Westport’s Planning and Zoning Commission

I recently submitted this letter to the Westport News, which published it today, May 16, 2008

Process at the P & Z

 

Dear Editor:

 

            As a Westport resident for the last 18 years, an attorney, and as one who served on both the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the Zoning Board of Appeals, I can no longer stand by in idle silence when a Commission I had been proud to serve in years past has changed for the worse to become almost unrecognizable.  I am speaking of our P & Z, which has been hated, loved and feared, but always respected.

 

            In the past, the rule was that the political party who won the majority of seats chose the Chairman.  The Chairman then permitted the minority party to choose among themselves as to who would be best as Vice-Chairman. Then the P & Z voted as a whole to elect that minority party member as Vice-Chairman.  There may have been skirmishes about individuals, but on the whole this policy worked. It respected the fact that by law, no more than 4 seats out of 7 may be held by a particular political party. What goes around comes around as the majority of today could be the minority of tomorrow.  

 

            I have no idea exactly when or why this policy changed but apparently it has. The Chairman of the P & Z is a Democrat. The Vice-Chairman is also a Democrat. Not fair, and not respectful.  For the record, I am now unaffiliated, having been both a Republican and a Democrat.

 

            This lack of respect of P & Z members for one another has boiled over into public hearings.  I attended two of the recent Mahackeno Y hearings.  I was appalled at the treatment bestowed by Chairman Ron Corwin upon fellow P & Z member, Helen Block. By way of example, Ms. Block requested information on the historic nature of the Merritt Parkway because the land under review directly abuts the Merritt.  Mr. Corwin made a public statement to the audience that he wanted it known that this information was not requested by the Commission as a whole but merely by one member.  Why does this matter? Why belittle another colleague’s efforts to receive all pertinent information? Mr. Corwin’s attitude toward Ms. Block is condescending, dismissive, sexist and frankly, embarrassing.  We in Westport deserve a lot better.

 

            I served under chairperson Ellie Lowenstein. Did we always agree on the issues? Of course not. But never once did I nor any of my colleagues who sat on the P & Z with me ever have cause to complain that Ms. Lowenstein was highhanded, dictatorial, patronizing or exclusionary.  And at that time Ellie and I were not members of the same political party.  

           

            The public does not elect the chairperson of the P & Z.  The public votes for individual members, each of whom has equal power.  The chairmanship role is administrative only.  When real issues are decided, or information is obstructed under  the guise of “administrative power”, then something has gone terribly wrong. Another example: To “increase efficiency,” Mr. Corwin has publicly proposed a new pre-application process by which only certain committee members of the P & Z will hear an application and then decide whether to send it to the full Commission for review. Disenfranchising the public and other members of the Board may be efficient but in the choice between efficiency and democracy, we have already determined that democracy is worth it.

 

            Members of the P & Z as well as the public must speak up when an administrative role is being misused to unfairly control and set the agenda. 

 

            With all the substantive issues surrounding the Machackeno Y application, why am I writing this letter now?  Because the proverbial straw broke my camel’s back when I read that the P & Z has decided to hold hearings from 6:30 PM to 11:30 PM to keep a deadline to close the hearings by a certain date, rather than extend the deadline as the Conservation Commission did.  6:30 to11:30 P.M.?  Exactly who agreed to this? And why?  Who does it benefit to hold interminably long hearings? Most people cannot be accommodated this way.  Who does it benefit to rush the process? Not the citizens of Westport. Moreover, an unfair process could lead to legal action which would further delay the entire process.

 

            Clearly, the only conclusion one can reach is that these hearings are being held for the benefit of the Y itself, the foregone winner of this battle, to enable them to get their first spade in the ground before the first frost.

 

            Process is often used to subvert results.  I am saddened to watch it here in the Town of Westport. I urge members of the P & Z to right itself to regain respect in the eyes of those who elected you. You owe us nothing less.

 

                                                            Lisa K. Wexler

                                                            Host, “Live!” With Lisa Radio Show           

                                                            Former Member, Westport P & Z

                                                            Former Member, Westport ZBA

                                                                       

             

                                                                       

 

 

              

           

           

 

           

 

             

              

 

           

 

             

 

              

 

Honestly, Mother

In honor of mother’s day coming up this Sunday, I asked myself, “What is the most important lesson my mother taught me?”  Thank you, Billy Joel, for saying it so well.

“Honesty is such a lonely word.
Everyone is so untrue.
Honesty is hardly ever heard.
And mostly what I need from you.”

My mother’s greatest gift to me is the gift of truth. Truth, as she sees it. Unvarnished, tactless, reliable, trustworthy truth.  Would that I had her courage to tell it, as she does.

People who tell the truth suffer for it.  Most people really don’t want to hear the truth.  They do not want to hear it about our government, if the government is doing something bad. That bad news would imply they would have to exert themselves to do something about it. People don’t want to hear the truth about today’s economy; how often are we told not to say anything negative about the economy for fear it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy?  Certainly people do not want to hear the truth about themselves- that’s a huge no-no.

Just yesterday I was confronted with this very dilemma.  A friend of mine showed me a picture taken of her of which she was truly proud. Who am I to say that the dress didn’t flatter her figure at all?  That she should not have let someone else talk her into wearing it and posing that way?  Not I, the chicken. I assessed the risk vs. reward.  The risk was hurting my friend’s feelings, and to what end? The picture was already taken- it was out there, soon to be published. The reward?  That I would be honest with her, that she would know that she could rely on my honesty, in a world full of yesmen and flatterers.  I ducked.  She didn’t ask my opinion, and I didn’t volunteer it.  Dishonest, tactful, or just chicken?  I vote cluck.

What would my mother have done?  Her first instinct would have been to volunteer her opinion.  How many friends she lost because she needed to tell her version of the truth.  I watched those averted faces, observed the body language of those who shunned her honesty.  My dad kept those opinions to himself, even when asked. Ever the diplomat, he was everyone’s pal, but no one’s true confidant.  My mother was the true friend, but only if you value sincerity.

I take the middle road.  In personal matters, if asked an opinion by someone I care about, I tell my truth, but only after that person affirms that they really want to hear my version of truth. I never assume it.   I try not to volunteer but rather to wait until asked.  I’m a master at interpreting negative reactions. 

Political matters are a lot easier. My version of the truth is the truth- didn’t you know?  Just listen to my radio show.

Thank you, my most wonderful mother, for giving me the one gift that no one else in the world could have given me- the gift of knowing the difference between truth and falsehood, between insincere flattery and candid compliments,  between pretentiousness and authenticity. 

Happy Mother’s Day Mommy for letting me count on you to tell me the truth as you see it. As we know, the way you see it is usually the way it is.

This Friday and Saturday on Live! with Lisa, www.livewithlisaradio.com, I’ll be asking listeners to call in and tell me: What is the Most Important Lesson Your Mother Taught You?  Find us on Friday between 10:00AM-12:Noon on www.wybc.com, and call in at 203-562-1340.  On Saturday between 10:30- Noon, call us at 203-845-3030.   

Happy Mother’s Day to you too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

   

 

 

 

 

 

Fame ( I want to live forever…)

Thinking in song titles as I do, the lyrics to Fame have a particular resonance these days.

Fame is such a peculiar phenomenon. We know it is fleeting, pathetically so.  Clark Gable, Jimmy Stewart, John Wayne- these men deserve to be remembered, yet even their fame is a distant memory to the next generation of movie-goers. In our fast-forward world,  fame is especially quick.  One hardly waits for the peak before the descent has already begun, and the public is ready to feed off a new instant celebrity.

Studies show that most people crave fame, crave it much more than we are willing to consciously admit.  Why?  Because who doesn’t want to be recognized at airports, be made to feel special amongst a roomful of strangers, sit at the best table at a restaurant, and have access to that special world of other famous people?  Not to mention celebrity discounts at all the stores…

Rosie O’Donnell warns of the lure of fame in her short gem of a book, Celebrity Detox. She admits to loving all the perks, the attention, the money, the glorious specialness of it all. She is candid in describing fame as its own addiction, complete with cravings, and the need for the next fix, the feeling of being unsatisfied, discontent with the ordinary, needing more adulation, more affirmation, more and more- until finally, one day, she stops. She steps off the fame train, temporarily at least.  Time for Detox, time to make time with her family.

I saw Priscilla Presley on Dancing with the Stars this week, for about 20 seconds, at the end of her performance, as she was being judged, looking tired, sweaty, and only just a little younger than her 64 years. (The neck was the giveaway).  Why? I asked myself. Why does Priscilla Presley need to compete on a stage with 20 year olds- what is she trying to prove? And then it hit me- Priscilla Presley isn’t trying to prove anything- she simply needs to be in the spotlight. She misses it. She has been off the stage too long and  craves the attention. All the money, the old press clippings, even the fame of her name are no longer good enough.  Priscilla Presley misses the eyes, the attention, the applause.  I get it. Rosie would get it.

I am ruminating on the nature of fame lately because of the ascendance of my sister Jill Zarin, who is enjoying the spotlight these days as the star of Bravo TV’s The Real Housewives of New York City. I was with her when she was stopped in New York and recognized.  It was fun, it was dynamic, it was a little strange.

The peculiar thing about fame is that people believe they really know you, based upon what they know of you. As the host of a radio show, Live! with Lisa, I am candid on-air about my opinions, my likes and dislikes.  One day I interviewed a specialist on compulsive overeating, and I was gabbing about my own insecurities regarding shopping for clothes.  A woman called to scold me on the air, saying that she knew I was not a compulsive overeater and I wasn’t taking the subject seriously enough.  How does she know that I’m not binging on the Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups every night and maybe throwing them up right afterwards??? hmmm. Not important.  What was important was that she really believed she knew me, Lisa, personally. 

My friend Virginia tells me there is a price for fame.  Celebrity discounts, anyone?

You tell me, please. 

         

        

  

    

Boring Oscars

The Oscars have not finished yet and I turned them off anyway. No interest.  Even the film clips this year have no zip. While watching the names of Best Picture winners of the past, I found myself thinking- some of those were great movies, but not all of them. Some of them I never even saw, and I am a major movie buff.  Major.

Just about the only channel I watch is TCM Turner Classic Movies. Thank you Ted Turner for giving me the one channel where I can watch my black and whites without commercials.

Why is there no zip tonight?  John Stewart is off his game- he’s simply not funny. The nominated movies are too violent, too gory for me. I haven’t seen them yet and I am unlikely to want to see them tomorrow.

The only radiant star is Marion Cotillard for La Vie En Rose, but I am partial to Piaf. That movie I’ll see.

Why is Hollywood today so worlds apart from the Hollywood of yesterday?  It’s the chicken or the egg question- which came first? The increasingly vulgar culture that influenced Hollywood, or the Hollywood that vulgarized our culture?  Either way, we are stuck with people of influence who prefer to see the dark side of life, who glamourize violence and gore, who see beauty in long, extended visual sequences of death and dying.

Not my cup of tea.  But look who’s talking- my favorite movie of all time is The Sound Of Music.  

 What’s your favorite movie?  

What, Me Worry?

Is it just a gut feeling, or a gut feeling that comes after your brain collects disparate facts and puts them together?

In the last week, three friends called me to talk.  Here is what they have in common:

1.  All are women.

2. All are between the ages of 50-60. 

3. All support children or young adults.

4. Two have no husband; one gets limited help from her husband.

5. All own their own homes.

6. All are highly educated and consider themselves upper middle class.

7.  All work full-time, with no job security, in the fields of finance, real estate and health care. 

8.  All are up late at night sweating about paying bills.

9. All are close to losing their homes because of dwindling finances.

10. All are considering bankruptcy or seriously worried about foreclosure.  

I have been practicing law since 1984. I’m old enough to have been through at least one miserable real estate cycle and recession.  Was it because I was younger, and therefore my friends were younger, that I didn’t know of this kind of suffering, or was it because this kind of suffering did not then disproportionately hit middle- aged, single-woman households who still have children depending on them? 

Newspaper headlines notwithstanding, there are lots of reasons for an economic downturn, and subprime lending is just one of them.  Personal greed, overbuilding, the weak dollar, outsourcing, poor political and corporate leadership, disproportionate executive pay, the US energy policy and the Iraq war are on that list as well.

In a capitalist society, booms and busts are part of life.  We cannot and should not expect our government to bail us out of every economic problem; last time I checked, a system that does that is not called capitalist anymore.   

Nevertheless, I feel an ill wind coming.  I feel for my close friends. I worry for my own family.  I need to break my own spending habits, and disregard the reigning economic mantra of our president to keep spending, spending. spending, in a drunken orgy of credit cards.  

OR, I need to live for today, because you never know what will happen tomorrow,and what the hell, life is short, so I’ll die tomorrow with a little less…

Either one. 

Media Bias in FRONT OF MY EYES

Scene: Yale Child Study Center, New Haven, CT

Date & Time: 2/4/08: 10:30 AM

Players: 1.  Lisa Wexler, sitting with the press corps, no laptop, blackberry or other communicating device.  Holding a tiny Olympus recorder, realizing it has no battery.

2. Clinton’s traveling press corps, complete with every communication device known to man.

3. Clinton’s traveling press corps camerapeople, whose cameras I have come to realize are frequently used as a lethal weapon if you happen to be in the way of a good shot.

Act I:  Hillary Clinton walks into the room with a smile, sits down.  Hillary Clinton is introduced by a man who works at the Yale Child Study Center, who fondly remembers Hillary from her days as a Yale Law Student when she volunteered her time at the Center to help abused children.

After a heartfelt and warm introduction, Hillary says with a smile something to the effect of , I thought I wasn’t going to tear up, but now it seems like I might be on a different path…

The moment passes, it is clear there is real affection at the table, and the discussion begins.

Act II: Immediately, the person writing for the Daily News (not sure whose Daily News, incidentally ,but saw that by-line at top)- types on his laptop: “Hillary Clinton tears up again…”   

HELLO?  I was right there- this was a normal emotional moment, and a normal comment for someone to make after such a personal introduction.  What is this particular journalist trying to prove with his headline?  Why this headline? Is he trying to show that Hillary is on an emotional roller-coaster? That she cries all the time???

This is precisely the kind of slanted reporting that I despise.

These politicians simply can’t get a break.  Period.  No wonder why it’s so hard to get good people to run for office these days- the media must take some responsibility for this.

And here is another tidbit for good measure:

So I’m sitting next to a journalist who travels with Hillary’s campaign, who isn’t even voting tomorrow.  Why do I have the feeling that she isn’t the only one?

Did I tell you I have no respect for people who don’t vote???- especially if they are in the media, when they are, theoretically, more informed. Although, based on what I saw today, maybe it is just as well… 

 Tomorrow I get to vote- yeah! 

    

Hillary Clinton at Yale today

For me, a record. Two presidential candidates in person within 24 hours. Yesterday John McCain at Sacred Heart, today Hillary Clinton at Yale Child Study Center.

Naturally, I had no camera and my recorder’s battery wore out. Same old story for the non-tech Lisa.

The Yale visit was intimate and refreshing.  Less than 100 people in the room, including media, which took up almost half the seats. Sen. Clinton sat around a rectangle table with ordinary women, some more accomplished than others, talking about what matters to them in their everyday struggles of child care, health care, and managing to keep their heads above water economically.    Sen. Clinton looked splendid in a lovely yellow jacket; in person, she was attractive in every way.  

I was happy to hear a presidential candidate focus on children and health care, things we can and should improve.

Next post on media bias right in front of my eyes.     

McCain Rally at Sacred Heart Today

Just returned from McCain rally at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, CT. Big Crowd, mostly friendly.  Observations:

 1. I liked that McCain is unpretentious, even with his speeches. No secret service, no pat-downs, very light security.  He was comfortable addressing a couple of hecklers, respectful of the process. He seems very comfortable in his own skin, which is reassuring, and a stark contrast to the present occupant of the White House.

2. There was not one black or hispanic face that I could see in the crowd. Not one.  It occurred to me that McCain may be capable of reaching across the aisle in Congress, but his campaign has not reached across the broad spectrum of people that comprise America.

3.  McCain spoke briefly, concentrating on the issue of the war against terrorism. For those for whom this is the most important issue, McCain is your candidate. 

4. I think the war against pollution of every kind: air, water, habitat, food- is the most critical issue of our time. If we don’t fight that war- by conserving our resources, developing clean energy and protecting the diversity of wildlife that still remains on this planet- then we are missing the big picture for the next generations. McCain is better on these issues than most of his Republican colleagues, but his solution to the energy crisis is to re-introduce nuclear power plants.   I do not understand why we would want to return to an energy source that has problems we haven’t solved yet, such as the shelf-life of the waste it produces.

5. McCain is proud of having supported Alito and Roberts to the Supreme Court. I think they are a disaster.   

Who Are You Voting For? Tell Me On-Air Saturday

This Saturday January 26th 2008 on the Live! with Lisa Radio Show on WSTC/WNLK AM (1400 and 1350) from 11:20 AM-11:55 AM I am asking my audience to tell me who they are voting for in the Connecticut primary and why.  Call-in number is 203-845-3044.  All registered voters who intend to vote are welcome to call. I’d like to get in as many calls as possible from supporters of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Ron Paul, John McCain, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. Did I forget anyone?  (Kucinich just dropped out)      

Please identify your first name and where you are calling from when you call. Thank you.   

DNA For Misdemeanors?

Sorry Mike Bloomberg. I like a lot of what you stand for, but not your newest idea of testing every traffic violator with a DNA swab just to add to the government database.  For that, I think police must need probable cause for a serious crime. 

Does anyone care that the government seems intent on amassing an enormous database of its population? Ssoon they won’t let babies out of hospitals without putting the DNA in a government database first.  Where will it stop? Sure, it might be good for cops, but lots of things are good for the police that aren’t good for the rest of us citizens.