Quantcast
Advertisement

Simms, Stewart allege SoNoCC ‘manipulated’ CDBG process with Norwalk officials’ blessing

Planning Committee Norwalk 15-0507 044
Norwalk Common Councilwoman Sharon Stewart (D-At Large), left, speaks her mind at last week’s Planning Committee meeting about funding for the South Norwalk Community Center. Listening is Minority Leader Travis Simms (D-District B).

NORWALK, Conn. – Norwalk officials gave the South Norwalk Community Center an inside track in its quest for federal funds, Common Councilman Travis Simms (D-District B) said.

Simms and Councilwoman Sharon Stewart (D-At Large) left the Planning Committee meeting last week after their colleagues voted to recommend that $80,000 in Community Block Development Grant funds go toward creating a third classroom at SoNoCC, and other renovations at the center. Before leaving City Hall, Simms cast aspersions upon Councilman Bruce Kimmel (D-At Large), Councilman Doug Hempstead (R-At Large), Mayor Harry Rilling and Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Tim Sheehan.

“They’s up to the same old, same old where they’re allowing the South Norwalk Community Center manipulate the entire CDBG process,” Simms said when asked why he had left. “Tim Sheehan is in on it, the mayor is in on it, Doug Hempstead is in on it, Bruce Kimmel is in on it, and I am sick of it. You’ve got all these other services that need funding in this city and if you look at it most of them got zero.”

“They told him what to do so he can get it. They’re not supposed to do that,” Stewart said, in reference to South Norwalk Community Center board Chairman Warren Peña.

“Mr. Simms’ statement is so far removed from reality, so absurd, that it does not merit a response,” Kimmel said Sunday in an email.

Rilling declined to comment.

“I am not aware of any conspiracy going on with Council members, the Mayor’s office or the Redevelopment Agency,” Peña said in a Monday email. “To suggest that is preposterous!  I, nor anyone affiliated with SoNoCC is involved in manipulating a process to obtain federal funds.  My understanding,  if I heard correctly at the Planning Meeting,  is that most if not all applicants were funded this year.”

Stewart and Simms have protested the idea of putting money into the center at multiple meetings, citing the bankruptcy proceedings that have made the status of the building unclear. SoNoCC and Norwalk Economic Opportunity Now (NEON) were deeded as tenants in common of the city-owned building at 98 South Main St., with the provision that if the entities stopped providing community services the building would revert to city ownership. The bankruptcy trustee argues that the building should be sold to pay off NEON’s debts; Norwalk argues that the building has reverted into its ownership.

SoNoCC was originally recommended to get $80,000 to fix the roof at 98 South Main St. The roof is not in as bad condition as was originally thought, Peña said. He asked the committee to instead grant the $80,000 to SoNoCC’s other request, the Renaissance Project, or renovations. The third classroom would allow an additional 30 children to enroll in afterschool programs at SoNoCC next fall.

That’s a “switcheroo,” Simms said.

The $80,000 should have gone to other organizations that requested CDBG funds, many of which got nothing, Stewart and Simms said. Hempstead said there were no organizations that did not get funding in the category SoNoCC was being approved for; that was for physical improvements, not to fund public services.

The only organization not getting its request for CDBG facility/infrastructure funding is STAR Inc., which requested $144,000 for paving and drainage for parking, handicapped ramps and walkways but is recommended to get $99,155.

Standing in the hallway outside the Planning Committee meeting last week, Simms held the paperwork with the numbers recommended for funding and talked about zeroes. Asked for clarification due to the different categories of funding, Simms said, “We should have put that money back into STAR. I am just tired of these organizations taking advantage of the process and manipulating the process.”

“They bargained with (Peña) on an individual basis,” Stewart said. “It showed in the meeting. You’re not supposed to do that. If I do something like that they’ll have my head, c’mon. I don’t do stuff, I don’t meet and do sidebar arrangements with nobody… They can’t keep doing dirty stuff.”

“I certainly have not bargained with anyone on an individual basis,” Peña said in his Monday email. “I merely stated facts at the Planning meeting to give members as much information as possible so that they could make an informed decision about our request to grow a program that is desperately needed in South Norwalk.  There was no side bar arrangement, our staff followed an application process like any other applicant.  I for one, was not involved in the grant writing or the process until this past meeting to help clarify any misnomers.  RDA did not work with us to apply as we now have a little experience with the application.”

“I am filing a complaint up in Hartford. I mean this is absurd,” Simms said last week. “…It’s ridiculous that Tim Sheehan and his staff, they continue to manipulate the CDBG process for individuals or for projects that they feel, that they want to see in the city, not what is desired and what’s needed in the city.”

Asked what body he would file a complaint with, Simms said, “With the CDBG Commission up there.”

“There is no CDBG Commission.  There is a regional HUD Hartford office, perhaps that what he is referencing,” Sheehan said in a Monday email.

The proof that the Redevelopment Agency is not manipulating the CDBG process is in the actions of the Planning Committee, Sheehan said after last week’s meeting.

“It’s the committee and the discussion that was here tonight made it clear that the Council members ultimately make the decision who gets CDBG funding,” Sheehan said.

Simms, at last week’s meeting, accused Kimmel of lying about proposing that the committee fund both the classroom and the roof repair. Stewart said Hempstead had said he would not support funding any more projects at the center, other than the roof.

“We only approved the roof,” Stewart said. “They don’t need that, now you’re going to go back and do something that you said you weren’t going to do.”

Simms did not respond to attempts to contact him Monday.

Hempstead “repeatedly said at all meetings that they weren’t going to be given any money for classrooms!” Stewart said Monday in a Facebook message.

NancyOnNorwalk was not present for the CDBG discussion on March 9. Cheryl Telesco Blois of Telesco Secretarial Services said the company did not have a recording.

“Never said I didn’t want to do the classroom,” Hempstead said last week. “…(I said), if we had $80,000 to spend I’d rather do the roof.”

That comment was not made at the Feb. 5 meeting.

“We have identified a huge ‘need’ in the South Norwalk area that is desired by parents and children,” Peña said in his Monday email. “We are simply building relationships to help cater to the need and desire, which helps children and parents from South Norwalk.”

“I find it disappointing that the elected officials representing South Norwalk are completely against building a cleanlier, friendlier, reconstructed learning environment for the benefit of children and their direct constituents,” Peña said. “These are the people they represent and are supposed to serve.  It is sad!  I have invited the Council members to visit the site or to meet but they have declined and ignored my requests.  Our doors are always open.”

Comments

10 responses to “Simms, Stewart allege SoNoCC ‘manipulated’ CDBG process with Norwalk officials’ blessing”

  1. John Hamlin

    Yawn.

  2. rburnett

    This is laughable. Simms, Stewart and Bowman have done nothing for their constituents the whole time they’ve been on the council. Now they want to take classrooms away from the kids in their district.

    Get rid of them.

  3. Faye

    It was confirmed by a member of the BET that Kelly, the SONO CC Chair stated that the roof was perfectly fine. They submitted an application for funding a roof. If the roof does not need repair, they should not be receiving CDBG funding as that is what their application is for.

    R Burnett I’m sure you have no idea what out constituents want. Our constituents want to know why SONO CC is constantly able to circumvent proper process. For example, if the BOE wanted to contract with an after school program in South Norwalk, why wasn’t an RFP put out where any after school program located in South Norwalk could apply? That’s what OUR constituents want to know.

    It’s not because SONO CC has an established track record in after school programs or an established financial track record as this is the 3rd Year they are slated to receive CDBG funding but only the first year they have produced Financials with their application. In addition, programs such as Achieve would have loved to apply and is going on decades of running an after school program.

    Government agencies should follow the proper processes.

  4. John Levin

    My favorite Rodney King quote: “People, I just want to say, can we all get along? Can we get along?”

  5. Don’t Panic

    “It’s the committee and the discussion that was here tonight made it clear that the Council members ultimately make the decision who gets CDBG funding,” Sheehan said.

    Ah, but even the council approval process has been subverted here. The chair made it clear that it didn’t matter what the committee voted here because he was using his discretion to advace it to the common council.

    There, these objections will likely be put down by suggesting that committee work not be done on the chamber floor.

    This is not the first time that the urgency of a finding deadline is the excuse to by-pass process and a lack of information at the committee level.

    Instead of challenging staff as to why the process is producing fire drills, the chairs are compounding the problem by focusing on expediting badly prioritized decisions.

    My question is, are these foodfights over small grants delaying the committee’s recently undertaken mission to begin the city’s issuance of a new and urgently needed master plan for Norwalk?

  6. Hugo Ramirez

    More sideshow antics by incompetency. We deserve better than this from our elected reps. Will there be more qualified candidates stepping up to challenge? It sounds like more primaries are needed in So. Norwalk to cleanse the dysfunction.

  7. FYI

    I’d like to know where the money is coming from to pay the expenses of the building at 98 South Main Street. Is SoNoCC paying or is the city paying? Is SoNoCC receiving any compensation from Norwalk Public Schools for the use of the facility? Is AmeriCares Free Health Clinic paying anything? Is ABCD paying anything? Where’s the money coming from to pay the electric bill, the gas bill, the insurance bill, etc.?
    It seems that there is definitely a need for services there, but who is providing the services? Norwalk Public Schools certainly is. To me it seems that the building (and NOT SoNoCC) is what the city actually needs. SoNoCC acts as a venue rather than as a viable service provider. Why doesn’t the city just take back the building and operate programming that is desperately needed? Perhaps it’s more cost effective for the city to just feed SoNoCC money on a need basis rather than to actually take over the building?

  8. Lisa Thomson

    @ FYI a you make an excellent point. The services are needed and THAT building, that facility could use another classroom. It seems to me that the South Norwalk common council reps are cutting off their noses to spite their faces or should I say cutting off the children’s because of a personal squabble with Pena. Regardless of which CAP agency ends up providing or administering services for the South Norwak community – it is undeniable that building a third classroom is a good investment! I strongly encourage the Common Council to vote in favor of it!

  9. OhNo SoNo

    It is obvious when politicians have no good ideas of their own, they just say no to everything. Makes them feel powerful, just to be able to say no with their vote. We have it with Republicans in Washington, and we have it with Democrats in SoNo.

    Where are the good ideas from the SoNo elected officials to help their constituents? We haven’t seen any, ever. It’s still all about NEON. where millions of taxpayer dollars disappeared over the years.

    Time to get real leadership in SoNo. That’s what voters deserve, not this childish nonsense.

  10. Things that makes u go hmmmm

    Have a audit done and track the money. In the course of a year or so they got almost 300,000 to do what they need to do and that was mainly the city money if I am not mistaken. ABCD is paying there part according to what I read here in Nancy and Americares dont. So something smells fishy.

Leave a Reply

Secret Link