Calling a petitioning candidate’s foray into the municipal election a strategy to expand a platform of disparagement that long has taxed the volunteers and employees who run New Canaan, First Selectman Rob Mallozzi said he considers himself an uncontested incumbent.
New Canaan First Selectman Rob Mallozzi
“I do not have an opponent,” Mallozzi told NewCanaanite.com, though technically Michael Nowacki of Lost District Drive did garner the required signatures to get onto the ballot.
“Mr. Nowacki is using the 35 signatures he gained to give him a forum above and beyond the normal targeting he does of Town Hall employees and other interests in town. But he is not a legitimate contender for this office. I don’t view him as such.”
He added: “I don’t think he has the mental or intellectual capacity to handle a job like this. And I just will not acknowledge him as an opponent of mine for this office.”
Michael Nowacki of New Canaan. Contributed
Mallozzi said he will not sit on a candidates’ forum beside Nowacki because doing so would only elevate a campaign he discredits.
“I don’t think his rants and ravings deserve that type of a forum,” the first selectman said.
Asked for his thoughts on Mallozzi’s remarks, Nowacki said: “I don’t care what Rob Mallozzi says. The people of New Canaan will decide. Rob Mallozzi has one vote to cast.”
Mallozzi, who was elected to his second term as first selectman in 2013, said his feeling that Nowacki is not a viable candidate is based on “a number of things.”
Those include “the grinding to a halt” to which Nowacki has brought town government on occasions, such as through requests under the Freedom of Information Act, and emails that accuse people in town of fraud or corruption.
Saying he regularly addresses issues in town government as part of his day-to-day work, Mallozzi added: “No person that wants to run for office should ever try to discredit hard-working volunteers, for the most part, to the degree that he has. He sees a conspiracy behind every corner. He does not like to build things up. He likes to tear them down. It’s the opposite of the way I go about running this community. So I don’t think he’s legitimate, and yes, he’s gone to jail, he has a record of being behind bars, he’s been disruptive at meetings, he doesn’t like to be told ‘No,’ and all these things are not really of the character you would assume to run the type of community that New Canaan has or any community. I think he’s a menace.”
Nowacki on April 13, 2011 was arrested for criminal contempt of court and was sentenced to 29 days in jail, according to the Connecticut Judicial Branch website.
Asked about the arrest and sentence, Nowacki said that the official who imposed them—Judge Referee Jack Grogins—later “recused himself for biased prejudice.”
“Jack Grogins violated every civil right I had and he will be the subject of a federal lawsuit,” Nowacki told NewCanaanite.com.
Has anyone tallied up the amount of money that the repeated Freedom of Information Act requests have cost the taxpayers of New Canaan?
While I strongly believe that FOIA requests provide an important measure of transparency into governmental affairs, and could expose incidences of waste (and worse), at some point they become a source of governmental waste unto themselves. What is the cost vs. benefit of this activity?
If these requests are exposing legitimate inefficiencies in town government, then they serve a benefit. If they are used to harass or otherwise impede the normal behavior of town officials, then this is an abuse of the system.
Is it legal to charge a user fee for FOIA requests? It would seem sensible to charge for FOIA requests over and above a certain amount that wouldn’t discourage legitimate fact finding – say 10 free per user per year, then pass along the costs of more frequent inquiries.
While I understand Mr Mallozi’s. Frustration with Mr Nowacki’s conduct, it is a shame to see our First Selectman spurn the candidates forum.
The League of Women Voters has for many years strove to bring a semblance of a campaign to new Canaan. Their forum is the only opportunity for candidates of both parties to appear together to discuss town issues. Mr Mallozzi’s absence belittles that effort.