Quantcast
Advertisement

Goldstein cites poor notification as reason for public’s non-response at Norwalk tax board hearing

March 21, 2015
–
Nancy Guenther Chapman

NORWALK, Conn. – Kind of hard to go to a public hearing if one has not been announced, a Norwalk citizen said, in reference to Wednesday’s poorly attended Board of Estimate and Taxation public hearing on the operating budget.

On Thursday, Third Taxing District Commissioner Deb Goldstein wrote to NancyOnNorwalk:

“Riddle: When is a public hearing not a public hearing?

“Answer: When it’s noticed as a special meeting with no public comment on the agenda. (see attached) BET agenda 15-0318

“This is why nobody showed up.”

Wednesday’s BET public hearing, held in the cavernous Concert Hall, featured one Norwalk resident speaking to BET members about the 2015-16 operating budget. Goldstein is correct: The agenda for the meeting that is accessible through the “agendas” link on the city’s website says nothing about public comment. The meeting was noticed as a public hearing on the city’s calendar page, but if you click the agenda link there you’ll get the same “special meeting” agenda that Goldstein said inspired her to skip it. Goldstein said she didn’t see the calendar listing.

While the city is in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, BET Chairman Jim Clark said “We can do better.”

Clark’s first email response to the situation:

“That is a shame, as we want to encourage, not discourage public participation in our budget process.

“I too, intuitively, would have first searched the BET agendas. I will suggest that in the future the operating budget public hearing be included in the BET Agenda section also.

“The public hearing is on our city calendar here:

http://www.norwalkct.org/calendar.aspx?eid=6587

“However it is not the easiest to find, which is a problem.  We need to improve how we roll out information to the public, and in fact the website is being worked on now, but I do not know the rollout date for the updated website.

“As far as the BET meeting at 7 p.m., that was separate from the public hearing and there was only one agenda item – set the cap for the 2015-16 Capital Budget. That is why there was no public comment in that meeting. Immediately after the BET meeting concluded, the public hearing began, at 7:15 p.m. Once again, I think the public notice/s should be clearer and easier to find, even though we certainly complied with FOIA guidelines.

“Lastly, if your reader had any comments she wanted to make concerning the operating budget, you may forward them to me and I will make sure they are taken into consideration.”

BET members decided the week before to hold a special meeting just to vote on the capital budget before their scheduled public hearing, which was technically a separate meeting. There’s no agenda posted for the public hearing.

Clark acknowledged that in a follow up email:

“It would be clearer for the public if there were two notices once you clicked ‘Click Here for Agenda,’ one for the BET special meeting and the other for the public hearing. However, it does clearly say ‘Board of Estimate & Taxation Operating Budget Special Meeting & Public Hearing’ on the main calendar page. The question remains, ‘Is it easy enough for residents to find information on the public hearing?’  And I think we agree the answer is no, and we need to do better.”

The city is in FOI compliance. Deputy Corporation Counsel Jeffry Spahr explained it thusly (with highlighting as shown):

“The requirement that the Agenda is to be posted on the Agency’s website applies to State agencies only.

CGS Sec. 1-225: 

(c)  The agenda of the regular meetings of every public agency, except for the General Assembly, shall be available to the public and shall be filed, not less than twenty-four hours before the meetings to which they refer, (1) in such agency’s regular office or place of business, and (2) in the office of the Secretary of the State for any such public agency of the state, in the office of the clerk of such subdivision for any public agency of a political subdivision of the state or in the office of the clerk of each municipal member of any multitown district or agency.  For any such public agency of the state, such agenda shall be posted on the public agency’s and the Secretary of the State’s web sites.  Upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of a public agency present and voting, any subsequent business not included in such filed agendas may be considered and acted upon at such meetings.

The lone Norwalk citizen to address the BET at the hearing, Diane Lauricella, as part of her comments, suggested that the BET allow public comment several times a year at its regularly scheduled meetings.

Asked about that, Clark said:

“As I am a fan of transparency and public participation in government, I’m willing to have a conversation with my fellow board members about it. Some issues I would like to consider in that discussion:

  1. References in the charter to public comments/hearings
  2. Precedent with other Boards as to public comment.
  3. In particular, the Planning Commission’s Capital Budget discussions, as they are inspecting the capital budget with a similar rigor as the BET does with the operating budget.
  4. Pros and Cons of public input of issues brought before the BET, many of which have extensive backup material and histories to take into consideration for a complete picture of the issue at hand.

“These are a few things that come immediately to mind when considering opening BET meetings to public input.”

Mayor Harry Rilling, who promised transparency as part of his campaign, did not respond to a request for comment.

More Stories

Comments

13 responses to “Goldstein cites poor notification as reason for public’s non-response at Norwalk tax board hearing”

  1. Debora

    Ironic that this is an issue during Sunshine Week.

  2. McCarthy

    The taxpayers make this city run. A meeting concerning taxation and the budget should be plastered all over the city’s website on the front page in big letters. Obviously, they don’t want the taxpayer’s input because they know we’re pissed with the rising property taxes. This is unconscionable for a city department to do this. You can’t say you want the public’s input if you don’t put any effort into informing the public.

  3. EveT

    That is pretty ironic about Sunshine Week.
    I’m willing to bet the vast majority of Norwalk residents, even those who try to be well informed and are registered to vote and come out to the polls for every election, are unfamiliar with how to look these things up on the city website.
    People have been complaining for years that the city website is far from user friendly, and we keep getting told it is being updated and renovated, but very little change happens.

  4. Diane C2

    Once again it is ironic and disturbing that it is the city’s chief FOI compliance officer who himself clearly does not understand FOIA regulations.

    Assuming NancyonNorwalk reached out to him for comment for this particular meeting and article, Attorney Spahr has once again referenced the wrong section of the statute, and as usual, the one that suits his apparent intention of posting the least information possible.

    Additionally, if he did consider this particular meeting, it very could well have been conducted in violation of FOIA if they added public comment when it clearly was not on the agenda posted on the web.

    Surely by now Attorney Spahr must understand the difference between a Regular Meeting and a Special Meeting, for which the law provides for additional compliance on timing, posting and procedures.

    The BET meeting last week was A SPECIAL MEETING. The word “special” is legal in that it denotes a meeting other than what would normally occur under a body’s pre-published calendar of meetings. A Special Meeting must be posted on the city’s website, if the city has a website, as Norwalk does.

    Here is the statute that Attorney Spahr should have cited:
    Section 1-225
    d. Notice of each special meeting of every public agency, except for the General Assembly, either house thereof or any committee thereof, shall be posted not less than twenty-four hours before the meeting to which such notice refers ON THE PUBLIC AGENCY’S INTERNET WEB SITE, if available,…No other business shall be considered at such meetings by such public agency.

    At least in this case, it appears the agenda was posted somewhere on the website, however, the meeting still likely violated FOIA regulations in that it did not have Public Comment on the agenda, and under the same state statute cited above, no item can be added to the agenda of a Special Meeting.

    If the meeting was held in violation of FOIA statutes, a complaint could be filed, and if found in violation, one possible remedy is that the BET could be held to void any votes/actions they took.

    The lack of adequate, clear public communication is a plague upon Norwalk, as it impacts almost every facet of good government. Hardly a week goes by without some violation of even the most simple public outreach basics. As a start to improve:

    -EVERY public meeting agenda SHOULD be posted online.
    -No agenda should be published as an outline. Instead, every line item should be identified as informational; actionable; or discussion only
    -Cryptic descriptions of agenda items may suit city staff, but they do nothing to inform the public of the nature of the business to be conducted.
    -Having to search multiple city website locations to find a single agenda is unacceptable. Every reference to a meeting should contain an agenda link.
    -Agenda links should include the exact same backup material as being supplied to the committee/commission (the exception being only executive session items).

    I could go on and on with suggestions for improvements, which in the past have ALL been presented to city hall elected officials and even to the IT Director, who for years has ignored and blocked any public participation in improving the process and content of public outreach. Their insulting attempt at gathering public feedback via a poorly written survey posted briefly on the web home page is a joke, and an insult to residents.

    Our city should strive to have the best public outreach we can, not just “settle for” the bare minimum required by FOIA. In fact, here is my favorite sentence in Section 1-225 d:

    Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit any agency from adopting more stringent notice requirements.

  5. Carol

    also the meeting to get involved with city boards etc was posted so late one could not attend if they wanted to.
    all meetings should be posted at least 4 days in advance and on the front page of the norwalk hour.

  6. Debora

    I would like to clarify that the agenda I collected WAS from the calendar notice (not the agendas listing). On a given day, when I know there is a meeting taking place, I will check the calendar just before departing for the meeting, to confirm the location, and to make sure it has not been canceled. The way I do this is to go to the City Calendar and select the “view all” option, which displays the agency and commissions calendar along with the other city calendars, altogether. No guessing. The problem here was that I did so from a smart phone and it was easy to miss the only full recap of the meeting title where the agenda link resides. I did conduct a search of local newspaper web sites for a press announcement of a public hearing and found no mention of it.

    I appreciate Mr. Clark’s sentiments and would propose that the board follow the procedure used by Zoning, Ordinance and other committees and commissions who regularly hold public hearings…and that is to notice the meetings together on one agenda.

    As to submitting comments in writing, I also appreciate the desire to accommodate. I would just ask that officials be reminded that the value of a public hearing is not exclusively in having officials hear the public, but for the public to observe officials as they deliberate, and for members of the public to hear one another.

    I am disappointed once again in the City’s retreat into defending its technical compliance with FOI, rather than seeking to use this as a learning experience and inspiration to improve public involvement, as Mr. Clark has.

    City officials often cite lack of public comment as approval of their actions. Sometimes, as in this case, the lack of public comment is only evidence of a need for a bigger welcome mat.

    It might interest Mr. Spahr to know that as a municipal agency, FOI compliance isn’t the BET’s only concern. Our charter has this to say (EMPHASIS IN CAPS MINE–I DON’T KNOW HOW TO USE THE HTML TAGS):

    § 1-289 Mayor as ex-officio member of Board of Estimate and Taxation; Board in general.

    Said Board of Estimate and Taxation shall hold a meeting on the FOURTH MONDAY IN FEBRUARY in each year, and may adjourn the same from time to time to a day not later than the first Monday of April in each year and at said meeting or any adjournments thereof within the time hereinbefore specified; IT SHALL HEAR ALL THE PARTIES WHO MAY DESIRE TO BE HEARD relative to any alterations in said estimates, and may make any alterations in said estimates, appropriations and tax rates, and make such additional appropriations, as it deems proper.

    As I said in an earlier comment, it is ironic that this conversation is taking place during Sunshine Week, and during this auspicious period, I would like to renew a proposal I made to Mayor Rilling after his election–to consider forming a Public Information and Transparency Task Force to assist him in his ongoing initiatives on transparency.

  7. piberman

    Sometimes the actions of our local Government speak more loudly than words. Lucky us.

  8. Joanna Cooper

    Communications and transparency have been issues in Norwalk it seems forever. I agree with Debra a task force should be formed to help address these issues. Over the years I can recall many meetings where there is not enough notice for the public to attend or its at last minute. Following basic laws are challenging as well in Norwalk a task force would help.

  9. M. Jeffry Spahr

    The fact that there was to be a Public Hearing on the Budget was on the Board of Estimate and Taxation’s website. Anyone can go to this link to find that list of meetings for the entire year:

    http://ct-norwalk.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/3975

    This was also filed in the City Clerk’s office.

    This particularly indicates that on March 18, 2015 there was to be a Public Hearing on the budget in the Concert Hall.

    In addition, as noted in the article, on the Calendar page was the notification that there would be both a Special Meeting and a Public Hearing by the BET on March 18th. The Agenda of the Special Meeting was linked to the Calendar. The’agenda’ of the Public Hearing was not separately linked. However, the fact that there was going to be a Public Hearing was clearly marked on the Calendar.

    In addition, the public was told that if there were any questions, they were to contact the Finance Dept.

  10. Suzanne

    Mr. Spahr, While this may all be true, some very smart people could not find the information. This would suggest that the City of Norwalk has some work to do in order to more clearly inform the public of public meetings.

  11. Debora

    Okay Mr. Spahr,

    You do get to say “gotcha” on this one. Because the public hearing was on the annual listing, it is a “regular” meeting, not a “special” and the agenda didn’t have to be on the web site.

    To close the loop on this, though, would someone kindly send NON the agenda that was posted in the BET office/the clerk’s office for the 24 hours prior to the meeting? Many thanks for honoring the letter of FOI, if not the spirit.

  12. Suzanne

    I guess I am saying that no one in government should be “gotcha-ing” anybody (with respect to Debora), any Norwalk citizen, about public meetings.

    There should be no secret password nor a need to know what arbitrates divulging such information.

    Plaster it everywhere, let everyone know, make it a top priority on the face page – public meetings here re: and when and quit playing bureaucratic nonsense.

    It should be transparent. It should be clear. Government and appointed representatives work FOR the constituency not the other way around.

  13. Joanna Cooper

    Mr. Spahr works hard on improving transparency and communication issues district wide. I have witnessed this in both his role as city attorney and parent in the district. In fact, I would go as far to say it is a passion of his. I’m sure he will continue to do this in every way possible. He can’t always fix problems that arise on his own. It is often a coordinated effort and ongoing process.

Leave a Reply

Newsletter

Secret Link