From Brian Lockhart, CT Post:
Ganim held his first substantive post-win news conference late Friday morning at his campaign headquarters on Hudson St.
He fielded questions from local and out-of-town media about the transition (in a one-page letter to Finch he asked his predecessor to essentially halt all significant decision-making ahead of the Dec. 1 transition), immediate priorities for his administration (understanding the budget and trying to address public safety issues), and the people he may surround himself with in City Hall (Ganim did not rule out rewarding some campaign loyalists with jobs).
“There will be (staff) cuts,” Ganim said. “I don’t think we have the luxury of spending as much as we’re spending now. … You’ll have less people when we’re done with our transition (but) at the same time we’re not going to compromise on the ability to be responsive as an administration and deliver on basic services.”
Full story here.
Thank you Joe, for talking to the media. I have been waiting for the forward-looking agenda patiently.
Can we take one TAXPAYER JEOPARDY category today? That would be MONEY for $200. I assume you will have access to the CAFR 2015 that is in preparation. With a change of administration would you like to review the more than 20 simple errors from last year’s CAFR so they do not happen again?
MONEY for $400 would raise the specter of the Single State and Federal Audit reports that accompany the CAFR. Will you shed light on their results as they provide a WATCHDOG view of the more than $350 Million we get from City and Feds annually but are not on the City website for people to see the weaknesses and deficiencies covered?
MONEY for $600 takes us to the Capital budget, such as anyone gets to see it today. Will you make the information about each and every Capital project approved and funded in the past five years available to the public and show the balances and variances involved?
MONEY for $800 goes to question of why the Charter-authorized Annual Capital Budget Hearing hasn’t been held in years. Perhaps if you re-established this activity and people came out to provide their “solicited” opinions and they felt listened to, the City might get better faster.
MONEY for $1,000 goes to the question of why very oppressed taxpayers in this City are providing “supportive service” funds in as many areas as we are officially and unofficially.
It was fun creating the questions and the categories. Will you in due course help break the silence and secrecy about MONEY and share it with frustrated taxpayers? Will your financial team be ready to certify the accuracy of the statements in next year’s budget, or at least give proof they read the material they signed? Sorry, that’s another category called BUDGETS. For another day. Time will tell.
My hope is Ganim is not tugged by people like Himes and Malloy to put their lackeys into city jobs.
We need more cops on the streets and the only way to get more quickly is to lure them away from the places that lured them away from here.
Finch whittled the benefits and made city workers pay more for less while he handed out six-figure jobs to buddies.
Streamline the waste money from city hall by putting qualified people in the jobs and cut the excess and make money available to make the streets safer. Sacking Gaudett is a good first move but there are many proper moves to be made.
Two words. Wilbur Chapman. That’s it. Talk about a big step backwards. Hope he can find his way to Bridgeport. He seemed to have a problem with that the last time he was here.
Chapman is helping with the transition, he is not going to be chief of police, but then again you needed something to bitch about as usual.
Frank,
Would you want Chapman back? Can you point to three positive initiatives Chapman undertook with the BPD?
I can’t name one but he’s just handling transition and then he is off to wherever he’s been.
Mayor Ganim is correct that safety/security and the budget/fiscal responsibility need to be top priorities. He also needs to focus on improving the transparency, accountability and integrity of City Government, addressing existing conflicts of interest (e.g., City Council President, City Attorney), streamline and upgrade the City’s workforce. Given his past, he should also ban the City’s practice of having recommended contractors and he should not be involved directly in major development contract negotiations.
Dave, I agree with you. I supported Joe Ganim for what I feel were the right reasons. My frame of reference was my involvement with five administrations, two Republicans and three Democrats. I held public office with all of them serving in the position of Council President with Tom Bucci and Joe Ganim. I still maintain Joe Ganim was a good Mayor, and if not for being distracted he would have moved on to higher office because of his inherent abilities. He’s facing the challenge of his life right now, and I’m no different than anyone else, I’m hoping for the best. I’m not part of his inner circle, nor do I want to be, however I want to see Bridgeport improve, and it’s not going to happen overnight despite Joe’s good intentions. I hope to see a forensic audit of the City’s books, I hope to see the conflicts on the City Council resolved, and I hope to see safety issues handled immediately. I don’t expect the Mayor to backtrack on his commitments; I along with many volunteers worked very hard because of our love for this City and our belief in Joe. Let’s stay positive.