Pisani to Sue Newtown – Part 1
To The Editor:
Legislative Council member Derek Pisani is exploring the idea of suing Newtown for Gross Stupidity. At the July 2nd LC meeting, the need for an ordinance to address protests was debated. Many of the protestors themselves protested at the meeting. Kudos to them! The agenda item came up because on April 19, protestors impeded businesses and disrupted traffic. During the discussion, it was also revealed that $225K of taxpayer’s money could be saved by providing the police with ample notice to better and more efficiently be prepared in scheduling their resources thus reducing overtime. In addition, it was discovered that unless the police have ample time to prepare, the town is potentially exposed to legal risk and negligence if, God forbid, someone barrels their car into the protestors killing, injuring, or causing property damage without advance police oversight.
The threshold was very low. All that was asked was if this was something the LC should consider addressing in the form of an ordinance. That’s it. Does this help Newtown? Is there any downside in just considering it?
Remarkably, nine members of the LC voted to ignore these benefits. Two members discounted the tax savings by essentially saying we can continue to have Newtown taxpayers pay for it. Two members defended their vote because they were so impressed with the attendance. One said it would be unconstitutional. Another said it was a power grab or overreach by our Chief of Police. It didn’t matter how much good this would be for Newtown, the democrats on the LC (and one misguided Republican) made sure the protestor’s concerns were not inconvenienced.
It has always been my goal to find common ground when negotiating. Most of the protestors are Newtown taxpayers. Ironically, a well-crafted ordinance would benefit them both by addressing all their concerns and potentially save them money. Protesting is a constitutional right. There is not one complaint that the protestors had that could not have been overcome. Simply applying for a permit, giving the police ample notice would have been win-win for both sides. That idea was met with energetic discontent by the protestors. “The magnitude of stupidity in this town is incomprehensible and needs to be addressed,” said Pisani. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. An opinion is just an unsubstantiated view that tries to influence others into thinking the same as you. But unless you can back your opinion with a credible argument, it just becomes the basis for your agenda.
The LC had an opportunity to make Newtown better. Protect it better. Protect the businesses that reside here better. Save taxpayers money. Make traffic safer. Nine members voted that those benefits were not a good enough basis to even consider. Not one LC member that voted against looking into this had a credible argument. Their names are in the LC July 2nd minutes. This was scandalous. Politics are not more important than the people you represent. Please remember that in November.
Derek Pisani
Newtown
“Politics are not more important than the people you represent.” Boy, that’s rich. 26 out of 30 asked you to vote against this, and you ignored them! And BTW…..Aren’t you the Councilman who suggested building a stadium at the town’s 6 Commerce Road open space? Talk about scandalous. Talk about magnitude of stupidity. SMH.
Hi David, I did not ignore anyone. I presented 4 quantifiable advantages and one intangible that an ordinance addressing protests would benefit Newtown. That was my only standard. No one that came to the meeting including the other LC members provided any argument to over come those benefits and remember, the threshold was set extremely low. The only thing the LC was voting on was to “just consider” if an ordinance would be in order. Get over the “stadium” joke. It is scandalous that you don’t have the mental capacity to understand it was a joke. Remember when I asked to meet with you for breakfast to see in we could compromise on some of your many complaints? I am sure could have found compromises but apparently the word “compromise” is not a part of your vocabulary. Either is acting like an adult. By the way, the intangible…that was to provide protection for you and your family, God forbid, that you were protesting and someone came barreling through the crowd in a car. My point was you always plan for worst case scenario, not best case scenario. In Kerrville TX, the legislative body had the chance to vote to put a flash flood warning siren in place. Someone like you probably thought they didn’t need it. Now over 200 people are dead. Nothing bad could ever happen in Newtown right?
Speaking of SMH, Ackert’s comment is the perfect example of why Newtown’s public discourse has become so toxic. He accuses Councilman Pisani of ignoring the will of “26 out of 30” people—as if 30 people in a room define the will of an entire town. That’s not how representative government works, and it’s certainly not how thoughtful policymaking should be conducted.
Ackert runs a Facebook group that has made a habit of weaponizing process. At nearly every turn, he threatens lawsuits over minor procedural points, creating unnecessary hurdles and sowing fear. This isn’t civic engagement—it’s obstruction, dressed up as activism. And it comes at a cost to taxpayers, town staff, and the very businesses that help keep Newtown vibrant.
Councilman Pisani raised a valid question about whether it’s worth exploring an ordinance that could both protect protestors and save the town $225,000 in police overtime. He didn’t propose banning protests. He didn’t even draft an ordinance. He asked whether we should consider one. For that, he’s met with mockery and personal attacks. It’s telling that his critics can’t engage with the substance—they just yell “stupid” louder and hope no one notices.
If Mr. Ackert is so sure of his position, perhaps he should stop threatening lawsuits and start presenting ideas that balance safety, fiscal responsibility, and smart development. Until then, spare us the righteous indignation.