New Haven Independent

posted by: streever on September 14, 2010  6:33am

The part Sean hasn’t gotten back to is that I inquired about the Ethics commission and filing a complaint there. Yes, Sean did offer to talk to me on the telephone about Cathy Weber, and I declined. There is no need for a conversation about matters of transparency.

The Board needs to make it’s minutes publicly available and open to the citizens. The board needs to acknowledge why it denies certain citizens and not others, so that they may amend their appeals and return with an appeal that does serve the public interest and the needs of their neighborhood.

Flat denials of appeals cost citizens time, money, and hurt our cities appeal to small businesses and home owners.

Not making meeting minutes publicly available hurts our democracy and makes the BZA appear to be an even more secretive body than it currently seems to be.

Why the Mayor’s office is not willing to make meeting minutes publicly available and order the board to stop deciding votes outside of a public meeting is a real question that I think more people should be asking.

This board has power over the finances and day to day lives of real people in this city. Without some checks and balances, that power can be exercised to hurt some and help others in an arbitrary or unfair manner.

I’ve been trying to submit an ethics grievance but to date no one from city hall has sent me even so much as a phone # to call to do so.

If the Mayor and Sean are hell-bent on blocking citizens from filing ethics complaints, they should just dissolve the 2 (out of 3 person) board immediately. As it is, it publishes no agenda/minutes nor do they have a schedule of meetings listed.

posted by: streever on September 14, 2010  6:43am

My full complaint outlined here:
http://davidstreever.com/node/17

As citizens, we all have the right to demand transparency and openness from municipal bodies. Until these issues are addressed, I do not believe that the BZA is operating in compliance with city rules, which clearly state in sec. 185: “Said board shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of each member upon every question, or, if absent or failing to vote, indicating such fact; and also keep records of its examination and other official actions.”

As Sean Matteson knows, these minute meetings *must* be made available to the public. Even small towns such as Wallingford follow this requirement: http://www.town.wallingford.ct.us/MinutesAgendas/default.asp

While the Board does indeed record each meeting, they do not type minutes, nor do they have them available for the public.

Relevant city statute (sec: 185):
http://library6.municode.com/default-now/template.htm?view=browse&doc_action=setdoc&doc_keytype=tocid&doc_key=95cc2f85bc508b6caeb23562f0e98913&infobase=14668

posted by: The Public on September 14, 2010  7:57am

David, I understand your frustration, many New Haveners have been disgusted by the running of our city.  You are not alone.  But you are on the Board, however objectionable, and unlike me, can work from the inside.  We who are not on the zoning appeals board lose if you do not vote, do not attend, and do not note on our behalf the ridiculousness which goes on in City Hall masquerading as government.  The non-reaction of the mayor’s office and of Matteson is par for the outrageous course.
But logic predicts that if you were a non-transparent appointee using the position for your personal gain rather than as a responsibility to the public, the last thing you would want is an honest, public-minded Streever there to keep an eye on things and straighten out what’s wrong.  You are making them look bad by holding up a mirror, so of course they’re going to react.  Please react by asking for more attendees to help you with your watchdog role.  Do not leave the mice to play (as they have for so long now).  We need you there.

posted by: Swatty on September 14, 2010  8:11am

Run for Mayor Streever. People have said it before. You are wasting your time on the small picture. We need someone to change Board of Ed, Zoning, tax accessors, and many other depts from the top down.

posted by: Threefifths on September 14, 2010  8:17am

Hey dude what wrong.Crooked two party system again.Why are you crying now.I keep telling you.The crooked two party system will always sell you out.Boycott give me a break.Do this sit down and have a cheese sandwich and come back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oAsOowNbAw&feature=related

posted by: Darnell on September 14, 2010  8:37am

David,

I agree with The Public, sometimes it is tough to fight when you are alone, but they would like nothing better than for you to not be there.

Stay and fight the good fight, you can’t lose. I’ve appreciated the role you have played so far, and I for one hope that you continue until the tide turns in your favor.

posted by: angelo on September 14, 2010  8:46am

Even assuming that Streever’s facts are accurate (which is a stretch, since meetings are recorded and Streever does not deny that Matteson offered to meet), this is a childish way of dealing with the problem.  If the board won’t play by Streever’s rules, he is going to stay home.  Very mature.  The problem of the BZA is real and it needs to be addressed in an official forum.  We all understand that the NHI is Streever’s preferred forum ..., we need a real representative on the BZA.  Streever is not that person and he should resign.

posted by: streever on September 14, 2010  8:49am

The Public:
I agreed with you completely until last meeting—but after 2 years of trying to improve it from the inside & being met with insistence that I “shut up” when I attempt to follow basic rules & regulations, I’ve realized that my presence is not helping to improve the board.

A very fair question is “why now?” and it is directly related to the events of July’s meeting. In addition, looking into issues like this one:
http://newhavenindependent.org/archives/2009/10/zoning_saga_com.php

No one on the board knew about any relationship between Chairwoman Weber and this man, as far as I knew, but I was pressured outside of the meeting to vote no. That was a rare example of the applicant (finally) getting what he was deserved. He waited a YEAR to get his appeal. The chairwoman stomped out of that meeting, said she didn’t want to do this anymore, and lashed out at board members for their votes against her.

That was a singular victory. When she decides she is against or for something, she gets her way in every other instance I can think of.

I sincerely hope that my noticeable absence helps shake up the public and gets more people to complain. I also hope I inspire some of the people who have been denied their appeals to step up and complain—or even file suit if they feel that they have no other option—and ensure that the Board is forced to operate in compliance.

Ultimately, the City has no checks and balances: for instance the powerless and almost non-existent Ethics Board.

What would happen if you filed a grievance with the ethics board? I suspect nothing. I believe that it’s lack of minutes, lack of members, and the mayor’s office still not sending me info on how to file a complaint demonstrates that it’s merely a tool used to have a public presence that doesn’t actually do anything.

posted by: Lonely in Ward 10 on September 14, 2010  9:01am

@ Streever As the Ward 10 Democratic Co-Chair how come you have never held one meeting or released the names of your ward committee? Practice what you preach.

posted by: Doyens on September 14, 2010  9:35am

Hang tough, David. I agree with others, you have to keep swinging in the face of adversity and understand the non-response from Mayor DeStefano is emblematic of his lack of a moral compass. He doesn’t believe in change, transparency or accountability.

Given the stunning defeat in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, one would think the mayor would replace Boise Kimber on the fire board. Has he? Given the revelations of his shakedown con man Criscuolo, one would think he would dismiss him outright. Has he? Given the denial of due process at the tax assessment appeals board, the lack of minutes, regular meetings, published results, one would think at very least, the mayor would make them go to public service school, change behavior, testify voluntarily in front of the BOA committee. Has he?

Matteson’s rather weak response reflects the mayor’s wishes as does corp counsel Vic Bolden who if he could muster any shame would know he is the one to advise what is legal not the other way around. It’s all about circling the wagons but understand this: Every time they circle the wagons which is a lot in the last year, they dig the ruts and holes deeper.

Know this: The winds of change are beginning to blow. Continuing to cook the votes at the Demo Convention, BOA, BZA, Fire, Police, BOE and Tax Appeals will not stand in the face of it. Hang tough and do your part.

posted by: Impressed on September 14, 2010  10:34am

David, to the person who said your behavior was childish, I seem to remember a boycott in the 60’s that wasnt so childish! So stick to your guns…...Once again the Destefano machine has put people in positions of responsibility who have NO BUSINESS being there!!! And as a person of color I find it interesting ..Either he is paying lip service to people of color or these people are tools to manipulate the way the Destefano machine sees fit…I so hope there is a decent resolution to this for u David…Your courage is to be admired!!!

posted by: Angelo on September 14, 2010  11:44am

Impressed - This is not a ‘60’s boycott or, for that matter, a boycott of any nature.  it is a case of a public official who took an oath and through his own petulance has now decided not to attend meetings.  If he wants to resign and organize a real boycott, that’s great.  i might even join him, if it’s about community and community solutions.  This, however, is more about self than about community. when can we see it on youtube?

posted by: Old Tymer on September 14, 2010  11:44am

...Your strength of conviction on what is morally right here leads me to believe two things. You must continue to hammer on the walls of the collapsing DeStefano administration. You would make an excellent Mayor. You can tell the difference between right and wrong. Its easy to get good people behind you if you are an honest, decent and well meaning person.

So do not be put off by my first paragraph if Bass even publishes it. I would vote for you and I would encourage others to.

Stick to it on this issue. Just remember you are fighting against the Mayors automatons. You will have a hard fight and you could well lose the battle. Its important to win the war, and that’s what counts

posted by: Nancy on September 14, 2010  12:05pm

Once again, I am astounded by the incompetence of some city officials.  “Is any of that illegal?” asks Victor Bolden.  I ask “Did you REALLY pass the bar exam, Mr. Bolden?”

One would think that everyone in the office of Corporation Counsel has heard of, and has ready access to, the Connecticut General Statutes.  Mandatory requirements for all municipal boards and commissions (such as keeping minutes) are spelled out very clearly in CGS Title 8, Chapter 124.  Check ‘em out, Victor… it’s a worthwhile read.

Streever, although you shouldn’t have to, it’s probably a good idea to distribute relevant CGS sections to your fellow board members before they decide to vote on their procedures.  They will see that many of those procedures are already prescribed by law.

posted by: Bill Saunders on September 14, 2010  1:06pm

Streever,

While I admire your chutzpah on this matter, I also think you must not shirk your duties as a sitting board member.  The two issues should be separate.  Fight the fight and serve the public to the best of your ability.
Any continuing shenanigans by the board or the administration is just more fuel for your fire.  Also, learn to embrace the ‘silent treatment’, don’t be frustrated by it—where it like a badge of honor.

posted by: Old Newhallville on September 14, 2010  2:10pm

Gary I agree with all that you have written. However why should DeStefano dismiss anyone when this city has never held him accountable for anything. The residents send him back year after year and then complain about what he has failed to do. Secondly I have known Weber for a long time she’s a very miserable unpleasant person who’s only mission in life is to make others miserable knowing no color or boundaries and carry out DeStefano policies or lack of policies.  Just ask anyone in the neighborhood. Man up and hang in there Streever.

posted by: Margaret on September 14, 2010  2:49pm

It makes me embarrassed to live in New Haven when I read about this kind of behavior by a public official and then this kind of non-response from the folks in charge.

Keep fighting the good fight, Streever.

posted by: streever on September 14, 2010  2:52pm

Angelo:
I’ve tried bringing it up via the Board, via the Mayor’s office, and via the ethics committee. It has gone nowhere. I’ve always applauded your work & been positive to you, and am not sure why you’d feel qualified to state that I’m doing this for myself or for personal reasons.

I’ve tried really hard to make a difference on this board and been stymied at every turn. When I pushed back on back-room pressure from the Chairwoman, I was told to shut up.

When I address it at the board, everyone pretended it wasn’t a problem, and no one had anything to say about the Chair telling Thomas MacMillan that she has the “right” to instruct board members to “shut up”.

Is it personal? Yes, very. But no, it’s not all about me.

@Lonely:
Drop me a line directly. There are a few issues that have prevented us from meeting to date—which I find incredibly frustrating—but I am pushing hard to make a meeting happen by the end of this month.

posted by: Sean Matteson on September 14, 2010  2:54pm

Please allow me to clarify a few points which I believe I did so with the reporter’s questions yesterday yet there remains some misunderstandings.

Transcripts for all BZA meetings are available from City Plan Department.  As are the voice recordings of the meetings, as David knows since he has ordered several copies in the past.

The BZA is not required to follow Robert’s Rules of Order, rather as part of their by-laws they prescribe their own process of running meetings.  David was given a copy of the by-laws when he joined the BZA.

I did state to David that I was happy to discuss his complaint with him which he declined to do.

posted by: Show me the minutes on September 14, 2010  3:47pm

Sean,

It seems a little odd that the minutes aren’t simply posted on the city’s website where people could access them without make the trip to city hall. Most towns in the state put the minutes right on their websites. It looks like the agendas are put on the city’s site, why not the minutes? 

The BZA may or may not be required to use Roberts Rules of Order, I honestly don’t know. Either way, anyone who’s been present at a BZA meeting would likely agree that the process/procedure comes off as overly informal to the point of being arbitrary. I’m sure this isn’t the city’s or the chair’s intent. After all, most boards are made up of volunteers, many of whom don’t have professional experience running meetings, which is fine of course. Perhaps the city could offer a workshop or two to members of all municipal boards so that meetings are run more appropriately.

Mr. Streever really isn’t asking for the world here, just good government. There are enough talented people working for the city that it should be easy enough to make this happen.

posted by: What does Victor Bolden say? on September 14, 2010  4:08pm

Streever’s account of his meeting with Victor Bolden deserves a response. What does Bolden have to say?

posted by: Bill Saunders on September 14, 2010  5:14pm

Here’s a question:

Per the City’s website, The Board of Zoning Appeals is to consist of 5 regular members and 3 alternates, yet the membership of the Board is actually listed as 3 Regular Members and 5 Alternates. 

(http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/CityPlan/BoardofZoningAppeals.asp

Also, Victor Bolden might want to refresh his memory about the requirements for maintaining public meeting minutes, per the CT Freedom of Information Act.

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/2009FOIA/Sec. 1-225.htm

posted by: Walt on September 14, 2010  5:44pm

Good job Streever, but after you make your point hopefully you will attend again.

posted by: Anon on September 15, 2010  6:47am

They may or may not have to use Roberts Rules, I don’t know, but the point of those rules, or any other the board would devise, is supposed to be, in part, to ensure the representatives on the board get to actually represent. This includes open discussions as well as votes.

Whatever rules are used have to protect that.

If the chair is doing what Steever says she is doing, then she is the equivalent of several members, overreaching her authority and decreasing the authority of other members. 

Maybe that’s why there are only three instead of five regular members appointed. She equals several and fewer appointees means less opposition to her.

If she is preventing streever from engaging in free discussion by telling him to shut up, she is flirting with a something like the ‘heckler’s veto,’ a kind of free speech that isn’t acceptable because it shuts down someone else’s free speech.

So, she doesn’t really have the right. Her bullying would be preventing meaningful participation.

The story about what the garage near her house went through that streever linked to is unbelievable. Its a board run amok.

posted by: CedarHillDem on September 15, 2010  7:04am

I don’t blame Ms. Weber for telling Streever to shut up.

posted by: ASL on September 15, 2010  8:54am

@CedarHillDem

I don’t blame you for hiding such a ... useless comment behind an anonymous alias.

posted by: Cedarhillresident on September 15, 2010  10:26am

Clarification

that is not me

posted by: angelo on September 15, 2010  10:45am

Anon (and others) -

Streever said Weber told him to shut up.  Weber said she did not say that. Let’s assume Streever is accurate.  So what?  Weber cannot make him shut up.  He has a right to speak his mind.  In fact, when he accepts his appointment, he has an obligation to say what he believes, to be prepared, and all of the other things that go into being a public servant.  I agree that Weber cannot be allowed to run the BZA as though she is the only member.  Explain to me how Streevr’s self-imposed absence is helping.  If he wants to fight from the inside, be true to the oath he took and show up at meetings.  If he wants to fight from the outside, resign and keep posting, so his friends can agree, his enemies can disagree, and someone else will do the real work

posted by: Bruce on September 15, 2010  12:09pm

Seems like many are losing sight of what’s really important.  The chair is accused of bullying and trying to influence other board members’ votes behind closed doors and for reasons that that have nothing to do with the merits of the case. That Weber behaves childishly at meetings (ignoring a reporter like a kid with her hands over her ears, telling board members to “shut up”) is secondary to this more serious charge.  This is the kind of behavior that prevents prevents progress.

Mattison says minutes are available, Streever says they’re not.  Can someone simply go down to City Plan and grab the minutes from the last 10 meetings or so to see who’s correct?  Regardless, they should be online.

posted by: Scott on September 15, 2010  7:25pm

Minutes give the impression of transparency but when well written in fact make matters more obscure.  I doubt posting the BZA minutes online would prove very useful for anything other than perpetuating an illusion of democracy.

Streever’s certainly becoming a more seasoned political operative.  Ducking out when responsibility becomes hard work is right out of the Palin playbook.  The platform known as the comments section of the NHI is almost like his Fox News.

posted by: Bill Saunders on September 16, 2010  3:19pm

Scott,

Though not a transcript, minutes provide an important ‘snapshot’ of the business at hand.  Why should anybody wade through hours of recordings to find out how the Board voted on a particular matter?

posted by: Anon on September 17, 2010  8:38am

A agree with you Angelo,

I think it is hard to take personal abuse especially when you know that you aren’t expected to by any standards, yet there you are, showing up for meetings and getting it anyway.

I can understand why Streever feels the way he does and decided not to attend the Sept meeting, but now that the heat of that moment is over, I think, like you, that he should reconsider.

Especially considering that he has substantial support in the community and the press sure hasn’t dismissed him, and he is not in any physical danger or threatened or anything else like that, he should go. He can do it. He is strong enough I think and needs to follow through.

Can’t he use his presence to start work on removing Weber if he thinks that is the right thing to do? Learn the processes and use them, right?

If he thinks the ethics committee is inaccessible, well, write an ethics complaint anyway and file it anyway, use procedures anyway. Use them whether they are liked or not, whether they are popular in city hall or not.

Otherwise, if it is too much of a headache, resign. No one will blame him if he just can’t deal with this kind of environment. Frankly, none of us can, among those I know. Why waste your life dealing with incivility in a city that is so adamant about being that way? It’s a question he has to answer for himself, and us.

posted by: Anon on September 17, 2010  8:43am

And btw, Streever in his document, linked on this site, did not say Roberts Rules, he said Roberts Rules or some other procedures, so Sean’s objections are kind of misleading.

I think Streever should move that the board adopt procedures along the lines of Roberts Rules to ensure legal, fair and open functioning of the board. It doesn’t have to be as highly structured as Roberts Rules, but they need something to emphasize orderly, fair proceedings.

If Weber refuses to support that, well, then she’s the odd man out, right?

posted by: Anon on September 19, 2010  4:44pm

Streever, Are you a full member? I hope so, because according to the secretary of state, which takes time to update, there are two vacancies with several alternates (?):

-Zoning Bd. of Appeals, Gaylord Bourne, Cathy Weber, Regina Winters; Alternates, A. Walter Esdaile, Victor Fasano, David Streever, two vacancies.