Another Dopazo Deception.
By Jim Conley • February 27th, 2007 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
Here’s what happens to a community group that takes the lawyer on the town’s payroll - Jennifer Dopazo - at her word. They get screwed.
Readers will recall from my February column (read here) that Dopazo manipulated Chestnut Hill residents into believing that a stop work order on illegal construction at 71 Spooner Road complied with an order to rescind the building permit at the site.
Now watch as she works her magic on the Fisher Hill Association and the permit for construction of Building D at the Longyear development in that neighborhood. The Association asked Dopazo to ensure that there would be a public process before the building permit was issued. Dopazo (in a letter dated June 2, 2006) tells them:
“The Planning Board will hold a public meeting to review the plans. You will receive notice of the time and place of the Planning Board’s meeting and be given an opportunity to raise the issues in your May 19 letter and/or submit any documentation to the Planning Board for their consideration.”
This statement is patently false.
Here’s why. The difference between a public meeting and a public hearing is that the public is not necessarily allowed to be heard at a public meeting. The Chair of a committee may open the floor to the public, but they don’t have to. In fact, Dopazo instructed the Planning Board that they could not hold a public hearing on Longyear subsequent to sending the Association her letter of assurance.
The permit was issued on September 27, 2006.
As the town’s chief attorney, it’s fair to assume that Dopazo knows the difference between a public hearing and a public meeting. But she pulled the same stunt back in August of 2006 concerning the ZBA’s “public hearing” on the St. Aidan’s settlement. That turned into a public meeting as well. (see previous post).
Remember, dear taxpayer, you pay for this nonsense. How long are you going to keep doing that?
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
I’m currently reading Frank Luntz’ “Words that Work.” He heaps praise upon former Pfizer CEO Hank McKinnell, who said:
“As Phizer’s CEO, it is my ultimate responsibility to our customers, employees, and shareholders to ensure that our products are safe and our code of conduct beyond reproach.
“Our customers depend on us for honesty. Our health as a business is tied to the health of the people we serve. Science is difficult. Business is complicated. Accountability is not. You’ve either done the right thing or you’ve done the wrong thing. It’s that simple. There are no shades of gray when it comes to corporate ethics. Ethical failure equals corporate failure.”
As I read this, I thought of our Town of 56,000+, a municipal corporation, wondering who is our CEO? Is it Rich Kelliher, the Town Administrator? Is it our part-time Board of Selectmen led by Chair Bobby Allen? Who has the resposibility in our Town that Mr. McKinnell talks about regarding Pfizer? A CEO such as Mr. McKinnell would lead and serve as a role model for our Town Managers, knowing that the buck stops with him. Yes, the business of running our Town can be difficult and complicated, what with the limitations of Representative Town Meeting (five Selectmen elected for three-year staggered terms serving as the Execuive branch and 240 TMMs similarly elected serving as the Legislative branch). The problem is that there is no accountability, which for McKinnon at Pfizer was not complicated. Our Town has had episodes of at least the appearance of ethical lapses over the past several years, with many shades of gray. This can lead to failure of our rudderless, municipal corporation, without a competent CEO at the helm.
If our Town had a competent CEO, what might he/she say about Town Counsel’s performance related in this post?
Let’s sing: “CHARTER, CHARTER, CHARTER-CHARTER, DIG, DIG, DIG ….”
With respect to citizen participation, I commend to Brookline residents Sherry R. Arnstein’s “A Ladder of Citizen Participation” published in 1969 that is available at:
http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-arnstein/ladder-of-citizen-participation.html
to take a look at Sherry’s ladder to locate the rung describing some of the public meetings or hearings they may have attended in our Town. I wonder if Jim can put up Figure 2 of the article showing “Eight rungs on the ladder of citizen participation” as a guide for residents to grade public meetings and hearings in our Town that they may attend. Sherry’s article has much vitality today.
[...] Another Dopazo Deception.Here’s what happens to a community group that takes the lawyer on… [...]