Quantcast

Letter to the Editor: The Call for a Council for Accountability Continued: I’m not Done Seeking to Speak Truth to Power in Norwalk

My first editorial letter and request for this idea was met with some positive as well as some negative in an angry outcry from friends of the powers that be and their interests’ et al, as well as a rhetorical article. It is paramount to report that the rhetoric of negativity erred in its intent though well-articulated was non-substantive with respect to valid reasons for why the voice of the public no longer matters or needs to be represented by the elected legislators holding office in Norwalk, CT.

Those who are so rooted in the divisive national politics of our day have failed at every level to recognize the simplest agenda of my words and have rather chosen to challenge my agenda by misrepresenting it, which disparages and disregards the greater voices of the public in this town of Norwalk, not me. The Taxpayers of Norwalk, who try to live their lives according to the very tenement and promise of the freedoms envisioned by our forefathers, and the foundational principals of our republic as outlined by the “Bill of Rights” as Madison petitioned vehemently to be included as the pre-amble of the US Constitution. The overall summary being relevant to the reason we decreed to establish a nation based on Freedom, to protect individual liberties and limits to federal power (ie; James Madison 1789).

Remember, the power of any corrupt authority has limits; whether it is local, state or national, and comes in the form of any ruling authority, via any one political affiliation or multiples thereof, as our forefathers were well versed in their break from authoritarian British rulers.

For us today, it means we must refuse to be apathetic and further ruled by a fabricated propaganda led ruling class that guides us to our own end of liberty and freedom for all, in order to be led by the same leaders who have corrupted themselves in favor of selling lies to the public in complicity, and to no avail.

To articulate my greater point, to those who wish to challenge me or criticize who they think I am, regarding my political affiliation, let them know now that they are on a fool’s mission of folly, and choose to not know me, because they fear me, simply said. I laugh at their misguided failure to make a valid well-articulated point which gives any real challenge to my point.

My point is simple, Norwalk, CT taxpayers deserve representation by a council that listens and makes decisions that value constituent’s opinions and feelings. The taxpayers of Norwalk deserve representation that is beyond reproach and not owned by big money interests and “gifts” that corrupt or guide the votes they make. In order to ensure that, and in our modern times it now seems necessary to do so, and elect an oversight committee that will do just that and will be comprised with equally represented political officials to represent the now seemingly unrepresented public. Just like the elected Board of Education, we need an elected oversight board of Accountability or Ethics, not in name only but in reality elected to vet the actions of our legislators and investigate why they are 100% in the pockets of big money interests over the public interest.

It seems the public also questions how it is that we have a one-party representative council of elected politicians, even though the voting public is not 100% affiliated with that one party. It seems we have come to a point where a majority of the public is actually unsure if they are represented fairly and via a free and fair election process, as well as feeling that the representatives do not hear them or do anything valuable to represent their interests in governance.

That feeling is real and must be acknowledged and not tossed aside with some ridiculous argument based in partisan politics and media propaganda.

The idea of an elected check on governance that clearly has governed in a manner that has gone way too far astray is an acknowledgment that “we the people” still wish to secure our right to maintain power and the ability to redress grievances in a civilized and lawful way.

Petitioning to change the Norwalk CT Charter with respect to the Board of Ethics and its members and duties seems appropriate to put in place and a much needed check as to why accusations of un-abated favoritism and corrupt votes that favor developers and big money over the public’s outcry to scale back irrational over-development is needed at this juncture. This recent idiocrasy at the hands of elected officials makes no sense, as it fails to lawfully comply with any formerly written and approved zoning in place, realized standards of traffic engineering, and further, overall public opinion of protest and “no more”.

To those who think this type of petition for a check or oversight on government will NOT prevail, give a reason beyond your short sighted propaganda based politics that are not relevant to the interests of taxpayers, try to protest a well written petition of the governed that have been silenced for far too long and will sign on the line to seek a way to be vindicated.

A HUGE and MOMENTOUS VOICE speaking TRUTH to POWER led by the POWER of PETITION via the SILENCED and UNACKNOWLEDGED GOVERNED of NORWALK CT will swiftly REMIND the seemingly corrupt leaders at the helm of what they thought was an insurmountable, omnipotent and untouchable authoritarian leadership that accountability to “we the people” actually matters and is coming to bite them in the collective butt.

Please follow my journey to the ballot box on our petition right to be heard in speaking to the powerful leaders in office owned by the developers that THINK they can retain this FAÇADE and LORD over us.

I may be a little goldfish attempting to make myself known in a sea of sharks, but don’t doubt my persistence to right an obvious wrong, or be a voice for change.

I will continue to write on the progress of my vision to make heard the Norwalk taxpayer’s voices in this once livable town which has been turned unrecognizable.

Liz Conti Norwalk, CT

Comments

7 responses to “Letter to the Editor: The Call for a Council for Accountability Continued: I’m not Done Seeking to Speak Truth to Power in Norwalk”

  1. Ana Tabachneck

    Where is the “well written petition of the governed”? Is there a link where people can review and sign it?

    1. Liz Conti

      Ana, I am actively putting my ideas into writing and pursuing legal assistance. I am quite serious, but am not a lawyer. It is coming, I assure you. There is a silent and not so silent majority looking forward to it. It will absolutely be coming. Thank you for your support. Liz

  2. Becca Stoll

    I have thoughts.

    First, I want to say again that I too identify as being one of the “Taxpayers of Norwalk, who try to live their lives according to the very [tenement] and promise of the freedoms envisioned by our forefathers, and the foundational principals of our republic.”

    -Do you mean tenet?

    -While many of the foundational principles of our republic as laid out in its early documents are laudable, some key updates have been implemented since then. It is well established that the founders did not, to the best of our knowledge, envision a world in which women like Ms. Conti and myself are allowed to speak for ourselves and voice our own opinions in a public forum such as this, and where the rights of property owners do not include the right to claim to own another human being, to name two pretty big examples.

    -You list at the end of this same paragraph “individual liberties” as one of those key principles. I too feel my individual liberties are often challenged by the current state of affairs, For example, I am not legally allowed to take an on-the-books renter in my spare bedroom to help them afford to live here and get a boost with my own costs of living. I do not have the liberty to build whatever I want within reason on the plot of land that I paid for. I DO feel that I have the right to petition my government, and just like you, I use it frequently. But I know that the right that I have is to be HEARD, not necessarily HEEDED, as decisions made by city entities have many stakeholders and even if I’m in a verbal majority (not always the case at the public comment sessions that I attend), that majority elected this council to act as the candidates told us they would. That’s not a fault in my book.

    Segueing from that, I absolutely agree that the current city council is rendered less effective by being made up of members of only one party. If a charter revision had made the ballot to change how we elect them (ranked choice being one great possibility), I would have absolutely voted in favor. But it didn’t this round. We should not let that stop us from continuing to try to get more voices heard and more voices that have been quieted throughout history into speaking roles at the table.

    Ms. Conti, have you looked into what the city charter actually says about forming the council you envision? What is needed in order to get started? Who would serve on it? How would this body be formed to ensure that it actually brings outside thoughts into the mix? How can you guarantee it will make any real impact on the system we already have in place?

    Later on in your piece, you say your “point is simple.” My point is also simple. It is that Norwalk RESIDENTS “deserve representation by a council that listens and makes decisions that value constituent’s opinions and feelings.”

    You choose to use the word “taxpayer” in your version of this sentence rather than “resident” – why?

    -Do children have no right to petition their government because they are too young to vote and aren’t direct taxpayers the way that adult property owners and tenants are?

    -Do the needs of those who are housed in our shelter system not deserve a voice via their votes and public comments?

    -Should those living in senior care matter less because they have sold their homes and chosen to remain in our community?

    I’ll conclude by thanking you again for speaking your mind. Keep going! We need discourse like this in amazing public fora like this gem of a newspaper.

    I also that you please think about the ways in which this article, despite being an outlining of “your” vision, makes some broad sweeping generalizations about certain types of Norwalkers. Please check yourself in the sentences where your language assumes that your opinion is shared by anyone else who has any certain somethings in common with you.

    Again, you have every right to speak for yourself and I applaud you for exercising it. But I am a homeowner in Norwalk too. I am a member of the voting public too. And you do not have the right to presume that you speak for me.

    1. Liz Conti

      Thanks Becca for feedback. You are correct regarding my read of the Charter and the options the governed (ie taxpayers, or “voters” would have, as opposed to non-voting residents) The reason I do not include “residents” is not to ignore their interests at all or “children” who have a right to education etc.. but because only the “governed” as it pertains to voting rights/petition rights can duly challenge a Charter or a city for their “right to be heard”.

      So far in my research, it is challenging whether by Charter revision or by petition for “ordinance” to obtain the rights of “we the people” to have accountability… which on it’s face should be automatic and seem simple yet in practice is our challenge to RE-OBTAIN, if you will from an elected one-party governance that thinks it can govern in an “authoritarian” style and censor the “governed” in favor of other interests more beneficial to their own bottom line. This is also an avenue of my investigation.

      What I do know and stand by is that “we the people” are supposed to be able to hold our representatives to account, and it should not be HARD but rather written into law to easily do so.

  3. Tysen Canevari

    kudos to you Liz. The way our council operates is a complete joke. You are allowed 3 minutes to speak only on the agenda at hand. After you speak, they say thank you and move on like they are doing you a favor letting you be heard. It doesnt matter the evidence or opinions you put forth. They already know which way they are voting before they come into the room. If it doesnt align with the democratic party then too bad for you. Have you ever seen them vote against it? The council person that does so would risk public humiliation. They once told me that turfing Broad River field would be toxic to kids and the oysters. Yes, the oysters!! When i asked why our head of conservation wasnt there or Norman Bloom wasnt there I heard crickets. They invite their small special interest groups to make them look good and do as they say. I replied that the towns drinking supply in the reservoir sits 700 feet from St Lukes school. The school is covered in turf. Wouldnt the First Taxing District not allow that if it is dangerous? Why werent they invited? Until they chamge their ways it is a waste of time to attend in my opinion.

  4. Brandon Buck

    Ms Conti is confusing the right to be heard with the right to be obeyed.

    It is not a failure of democracy when the Council doesn’t to align with your preferences.

  5. Tysen Canevari

    Brandon, they only align their way! They named a street after our common council. It is called: ONE WAY!

Leave a Reply

Secret Link