More nonsense from the person who's quite arguably the WORST City Clerk in the history of Danbury.
From time to time, I read the minutes of meetings which I videotaped and since I attended the ad-hoc committee meeting on the appointment of Mike McLachlan for Director of economic Development, I wanted to see if our lovely City Clerk got the minutes right.
From the OFFICIAL minutes, here's what written about Minority Leader Tom Saadi's remarks (located at the end of the report):
Mr. Saadi stated the Council vote is a stamp of approval and not binding on the Mayor. He feels it's the Mayor's prerogative to structure his office the way he wishes. Mr Saadi agrees with the benefit of the cost savings, the accountability and the structure up to 15 hours. He further hopes adjustments will be made for a fill time director in the future.
Now, here's what Saadi ACTUALLY said:
Here's a REALLY rough transcript of what Saadi ACTUALLY said...which was left out of the official record on file at City Hall.
...in all candor, is it ultimately the mayor's decision how he structures his staff...ultimately, on the standpoint of the council voting on it, it's a opinion..it's not binding. My opinion is that it's the mayor's prerogative on how he structures his office.
[...]
Where I have concerns, and I think Mr. Rotello began those initially, ah, is the issue of potential...this was discussed and I don't want to beat a dead horse...the potential competing economic interest between municipalities that the State Senator represents with his Danbury hat on as a state senator.
It's not that being a municipal employee is a conflict...it is more the issue of a conflict in regards to the job description that a Economic Director has...that raises the very concerns I still have...I certainly hope there will be adjustments made going forward. I do think that...not to spend more money but a full time Economic Director...
Notice how all the critical remarks Saadi made about McLachlan's appointment didn't make it's say to the official record...THE RECORD THAT'S APPROVED BY CITY CLERK JEAN NATALE!
It's one thing to be just plain incompetent, it's another thing to be incompetent and play partisan politics and anyone with a clue can see that's exactly what's going on when it comes to scrubbing remarks that were critical to McLachlan! What other reason could there be for someone to TOTALLY ignore a significant section of an elected official's remarks?
Now do you understand why it's important that ALL Common Council meetings at City Hall should be videotaped/televised? Now you understand why the position of City Clerk SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.
To read more on the incompetence of our City Clerk, just click here.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
More nonsense from the person who's quite arguably the WORST City Clerk in the history of Danbury.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
