Open forum 6/8
Ron Paul (for President!) has a revamped website today.
Lt. Gov. Fedele will be liveblogging over at CTLP today around 2pm or so.
Thanks to CH for the brief tutorial on commenting by a "name" other than "anonymous." I know some use that functionality, but I wish it were more. From my perspective, it can be easier to follow the comments... yet it's still anonymous. So please consider using it.
The Environmental Review Team is at work on Boulder Knoll.
Poles are more of an issue than I first realized... more on that later today or this weekend.
Plans are moving forward on some proposed commercial development in Waterbury (WRA, by Michael Puffer) off the Austin Road exit... is that exit 25 or 25A?
CHS Softball lost (WRA, by Joe Palladino) in the Class LL semifinals.
Council meeting next Tuesday... I don't have the agenda yet.
Tim White
Town Council, 4th District
18 comments:
Another development in Southington off West St exit 30 I believe. Lowes and Kohls are the anchor stores. State highway will make changes to exits etc. We will not have to go far for any building stuff that's for sure. We will be surounded by Home Depots and Lowes. Price wars? Let them begin.
It will take you all week to read all the articles on "THE POLES". Every local paper had an article concerning this. Why it has not made the late night shows yet is surprising. They could have a great deal of fun with this. How asinine. Will they give a written warning for the first offense? Will the Animal Control department need to be increased? As Steve Martin said "A wild and wacky world".
Do you want this town to start looking like Waterbury or Meriden?
a) allow people to post what they want on telephone poles
b) allow 150 units of rental housing to go in the North End which will be Section 8 in ten years
Maybe we can get a Hooters next...
Cheshire is a town run by few and unfortunately real people do not have the stomach for the garbage that is generated here.....
A Hooters would be great is WS considering them? I can't wait.
Telephone poles have never been an issue until the WS Development debate. The most ridiculous thing is when Milone says it's a matter of safety for telephone company workers. Give me a break, telephone company workers have not climbed poles for years and the company could care less what signs are put on their poles. The other one was someone walking by can hit their head - on a paper sign? At least try to come up with something intelligent. This is nothing more than town officials and a few pro-mall residents trying to stop opposition. Sad isn't it? But the bigger question is why, are they afraid town residents will get informed?
No, this is a bunch of people trying to use someone's else property without consent to express their personal poltiical opinion.
I'm sure if I put a "Win the Iraq War" sign on Bisbort's lawn he would not stand for it. And if I put a "Re-elect Mary Fritz" sign on the webmaster's lawn he would be irked.
Why should we expect AT&T to have to permit free advertising for a political opinion they have no business endorsing anyway?
Besides, I DO NOT want this town looking like some rundown urban area with signs everywhere...odd the same people who raise the spectre of Queen Street in Southington think it is their constitutional right to turn Route 10 into the twin of Wolcott Street in Waterbury with tacky signs everywhere
"...tacky signs everywhere"
I'd sure rather some tacky signs than some 400 acres of superfluous shops and manicured shrubbery.
Either way, to ensure that the issues at hand aren't driving any push to patrol the poles, why not agree to a scheduled increase in enforcement that kicks-in after the ws affair shuffles off? :)
I get that it's private property, and there's plenty of justification for sign removal, but that doesn't mean it's a priority. The whole thing just smacks of an enforcement body ready to cater to the interests of a few -- I'm sure the police have better things to do.
ch, you make as compelling a case for illegal signs as President Bush makes for illegal immigration
Isn't it funny how all of a sudden we're so concerned with signs on telephone poles. They have been used for years with notices for lost dogs, tag sales, you name it. Only in the last few weeks have we been concerned with AT&T's rights. This is a joke on Cheshire.
12:44 Where are all the signs? I see more lost dogs and cats signs then "NO MALL" signs. Take a ride around town and see for yourself.
Anon 12:44 What political opinion? Informing someone of a town meeting so you can voice your opinion (pro or con) is political?
"NO MALL" is not a political opinion....say what?????
Look up the definition of "POLITICAL".
12:44 PM
The signs are temporary. The stores are permanent. Have anymore tough questions?
Yeah, how do you expect developers to follow the laws when the people opposing them demand a right to break them?
When is the possible open date? Will it take 2 or 3 years to build?
This will be in the courts for years. You might still have to shop out of town or the internet.
Post a Comment