“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 krapoport@eecnet.com, or, best yet, snail mail them to Ken’s home address in Woodstock -Ken Rapoport, PO Box 625, Woodstock, CT 06281.

PETITION
February 2006

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 “subordinate� to the selectmen- specifically the IWWA.

(B) Incorporate mechanisms by which “conflict of interest� 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 “conflict of interest� to incorporate any members, of any boards, which are seeking legal actions against the Town of Woodstock, and therefore its citizens. Assure “board questionnaires� are completely filled out and signed by the applicants.

These measures should be enacted immediately, and retroactively enforced where applicable, to restore “any loss of trust and to maintain and increase the confidence of our citizens in the integrity and fairness of their government�, as quoted directly from Woodstock’s CODE OF ETHICS
Print
Name Address Phone Signature

PETITION
February 2006

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.

Print
Name Address Phone Signature

To answer Debunker’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 “recuseâ€? themselves when conflict arises.

I also have “proof positive� that IWWA meeting minutes were altered during the Nelson Douglas review to assist Douglas in his planned lawsuit…because I video taped the entire meeting…and one of his “key issues� hinges on the modified wording within the meeting minutes. Want more? Dan Very organized a “secret� meeting, disguised as an administrative meeting� to discuss IWWA business, rather than its true intent….to discuss & initiate a decision….without the full board present…but again…we intercepted, videotaped…and with Very calling the town attorney by phone- wasting our precious tax dollars- Dan and the boys were told to “cancel� it. Dan certainly attempts to appear knowledgable…in the last IWWA meeting on wetlands…he introduced “new information� after the public hearing was closed (illegal), questioned the DEP’s definition of “significant� vernal pools after Dr. DeSanto’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 CME’s Soil Engineer, given the CME engineer’s entire year of Environmental experience as an “intern� 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. Very’s “real� expertise…you must listen to Dan’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 “highly knowledgable and useful member of IWWA�…at least to any developers that want to build in Woodstock!! Oh yes, wasn’t it also Delpha Very who oversaw the town’s first foray into “open space� acquisition by suggesting to buy her former partner’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 Eaffy’s wife)..appointed by the “old� selectman Very, Alberts and Eaffy? Her primary strength in her resume includes “knowledge of construction and concern about the importance of the environment�…better to have her as a full member than a current IWWA alternate with an BS & MS in the physical sciences? Scott Young’s an excellent engineer with CME…and has reports supporting the Douglas subdivision. Will Margaret Young recuse herself? Does Dexter Young recuse himself when his “son’s� firm is the primary engineer of record for developments before PZC? It just doesn’t feel right.

If I sound upset…I am. I would suggest that MOST town people had NO IDEA Delpha’s husband was on IWWA when she was voted in. I would also suggest that the town had no alternative in Jay Livernois…as the “other� candidate back then.

For democracy to work…it is important to have an open and vibrant media (internet, papers, etc.). I would suggest that even without direct blood ties…business relationships….certainly impact people’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 life…he was Chairman of PZC for Newtown CT…during the time when development ate up 40% of the town, sewage was brought in…and the town went from “rural to densely suburban�. No possible conflict there? Where is that ethics bill from Hartford? We need a Woodstock Ethics Ordinance! Since obviously….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 “blog� can figure out how to “download� large video…it can post all three videos. But beware…the amount of “dead air� is unbelievable. In the IWWA discussions…Dr. Looby and Frank Abissi never asked a question, offered a comment, sought a clarification in any of the meetings…but they didn’t need to…they have NEVER voted against ANY development in Woodstock.

Want more “conflicts�?…just turn over any rock in Woodstock…we have lots of them in town!