New Haven Independent

The Association issued its letter as word filtered through Branford yesterday that a special meeting sought by ten Republican RTM members would not be held because James Bruno, the moderator of the RTM, failed to post the call for the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to review the lease. It is not clear if Bruno’s action violates the town charter. Bruno is a loyal soldier for First Selectwoman Cheryl Morris and town attorney, Ed Marcus.

“It’s a sad day for Branford and exemplifies what is wrong with our present town government — bossism and fear trumps the rule of law,” said Frank Twohill, one of the ten RTM members who signed the letter. He is also an attorney.

Kurt Schwanfelder, the Republican minority leader, said he fielded “hundreds of calls” yesterday and during our five- minute interview at least eight callers phoned him. “The Morris administration is determined to enter into the new lease without the proper and lawful review by the RTM —the elected representatives of Branford’s residents,” he declared.

The RTM consists of 30 elected representatives from Branford’s five districts. Schwanfelder said that “Morris’s blatant disregard for upholding the duties of her office tramples on the rights of our fellow citizens to an open government process and usurps the power of Branford’s legislative body.” RTM member Jim Walker, who lives in Stony Creek, said there may well be legal action brought against the town. Peter Brainerd, the president of the Stony Creek Association, said in an interview that the organization would provide up to $2,000 if needed toward legal fees.

Brainerd, who signed the letter, addressed the efforts to preserve the Quarry as well as the threat the new lease presents to its existence.

“The Stony Creek Quarry, as you are aware, is both a geological marvel and an historic landmark, but it also is an intrinsic and cherished component of the history of the village of Stony Creek. Its acquisition, with the associated open space acreage, was one of the Town’s great achievements in ensuring the preservation of an important historic site for future generations, but never was undertaken with the premise that the quarry necessarily must serve as a revenue source for the town.

“The possible expansion of quarry operations, to include the importation of an unspecified amount of material for an unspecified purpose, presents a major threat to the expectation that the quarry would be preserved as an important and treasured source for dimensional stone, and also for the quality of life of Stony Creek residents.”

“Quarry Road, built across a marsh, is inadequate for what we presume would be a significant increase in heavy truck traffic, as is Leetes Island Road, particularly in the section that passes through the village of Stony Creek,” the letter said.

Ed Marcus and his wife, Jill, should have a sense of these conditions as well as the history of the area. He has lived in Stony Creek for many years.

The letter, the first to reflect the voice of Stony creek residents, asks the RTM “to take immediate action to consider both the propriety of the 2-1 (Board of Selectmen) approval and the altered language of the lease.” Brainerd also said that the ‘deliberate avoidance” of RTM review “violates the due process required for such agreements by the Town Charter.”

This is a reference to section 73.3 of the Town Code. It says that land deals like the lease just signed must have the approval of the RTM.

But Shelley Marcus, a town counsel, doesn’t agree. She argues that the special Sept. 12th RTM meeting sought by the ten Republicans was not permissible based on jurisdiction. It is her legal opinion, though not the opinion of other lawyers, that the RTM does not have the right to review the proposed new lease because it is not a lease: it is an “addendum” to a lease.
At the special Board of Selectmen meeting on August 29, Shelley Marcus noted that when a prior addendum to the same lease was signed in December 1999, it was not approved by the RTM, even though section 73.3 was in effect. While there are changes in payments and time frames, there were no new uses in the 1999 lease. Now there is a new corporation—as of August 3 — a new tenant and significant changes in how the quarry may be used.

The key issue in our humble journalistic opinion, is that Ms. Marcus and her father, Ed, have taken a huge legal leap because they have provided not one word of thought on the case law governing a call to post a special RTM meeting under the Town Charter. What Shelley Marcus seems to be saying is because we don’t think the RTM has the right to vote, the ten RTM members are not even entitled to hold a special meeting.Therefore, there will be no special meeting.

From where we sit there is no wiggle room in section 5C of the Town Charter.

Section 5C says that the Moderator of the RTM, Selectmen or ten members of the RTM may call a special meeting at any time. Ten members of the RTM did call for a meeting and delivered their letter to Bruno’s home on Labor Day. A copy was delivered to Marianne Kelly, the Branford Town Clerk, at her town hall office Tuesday, Sept. 5. If Bruno notified Kelly, her job was to notify all 30 RTM members of the time and place of the meeting. In addition, a copy of the notice must be published “in a newspaper having a circulation in the town, at least five days before such meeting.” The notice must specify the reason for the meeting.

Had the New Haven Register run the ad over the next five days, then the meeting would have been held Sept 12. But Bruno was apparently taking his marching orders from the Morris Administration. Shelley Marcus had provided Morris with a legal opinion that repeated her views at a public hearing: This was an “addendum” to a lease, and not a new lease, and consequently the RTM was not entitled to vote. Without Bruno’s action, Kelly did not move forward on her own to arrange for the Register to publish the legal notice. By day’s end on Sept 7, the newspaper had not been notified. That meant no ad, no five-day public notice, no meeting.

As we see it, the rules for Section 5 permit no discretion on the part of the Moderator, the town clerk, the town counsel or the First Selectwoman to disrupt the process of a call for a special RTM meeting. Long-term RTM members who know the procedure say that if the required 10 RTM signatures are delivered, then the next step is to call the meeting, whether the call for the special meeting is posted by Republicans or Democrats or, for that matter, twenty voting citizens, who also have that right under the Charter.

At the end of the day, Twohill said “everyone must involve themselves in this government as much as possible and lawfully fight for what is right. That’s all that we can do.” There is a regularly scheduled meeting of the RTM on Wednesday, September 13 and at that time Bruno will be required to read the letter sent by a unanimous vote of the directors of the Stony Creek Association.

The Republicans don’t rule out seeking a temporary restraining order to stop the implementation of the new lease. (FOI complaints have already been filed against Mrs. Morris regarding the agenda for the quarry meeting.) But they also don’t rule out that a group of Democrats who understand the ongoing dismantling of the governmental process will join them in whatever action they have planned, Walker said.
###

.