Sunday, April 19, 2009

Some issues facing state & town government

I've got several issues of concern to me, but this was such a beautiful weekend. Besides attending a few events, I did some work around the house, knocked on a few doors and visited Mixville Park. I'll try to get back to posting some thought pieces this week.

Issues of concern to me right now:

1) Who has the authority to change the pool fees?

2) Who is going to ensure the Mixville pump station is retrofitted? My idea is performance contracting. But we already know any discussion on that is only lip service.

3) The state is getting $38 million in energy-related stimulus funding. As I understand, the Administration has sole discretion. Does the legislature intend to sit back and allow for another $38 million in Crusher-Fritz-Altieri-Turf-style favor dealing allocation of grant funds?

4) Will anyone besides me take the time to put pen to paper and create a fiscal impact analysis before the Town grants an easement for $10 to a business for a presumably lucrative housing development?

And I'm sure there are plenty of other issues to consider.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

Richmond Glen--can you put in brief layman's terms--what is the issue with this?

Anonymous said...

Is the Mixville pump station really need, or does a local developer want to have the capacity increased inorder to build another sub-division?

The town should start charging developers the true costs of all changes required to handle their subdivisions and charge them the real cost of the capacity that they require of the sevwer plant.

It looks like Richmond Glen developer Brodach is trying to get 41 units hooked up to the sewage system for $10.

Anonymous said...


The unit tax benefit of $9,000, $9,500, and $10,000, that the attorney supplied you with for your cost benefit calculation, of the Brodach Serenity Ranch development, seems excessively high.

It is obvious that the attorney wants to insure a positive outcome for his client by exaggerating the tax benefit to the town. Why else would he supply such hard to believe numbers and I hope that staff would have contacted you with better numbers, isn't that what staff should do? How can we trust our government if it does not work for the benefit of the us and make sure that we are not fed baloney.

Thank goodness you take your job seriously and whenever possible you try to shine the light of day on some actions that others would rather slide under the radar.

I totally agree with your analysis that in-town people would move from their homes to these units and their houses would be attractive to families with children. Why wasn't this analysis used for the northend instead of the developer cherry picking housing developments that would provide the least number of children per unit for their cost benefit study.

Breachway said...

"I totally agree with your analysis that in-town people would move from their homes to these units and their houses would be attractive to families with children"---

I think they may like to move....but won't be able to sell their current home, leading to empty units in the new development as Tim's other post points out.

Anonymous said...

Buy stock in Chap-stick - alot of dry lips from all the ass kissing Tim is getting.