Monday, June 27, 2011

A waste of state resources

In what some are calling an unusual move, Connecticut State Police members were used to hand-deliver notices to all 187 state legislators informing them of the special session scheduled for Thursday, June 30th.

Stephen Krauchick from has more:
State Senators and State Representatives across Connecticut were surprised even startled Saturday morning to find Connecticut State Police Officers at their door to hand deliver a “Proclamation From His Excellency The Governor” to return to session on June 30th.

“I think it’s a poor use of vital resource of our public safety officers to deliver to one hundred and eighty seven legislators official notices of a special session when they already received the notice on Thursday by e-mail. In addition most media already reported about the special session” said State Representative Brenda Kupchick from the 132nd District. Some of the officials we spoke to were uncertain who may have initiated the special delivery. Some speculated it may have been from the Secretary of the State or the Governor himself.
So far it isn't known who authorized the use of State Police officers to deliver these notices. It seems redundant in this age of immediate electronic communications, and very wasteful of valuable and expensive resources during this time of budgetary crisis.

While stopping far short of NJ Governor Chris Christie's use of a State Police helicopter to take him around on personal errands, this certainly doesn't appear to set a good example for fiscal restraint when our government utilizes State Police as messenger boys (& girls).

I'm sure we'll see more on this story soon.


West Haven Bob said...

Per the Conn. General Statutes:

"Sec. 2-7. Notice of special and reconvened sessions. (a) Whenever the Governor, the members of the General Assembly or the president pro tempore of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives call a special session of the General Assembly, the Secretary of the State shall give notice thereof by mailing a true copy of the call of such special session, by first class mail, evidenced by a certificate of mailing, to each member of the House of Representatives and of the Senate at his or her address as it appears upon the records of said secretary not less than ten nor more than fifteen days prior to the date of convening of such special session or by causing a true copy of the call to be delivered to each member by a state marshal, constable, state policeman or indifferent person at least twenty-four hours prior to the time of convening of such special session." (my emphasis added)

Whether this was construed to require direct use of State Police is another issue.

CT Bob said...

I don't doubt that the move was based on a statute like the one you quoted above. I just don't understand why anyone would think it's still a necessity to utilize the State Police with all the modern communications that are available now.

Just because a statute like that exists doesn't mean you have to use it. I think everyone would have gotten the message somehow.

This is where good judgment should be used.

West Haven Bob said...

Actually, the existence of this statute is exactly WHY you must obey it.

I agree that the law is outmoded and unnecessarily costly to follow, but while it exists it must be followed; and the fault for its continued existence lies squarely on the legislators...NOT the Governor.

Tessa Marquis said...

We have the same thing locally. Milford Board of Aldermen "packet" delivered by police every month.

But it keeps the neighborhood kids in line to see the cop car.

Anonymous said...

BS, not required by statute, the Gov. has the call to make and he did it in the most costly manner...but hell it did go to union workers, so all is good!

West Haven Bob said...

Anon -

It is NOT BS...

My first post stated the statuteverbatim. The reason that the Governor used the second option is because of the ten-day minimum time limit by any other legally allowable method. We NEED a budget by the start of the next fiscal year (or is this just another "stupid law" to be ignored - or broken for one's convenience?)

This particular law - like many on our books - needs updating, but while it stands, it must be obeyed.

Anonymous said...

Properly noticing meetings have been a critical part of any number of court rulings reversing an action because of inadequate noticing.

We are living in a time when opponents of any action or vote use any means available, including compliance with FOI regulations on meeting notices. All we need is someone (I can hear it now) going to court to stop a legislative action based on whether the legislators were properly noticed.

Besides this is how Sheriffs, constables and state police make their pin money.