Monday, February 11, 2008

Too late. It's been decided.

It's official.

I got my first phone call on it this weekend.

A constituent said he had seen the paper's discussing Jim Amann's "slush fund," also known as Jim Amann's "discretionary fund." And since we could apparently use the "slush fund" for anything, he suggested we use the money to extend the linear trail.

I respectfully disagreed. I offered my higher priority... reducing America's dependence on foreign oil... and said we could have a direct impact on Cheshire's consumption of fossil fuels by building a permanent structure over the pool.

Nonetheless, I was candid with him. I told him that the Council leadership is in a "state of paralysis" over the pool... and that at least one other member of the Council majority is both opposed to the linear trail (at least he was in Nov 05) and has been actively advocating the turf for the two years he's been on the Council.

So I have my doubts about the "slush fund" being used to extend the linear trail.

Besides, Matt Altieri already spoke to Mary Fritz.
And Mary Fritz already spoke to Jim Amann.
And Jim "Crusher" Amann already decided.

Tim White

These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

So it's a done deal and this money is going to turf?

I hope Amann, Altieri and Fritz can sleep at night knowing they are putting this state further in debt while adding to additonal indebtedness for our town.
We only have to get another $300,000 to purchase the turf. How long do we have to do that before we lose the money?
Will Matt Altieri be coming clean with his connections to the turf company?
This isn't right!

Anonymous said...

Maybe we can put the turf on the linear trail?

Anonymous said...

I heard he invented field turf

Anonymous said...

Another devious plan by a few so they may enjoy a power trip. there is no value system left, just go out and get whatever you want, no regards to price of method. What lessons we are teaching our kids. The children of today are almost incapable of dealing with reality. Parents protect them from everything, give them everything and the justification is we want them to have more than we did. Kids today have difficulty filling out job application correctly, cannot deal with criticism in the workplace and think they should their first job at $100,000.

Anonymous said...

Don't these people check anything out before they make a decision? The Pittsburg Steelers know a little about football and football fields and the players lobbied to keep "NATURAL GRASS" over "ANY OTHER ARTIFICIAL SURFACE". They are convinced that it reduces "INJURIES". How can anyone want this for our students? Are permanent injuries to these young people worth the extra "COMMUNITY" events that can take place on this field? I'm all for fixing the bathrooms,field,hot dog stand and whatever needs improvment or repair but not this. Think about this long and hard because it could effect the future of hundreds of children.

Anonymous said...

From a 2004 newspaper article -

"Here's the way I look at it," said Sheehan baseball coach Matt Altieri. "I love natural grass. There's nothing more romantic to me than looking out at Fenway Park or Yankee Stadium. Yet, if they gave me a choice between FieldTurf or real turf, I would take FieldTurf in a heartbeat."

Additional comments from the same article:

It should be noted that 10 years ago, when Platt football coach Tom Ryan was quarterbacking a drive to install artificial turf at Ceppa Field, the quote for that project was $1.9 million.

It should also be noted that artificial turf does not have a limitless shelf life. The surface needs to be replaced roughly every 12-15 years. DiGeronimo pegged replacement cost at $300,000, adding that savings in maintenance would pay for it.

That's subject to debate.

"I did the numbers; it's not even close," said Southington athletic director Bob Lehr, who is an advocate of artificial turf. "You'd better be putting money back into your budget each year. If you don't, you'll get hit with a major expense. So if you amortize it that way, there's no savings."

If you want to read the entire article just google "Matt Altieri and artificial turf"...you'll be able to find it.

Anonymous said...

5:11 you're so mean-spirited! Just because someone says something doesn't mean that you should "shine a light" on it. This whole "internet thing" is so problematic!

Seriously though... I'm glad to see others are googling and researching stuff.

Two of his comments that I enjoy:

"We don’t spend enough money"

and

"Council does not need to know"

Ha!

Ok, ok... you really need to read the entire context, but they're still great quotes!

Tim White said...

btw, I've also heard that Ecke is a big advocate for the turf.

Anonymous said...

Besides, Matt Altieri already spoke to Mary Fritz.
And Mary Fritz already spoke to Jim Amann.
And Jim "Crusher" Amann already decided.

Wow! Matt must have a lot of pull. Maybe he can call them to fund a pool building.

But, wait a minute. Does this money ultimately come from the state taxpayers and aren't we state taxpayers? Why is it so easy to give away our money on such non-esential things. While people are losing there jobs, their houses, and their futures Matt can get turf?

Anonymous said...

disgraceful. I think folskneed to show up at the next meeting and let Matt Altieri know we dont appreciate our tax dollars funding turf especially during a recession. No tone lousy dime of our money should be going to this pork filled garbage.

Anonymous said...

9:21 Better yet, here are the email addresses of the council members. I've emailed them myself and they say they welcome public comments. A few showing up at a meeting will not compare to the hundreds the athletic department and coaches will recruit.

maltieri@cox.net
elizabeth.esty@yale.edu
michaele584@aol.com
mhall@bhhlegal.com
dolphinlaurad@yahoo.com

tslocum@snet.net
tomruocco@snet.net
timwhite98@yahoo.com
jrs7@att.net

Anonymous said...

Tim White said...
btw, I've also heard that Ecke is a big advocate for the turf.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:50:00 PM

Gee, you think??

Anonymous said...

The pool was supposed to be a self sufficient project. We spend over $400,000 a year on that...hardly a drop in the bucket.

Now the turf will be presented as a "no cost" to the town project. What a joke that is. The $525,000 the State is willing to hand over is our tax dollars wasted on a project we don't need. There are so many more important issues. Private donations are not going to be enough when it comes to replacement costs. The Boe will get stuck funding it out of their operating budget. Who pays for vandalism to the turf? There seems to be a lot of that going around.
Unbelievable how our council majority enables the State to waste our tax dollars.

Anonymous said...

The Boe will get stuck funding it out of their operating budget.

No they won't... not the construction costs (first costs).

From the Herald:

"(Altieri) compared the process to that of Kids in Motion, a volunteer group that raised money for a new playground. In addition to fundraising efforts, the group received a state donation and asked the town to make up some of the difference."

Knowing the majority, they'll be concerned about sending the turf to referendum because they'd be afraid of losing an election... similar to what happened with the linear trail. (Why else would they be "paralyzed" over a recreational facility?)

So from their perspective, they see $525,000 + $349,000 ($350,000+ goes to referendum) or $874,000 that is already available for turf. Now they just need to get a low ball budget (same as the Rs did with the pool) and do it. Then, as the Rs did with the pool... when the budget comes up short, they'll just make a special appropriation to finish the job.

Easy, peasy! No need to have to listen to the voters... they were elected, so they know best!

Obviously, this is just my opinion and I can't read minds. But if anyone sees this differently, I'm all ears....

Anonymous said...

By mentioning Kids in Motion, Altieri shows his lack of understanding.
That group was together for several years raising money and filing for grants.
The town had to open their eyes and realize that the existing wooden playscape at Bartlem, that was built by hundreds of volunteers, was in a severe state of disrepair. If this group didn't come in with the funding that they did, then what would the the town have done when they would be forced to remove it in a year or 2?
This is costing the town $170,000 and it will be around for a lot longer than turf. Plus it will serve a lot more people then the turf would, including those who have never been able to go to a park due to barriers.
Shame on Mr. Altieri for comparing "his turf" with this wonderful project!
Lets see how much money those who will use the turf could come up with?

Anonymous said...

Has anyone checked to see what the "additional " costs would be besides the turf?
I understand, based on my research, that you will need a special grooming machine at a cost of $30,000. Although the cost of maintaining an artificial turf may be around 20% of what it costs to maintain a grass field, an artificial life span is only 8-10 years.
So, add up $879,000 plus $30,000 plus $5,000 per year for maintenance and we are talking $959,000 at a minimum over 10 years.
How much will it cost to take care of the existing field over those 10years? $300,000 maybe.
Do they feel that with the new turf the field will be used more, thus justifying the costs? I doubt it.
Is anyone looking at the numbers here?

Anonymous said...

Using the turf more does not justify the costs. More use means lower cost per use but has no value unless the groups are charged on per use basis. If the Town/BOE does not charge on a use basis then the whole issue is academic.

Anonymous said...

Tim ...when is the TC meeting regarding accepting this money? I am sending my emails now to TC, and local papers.....total waste of money. They are going to break the seniors stones on taxes but at the same time do this?

Anonymous said...

Why the football field? How come other sport fields were not considered?

Anonymous said...

It's nice to see concerned people wanting to fight some of this crazy spending. The fact is, you're not going to stop it. There will always be a 5-4 split on the Council.
Hopefully with enough rope, the Dems will hang themselves and we will get a more conservative Council on 2009

Chipmaker said...

Poll the athletes (and future athletes) which surface they would rather play, and risk their knees, upon.

Anonymous said...

It's ironic how the same people that can come up with $10,000 to study the "TURF" complained about student activity fees not long ago. What's in our water?