The Sandwich Man is a great place to grab a cup of coffee with some pals — but it’s probably not the best place to conduct official government business.
That’s the message First Selectman Paul Roy is sending to the town’s Commission on Aging.
The commission held its Dec. 22 meeting at The Sandwich Man, a diner at 6 Klarides Village Drive. It is known for its extensive menu, ranging from “comfort foods to healthy salads,” according to a review on Yelp.
Good eats or not, former First Selectman Robert Koskelowski complained about the meeting location to the Board of Selectmen Tuesday.
“The commission on aging had a meeting in December and I went to the building and there was no meeting,” Koskelowski said. “I came back, found the agenda, and found they had it at The Sandwich Man. This is highly unusual.”
Why Sandwich Man?
The commission usually meets at the Senior Center.
Joan Gee, the commission’s chairwoman, said she wasn’t trying to keep the public out of the meeting. No one from the public ever comes to the meetings, Gee said.
The December Sandwich Man meeting “was basically conversation and a holiday luncheon,” she said.
It was more enjoyable than the standard Senior Center meeting.
“There we don’t even have coffee,” she said, joking.
Are you OK with the Seymour Commission on Aging holding its meetings at The Sandwich Man?survey software
Illegal Meeting?
The meeting notice stated it would be held at 10 a.m. at The Sandwich Man, so the meeting doesn’t appear to violate the state Freedom of Information laws, according to Thomas Hennick, spokesman for the state’s Freedom of Information Commission.
The Freedom of Information Act defines what constitutes a meeting, how it should be advertised and provides many other guidelines to make sure government doesn’t do things in the dark.
A problem could have arisen if 20 people had showed up for the meeting at the restaurant and couldn’t find a seat, Hennick said. There may also be local town charter issue, depending on local rules, Hennick said.
“They can meet anywhere, so long as it is posted and people can attend,” Hennick said.
No More Sandwich Man
Roy said said the location was probably not a good choice — and that he would be relating that information to Gee.
“I hope the commission understands that it needs to meet at a location that would allow the public to attend the meeting,” Roy said in an e-mail.
Politics?
Gee indicated Koskelowski has an ax to grind.
Gee’s commission is questioning the way the Senior Center is operated and organized. The commission has also been asking why there are no job descriptions for employees who work at the Senior Center.
Gee said Koskelowski’s wife, Diane, is an assistant to the Senior Center director and his son, Brian, drives a van for the Senior Center.
There were no issues at the Senior Center until new members were appointed to the commission, Koskelowski said. Koskelowski said the Commission on Aging is taking the wrong tack. He disagreed with everything Gee said.
“They came in like a bull in a China shop,” he said.
These complainers need to get a life. I’m a homecare hospice nurse, believe me, this is a non-problem. Politics, and politicians, just plain suck.
Would the owners of the Sandwich Man be upset if 20 people showed up for the meeting and not one of them ordered anything? Just took up customer space? These people on the Commission on Aging are just trouble-makers. The commission on aging should not even be in existence. OK, Paul Roy, disband them!
K’s whole family needs to quit living on Seymour’s dime. That being said, I don’t mind a public club having meetings at a restaurant, but not a govt commission! If folks had shown up how could the public hear what was being said at their table?
Although the meeting was not illegal the mere location breeds negatives(lack of space for the public etc.) Better judgement should be used in the future.
Believe me seymourct. I don’t do this job for the money.
This is something we’re going to argue about? Really? We don’t have anything *better* to do?
If it’s a matter of not violating the FOI act, then fine. But this is such a non-issue that it’s almost sickening, especially if these people were purchasing their food on their own accord (they DID purchase the food on their own accord and not expense it to Seymour… right?). And three days before the holidays? Forgive me if I’m not going out to find my finest torches and pitchforks.
I have to agree with Ms. Gee; this is Mr. Koskelowski rabble-rousing. If he feels he needs to do that, then fine, First Amendment and all that. But this is a silly axe to grind, and I can imagine Mr. Roy getting this news with his hand on his face like “you’re serious?”
How about a compromise: they have their meetings at the Senior Centre, and cater? That way, everyone’s happy. Until then, shame on Mr. Koskelowski for turning a mountain into a molehill (again), shame on a few commenters here for taking the opportunity to make their own partisan points (again…) and shame on this site’s spell checker for not allowing me to shut it off (%$?!).
Sharpeye, stuff it. The man was the First Selectman of Seymour for a long time. He’s a public figure who invites criticism of his actions. He knew those risks when he took the job. Criticising public officials is one way in how our democracy works, and both sides in this case have earned their fair share. Them’s the breaks, and frankly, I tire of you making a comment anytime someone on these boards says anything remotely critical.