“We need a Woodstock Ethics Ordinance!”
Please copy these two petitions into a WORD document, sign them, collect signatures, if possible, and then either fax them to 508-303-0579 (fax), or email them to email@example.com, or, best yet, snail mail them to Ken’s home address in Woodstock -Ken Rapoport, PO Box 625, Woodstock, CT 06281.
We, the individuals identified below, residents of Woodstock Connecticut, demand that the selectmen INCORPORATE the existing CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE TOWN OF WOODSTOCK into a specific town ordinance with the following additions or modifications:
(a) Prohibit spouses and relatives of Woodstock selectmen from serving on any boards to which the selectman are responsible for appointment, or are in anyway â€œsubordinateâ€? to the selectmen- specifically the IWWA.
(B) Incorporate mechanisms by which â€œconflict of interestâ€? issues can be raised by the public, appropriately discussed in a public forum, and satisfactorily resolved- such as the power to remove the official from serving.
(C) Define â€œconflict of interestâ€? to incorporate any members, of any boards, which are seeking legal actions against the Town of Woodstock, and therefore its citizens. Assure â€œboard questionnairesâ€? are completely filled out and signed by the applicants.
These measures should be enacted immediately, and retroactively enforced where applicable, to restore â€œany loss of trust and to maintain and increase the confidence of our citizens in the integrity and fairness of their governmentâ€?, as quoted directly from Woodstockâ€™s CODE OF ETHICS
Name Address Phone Signature
We, the individuals identified below, residents of Woodstock Connecticut, demand that the selectmen move to immediately modify the current INLAND WETLANDS & WATERCOURSE ORDINANCE to reflect a commission which IS ELECTED by the citizens of Woodstock, rather than being appointed by the selectmen. We would request that during the next regularly scheduled election (or a special election), 10 members be chosen with varying terms- either 6,4,2 year terms based on their respective vote counts, with the most successful candidates receiving the longest terms, and the least successful serving as alternates. In subsequent elections, the terms would be based on 6 year appointments following their election to allow for overlap of candidates with experience & knowledge of wetlands.
Name Address Phone Signature
To answer Debunkerâ€™s comment (“Another Perspective by Debunker…” and comments) – the town has grown significantly enough to allow impartial people to serve on boards- rather than expect people to â€œrecuseâ€? themselves when conflict arises.
I also have â€œproof positiveâ€? that IWWA meeting minutes were altered during the Nelson Douglas review to assist Douglas in his planned lawsuitâ€¦because I video taped the entire meetingâ€¦and one of his â€œkey issuesâ€? hinges on the modified wording within the meeting minutes. Want more? Dan Very organized a â€œsecretâ€? meeting, disguised as an administrative meetingâ€? to discuss IWWA business, rather than its true intentâ€¦.to discuss & initiate a decisionâ€¦.without the full board presentâ€¦but againâ€¦we intercepted, videotapedâ€¦and with Very calling the town attorney by phone- wasting our precious tax dollars- Dan and the boys were told to â€œcancelâ€? it. Dan certainly attempts to appear knowledgableâ€¦in the last IWWA meeting on wetlandsâ€¦he introduced â€œnew informationâ€? after the public hearing was closed (illegal), questioned the DEPâ€™s definition of â€œsignificantâ€? vernal pools after Dr. DeSantoâ€™s excitement over this major environmental find on the Douglas property, implied that Dr. DeSanto, a PHD in Environmental Science, should be discounted based on testimony from CMEâ€™s Soil Engineer, given the CME engineerâ€™s entire year of Environmental experience as an â€œinternâ€? with the DEP and his incorrect conclusions regarding the impact of comparable studies done in Florida! If you have any further doubt as to Mr. Veryâ€™s â€œrealâ€? expertiseâ€¦you must listen to Danâ€™s comments(after walking the Douglas property for 45 minutes) where he definitively told the IWWA members that he could tell exactly where 2 glaciers had receded from the ice age there on the Douglas property. ANYONE who can spend less than an hour on a property, and claim to know what occurred 10 million years ago MUST certainly be a â€œhighly knowledgable and useful member of IWWAâ€?â€¦at least to any developers that want to build in Woodstock!! Oh yes, wasnâ€™t it also Delpha Very who oversaw the townâ€™s first foray into â€œopen spaceâ€? acquisition by suggesting to buy her former partnerâ€™s (and former 1st selectman) land-locked property? Want other potential conflicts of interest?
How about looking at the resumes of the newest IWWA member- Margaret Young (Selectman Mitchel Eaffyâ€™s wife)..appointed by the â€œoldâ€? selectman Very, Alberts and Eaffy? Her primary strength in her resume includes â€œknowledge of construction and concern about the importance of the environmentâ€?â€¦better to have her as a full member than a current IWWA alternate with an BS & MS in the physical sciences? Scott Youngâ€™s an excellent engineer with CMEâ€¦and has reports supporting the Douglas subdivision. Will Margaret Young recuse herself? Does Dexter Young recuse himself when his â€œsonâ€™sâ€? firm is the primary engineer of record for developments before PZC? It just doesnâ€™t feel right.
If I sound upsetâ€¦I am. I would suggest that MOST town people had NO IDEA Delphaâ€™s husband was on IWWA when she was voted in. I would also suggest that the town had no alternative in Jay Livernoisâ€¦as the â€œotherâ€? candidate back then.
For democracy to workâ€¦it is important to have an open and vibrant media (internet, papers, etc.). I would suggest that even without direct blood tiesâ€¦business relationshipsâ€¦.certainly impact peopleâ€™s voting record..locally and nationally. Steve Adams is a GREAT example! His primary business is real estate law..where better to get new business and retain clients than being on PZC. In his previous lifeâ€¦he was Chairman of PZC for Newtown CTâ€¦during the time when development ate up 40% of the town, sewage was brought inâ€¦and the town went from â€œrural to densely suburbanâ€?. No possible conflict there? Where is that ethics bill from Hartford? We need a Woodstock Ethics Ordinance! Since obviouslyâ€¦.the boys and girls at the state & national level are too busy filling their pockets to want change, lets see about doing something locally.
So maybe if this â€œblogâ€? can figure out how to â€œdownloadâ€? large videoâ€¦it can post all three videos. But bewareâ€¦the amount of â€œdead airâ€? is unbelievable. In the IWWA discussionsâ€¦Dr. Looby and Frank Abissi never asked a question, offered a comment, sought a clarification in any of the meetingsâ€¦but they didnâ€™t need toâ€¦they have NEVER voted against ANY development in Woodstock.
Want more â€œconflictsâ€??â€¦just turn over any rock in Woodstockâ€¦we have lots of them in town!