport audiences. On one level it may make some sense in creating greater efficiencies in a region for common purchases, water or sewage handling, some educational and social services, etc. but they must be studied first and well monitored after.
What I said above was Bridgeport, because of the way public decisions come to be made and funds applied in unknown manner and without checks and balance, is an unlikely partner for such “Sharkey regionalization.” Bridgeport will need to clean up its act to be responsible to citizens or be an attractive partner for regional pacts.
And since Jim L mentioned Russia, laws passed in Hartford or US trump those of our own elected officials here in Bridgeport! Isn’t that the takeaway for a Charter Review commission from the 1980s that said City Council members cannot be City employees? But a State Law has been interpreted to exempt the situation in Bridgeport (because of a drafting loophole that is silent when there is no Board of Finance in a community) so the Bridgeport DTC has centralized Bridgeport decision making and is not accountable to the people, “like what they have in Russia.” Isn’t that what you forgot to say, Jim? Time will tell.
I still have hope for this City.
As do I, but not with the current administration and the current methods of operation.
Stop blaming the victim. Congress is “ground zero” for fiscal irresponsibility in America. Bridgeport is a direct result of that process, while Congress has become the epicenter of debt-based despair. It is unwise to expect Bridgeport taxes to go anywhere but UP as long as Federal spending continues to rise.
Local Eyes,
You obviously don’t know much about government finances. There is no connection between higher federal spending and higher Bridgeport taxes. If there were, it would likely be the opposite of what you said. The federal government, State of Connecticut, and the City of Bridgeport have all been fiscally irresponsible. All levels of government need to take steps to put their finances in order.
Remember, Republican President George W Bush approved EVERY spending bill that came before him, he NEVER vetoed one spending bill.
Ron,
I do remember Bush (43). He was one of the most fiscally irresponsible Presidents in our history. I have said so many times for many years. Bush (41) and Clinton were fiscally responsible Presidents. Bush (43) was not and so far Obama has not been either. We have tripled the national debt in the past 12 1/2 years!!! That’s a fact.
Two wars unpaid for, opening the vault to the medical industry on prescription with no control, financial institution bailed out, poor housing loans, bailing out companies “too big to fail,” I will just use those few for a start.
Ron,
Right. Don’t forget about debt-financed tax cuts.
That’s what I like about this blog: we’re allowed to pontificate here.
I’m a self-styled expert on the direct relationship between higher federal spending and higher municipal taxes. It’s a national trend, not a Bridgeport trend. Congress is holding Bridgeport taxpayers hostage by its spending habits. It is unwise to expect Bridgeport taxes to remain stable while Federal spending climbs.
Here’s what happened: the debt has “rolled over”–what was once an advantage is now a disadvantage.
*** BILL HB-5724 SHOULD BE AN OPEN AND SHUT “SUPPORT VOTE” FOR ALL THE BPT STATE LEGISLATORS, NO? *** THERE IS NO “I” IN THE WORD “TEAM!” ***