New Milford First: Working hard, asking questions
Published 9:01 pm, Wednesday, November 11, 2009
To the Editor:
In Hamlet, Shakespeare's queen says, "The lady doth protest too much."
We think the Republicans do protest too much.
Their attacks constitute a lot of fluff and flutter, because they still did not address the issues that were raised.
John Kane is not seeking to "resurrect" his ethics complaint. He simply is repeating New Milford First's (and Connecticut Common Cause's) call for a state-wide ethics code, with regional commissions, to take ethics issues out of the town's self-policing mode.
Regarding the lack of transparency with the budget process, the fact remains that Moody's rating service put the town on warning that its bond rating could be lowered because the mayor and town council had reduced the town's surplus below acceptable levels.
There is no disputing the fact the town now has until July 1, 2010 to complete the Plan of Conservation and Development.
We questioned why the town had to get that extension from the state Office of Policy and Management, instead of completing the revision when it was originally due, according to state statute, in 2007.
In 1997, the Planning Commission amassed the "volumes of input from many sources" and still had the report completed on time.
There were several points that were not answered, probably because there is no way the Republicans can spin them in their favor:
Although the town reimbursed the defendant (John Spatola) for his legal fees, it spent nothing to defend itself in the ethics case.
New Milford First works hard to create transparent, honest government, asking the questions that cause political parties to huff, puff, fluff, flutter and protest too much.