GROUP LETTER: First Selectman Camillo, Sign the Grant Legislation

Group letter (see list below)

Dear Editor,

On Tuesday January 17 the Representative Town Meeting (RTM) voted to accept a $500,000 grant, awarded to our bipartisan Registrars of Voters, to enhance election infrastructure in our town. Unfortunately, the First Selectman has not signed this legislation, even though the vote was confirmed by the RTM Moderator. We feel that NOT signing the grant legislation is biased and inconsistent with the duties of the First Selectman’s office, and we urge First Selectman Camillo to sign the legislation without delay.

By now, most people are aware that a group of RTM legislators from the losing side of the grant vote have protested the results and are seeking to overturn the decision. Putting aside the merits and demerits of this protest for the moment, let’s review the role of the First Selectman’s office.  The job of the First Selectman is to enact legislation that has been passed by the RTM.  Whether or not there is a protest, until such time as an RTM vote has been overturned or changed, it IS the law of the land and the will of the people of our town, as expressed by a majority vote of elected officials in the RTM. 

It should not be up to the First Selectman’s office to decide which legislation is valid, what RTM legislation should be signed or what should be rejected.  Normal procedure dictates that the correct and neutral policy stance is for the First Selectman to sign this legislation. By all means, if the First Selectman feels inclined to do so, he may like to issue a statement making clear that if something changes regarding the vote going forward, corrective actions will be taken at that time. But not signing now is wrong, and it is not normal procedure.

Not signing also sets a terrible precedent. Imagine what would happen if every time there is a vote, the losing side claims fraud or a technical glitch and asks for a do-over. Imagine if they can put pressure on the First Selectman to use his executive power to support their cause by refusing to sign legislation.  Our town would become ungovernable, and the RTM would become a farce.

The First Selectman was advised not to sign the grant legislation because of a pending motion to rescind the vote, but this is misguided. It is important to understand that the effort to overturn the vote can move forward whether or not Mr. Camillo signs the legislation. No grant funds can be spent without prior approval from the BET and the RTM. And this is not a contract but a grant agreement, one that both parties can withdraw from at any time.  Accordingly, the only reason NOT to sign the grant legislation is to show support for the protesters. The logical conclusion is that this is not an impartial act, as the First Selectman has insisted. 

And that is exactly how the faction working to overturn the RTM vote have interpreted the First Selectman’s actions. At the last meeting of the Republican Town Committee (RTC), First Selectman Camillo received a big round of applause and expressions of gratitude from this faction for NOT signing the legislation. This begs the question – is the First Selectman doing his job and representing the best interests of the people of our town by following the will of the RTM, as he is supposed to do, or is he bending the rules to represent the best interests of a partisan group of hard-right protestors currently controlling the RTC?  The best way to avoid this can of worms is to do the right thing – follow normal protocols and sign the legislation.

Finally, with his action, the First Selectman sends a terrible signal about respecting voting outcomes.  The software company responsible for our voting systems spent two days analyzing the voting results, the equipment, and our systems. Their report was reviewed by the Town Clerk, the Town Attorney, our IT consultants and the RTM Moderator. No evidence of fraud, or of a “glitch,” or of miscounting was found, and the vote results were reaffirmed as valid by the RTM Moderator.  Yet, instead of standing by Town authorities, the First Selectman is choosing to stand with a group that is seeking to overturn a confirmed voting outcome and refusing to sign legislation that was duly passed by the RTM. 

We have seen this scenario played out many times in the last few years – the losers of an election refusing to accept defeat and making claims of fraud to get what they want, losing in the courts over and over again, but never before have we seen this happen in our town, and never before have we seen a group like the current hard right faction controlling the Republican Town Committee, actively undermining confidence in our local democratic process to achieve their goals.

We urge the First Selectman to do the right thing and sign the grant legislation, as he is required to do. It is not too late to make a course correction.  Let the effort to overturn the vote move forward and we will see how it plays out. But the First Selectman should not abandon his duty and he should never lend his executive office to support efforts aimed at overturning our legislative process and undermining confidence in our voting system.

Sincerely,

Peter Berg, D8

Ellen Brennan Galvin, D7

Glen Canner, D12

Matt DesChamps, D6

Mary Flynn, D12

Bill Galvin, D7

Alison Ghiorse, D1

Dana Gordon, D8

Shaye Hester, D9

Scott Kalb, D7

Myra Klockenbrink, D8

Mark Kordick, D9

Lucy Krasnor, D5

Lindy Lilien, D5

Richard Margenot, D8

Abigail McCarthy, D12

Janet McMahon, D8

Anthony Moor, D7

Cheryl Moss, Chair, D8

Dana Neuman, Vice Chair, D11

Nerlyn Pierson, D11

Barbara ONeill, D6

Jonathan Perloe, D8

Caryn Rosenbaum, D8

Steve Rubin, D3, Vice Chair, Education Committee

Romulo E. Samaniego, D4

David Snyder, D6

Joanne Steinhart, D9

Jay Teevan, D2

Joan Thakor, D5

Lucy Von Brachel, D4

James Waters, D12

Cory Williams, D8

Victoria Martin Young, D6