I have followed the Charter Revision pretty closely over many years due to an issue of personal interest. As evidence, I read into the record during the current Charter Commissions deliberations, my letters on it going back to 2002.
My interest and examination of the current proposal led to me discovering an item the Charter Revision Commission included as a component that was of hope to me as Chairman of the Conservation Commission: appointments to boards and commissions.
The Shelton Conservation Commission has always been non-political through my involvement since 1998. The commissioners are appointed to serve for a 3yr term. My witness has been that when there is a vacancy, the commission has experience with someone interested in our efforts and approaches them about possibly serving. If that is a positive response, the person is recomended to the Mayor for appointment to the post and that is carried out to conclusion. Current Mayor Lauretti has never recomended someone or appointed someone to the Conservation Commission from his sole initiation until recently.
As example, I came on in 1998 after Harriet Wilbur (co-chair at the time) asked me if I was interested in serving as they had a vacancy (I had attended a few meetings out of concern for a development proposal near where I lived). Joe Welsh, who was and is involved with the Shelton Land Conservation Trust (a private non-profit entity with preservation efforts similar to those dealt with on the Conservation Commission), replaced Soren Ibsen who simply ended his term. Bill Dyer had been working on trails as a volunteer, and was asked if he wanted to serve on the commission.
A concern over lack of action for appointment to the Conservation Commission arose over two years ago. Harriet Wilbur resigned for health reasons, but the Mayor refused to accept the resignation, a nice gesture to signify he thought she would recover and have a healthy future. Sadly she passed away soon after. In subsequent months, the ConsComm interviewed three candidates, and made a recomendation to the Mayor for filling Harriet's vacant position, along with the resumes and opinions on the other candidates. Despite repeated attempts and encouragement, the Mayor failed to fill the vacancy.
Thus it was with surprise that I read the Mayor's comments quoted in the Aug27 Huntington Herald which I cut/paste here for reference/comment in case they aren't retained at their current online archive:
*** Mayor Mark Lauretti participated in the CRC meeting Aug. 21 by calling in on a speakerphone, but his objections to several provisions didn’t sway the commission. Lauretti was most adamant about two CRC recommendations concerning appointments to boards and commissions. One requires the mayor to notify the Board of Aldermen and the City/Town Clerk 15 days before the appointment goes into effect. The other requires the “appointing authority,” which often is the mayor, to fill a vacancy within 30 days, or the board or commission is authorized to do so.
“Is there a problem with the way I’ve been making appointments?” Lauretti asked. He repeatedly stated there was no problem with the current charter and said, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
But the CRC felt it was broke enough to fix. DiMauro said the provisions were intended to promote good government, not as a criticism of Lauretti.
“In real life there’s more important things for me to deal with than appointments to boards and commissions,” Lauretti said.
When he questioned how would he know if someone’s term had expired, DiMauro said notification could be provided by using a computer spreadsheet.
When Lauretti noted that several times members of boards continued to serve for years without reappointment, DiMauro asked, “Why didn’t you reappoint them?”
Lauretti paused, then said it was another example of “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
****
My simple experience is that the system IS broke. If the current charter was being violated (the Mayor was not following the process for appointments) there were no ramifications and no course of solution. As Chairman of the Commission, I expressed to the Mayor how displeased I was to read his comments in the news, especially in light of our experience. I informed him that the person recomended over a year previously, who he had interviewed and was fine with appointing - was still interested.
He was surprised at the vacancy and thought that he had already done the appointment. I can't understand that reaction since every ConsComm mtg minutes over the past 2 yrs clearly states in the Call to Order that we only have 6 active members. (for example, see pg 2 of our Sep30 minutes)
On Monday Sept 15, during the Mayor's Golf Classic Tournament (charity benefits the Boys & Girls Club among other recipients), the Mayor informed me that he made an appointment to fill Harriet Wilbur's vacancy: Albert John Grasso (AJ), the owner of Prestige Builders. This brings our membership to a full complement of 7. It is my understanding that the Mayor did not further pursue appointing the ConsComm's suggested nominee from the 3 who expressed interest and were interviewed about 1.5 yrs ago.
I met AJ personally on FriSep19 (in the interest of full disclosure, we were in the same home-room at Shelton High School, but haven't traveled in the same circles since we graduated). We discussed his interest in serving on our commission. He was sworn in by the City Clerk, and began serving by our next meeting in October. AJ is a member and Director of the recently formed Shelton Builders Association, and has done some developments in Shelton, for example Freedom Way off Buddington Road. A developer has the potential to bring a complementing contribution and developer's perspective to our Conservation affairs, but the Conservation Commission is meant to be a balance to the development perspective.
Thus, coming from a builder/developer background will obviously raise questions for some in the public. The public impression of the ConsComm's affairs is of great value, having been compiled through years of earning the public's respect. I have a duty to see that this wealth of respect is not squandered. Where there are obvious conflicts of interest, it is easy for any commissioner to abstain from voting, or more thoroughly, recuse themself from discussing or deliberating on the issue. The City has a Board of Ethics and those regulations and rules are given out to any new appointee. More complicated are when the ConsComm deals with land acquisitions issues as executive session items, and if/when it is warranted for someone to be excused from such discussions. This was just discussed openly and frankly by the ConsComm at our first meeting with AJ as a commissioner.
No comments:
Post a Comment