WRA opines on the need for honest government
The WRA editorializes:
Two Democratic senators, Joseph Crisco of Woodbridge and Thomas Gaffey of Meriden, recently admitted to felonies. Yet leaders of your Democratic legislative supermajority can't even bring themselves to condemn the conduct, let alone remove the offenders from their leadership posts, censure them or fulfill their promise to create an ethics committee. And since they have the numbers, they have the power to let everything drop until the next wayward Republican senator comes along...
Rather than giving the Democrats a tool to torment and persecute them, Republicans should field upstanding, credible candidates to oppose the lawless Democratic incumbents in 2010, continue to pound the honest-government drum from now until Election Day, and follow the advice of Sen. Andrew Roraback, R-Goshen: Lead by example and disabuse "the public of the widespread misapprehension that most of us are here for the wrong reasons."
As has been reported, a return to good government is a concern for voters. I agree... at all levels of government. Not just in Hartford and Washington.
Tim White
12 comments:
Did anyone happen to see the Herald's article about AJ's getting the contract?
Since a new editorial staff has come on board, it seems like they are going way to the left.
From the 2 editorials they did on the contract, to allowing Marty Cobern's "teabagging" comment, to the headline of the article where they say we are paying $80K more this year. They slant the article to the point where I wonder if one of the spending 5 co-wrote it.
I wish it would go back to honest reporting.
Nobody seems to talk about how much more the contract sould have been if we waited till next year to put it out to bid. They don't explain how our town is suppose to operate.
The genius, Altieri, tells us that there is a time to put things out to bid and a time not to....is he kidding? What is he talking about?Does he have a crystal ball? If he did, he wouldn't have voted in favor of the teacher's contract last September.
It is time for this town's newspaper to go back to fair and honest journalism.
Yes I saw the article. Didnt really see any problems with it. The reporters all reported on what happened at the meeting. They even were handed documents by Milone. I did not see much difference from what happened at the meeting to what they reported.
Concerning Alteri's crystal ball, there is a right and wrong time to put out a bid request. When you ask someone to "sharpen their pencil" on a waiver request, and they respond with a better offer, the offer should be considered. The trash committee was told the offer was more than reasonable by other towns. Considering the increase was less than the contracted increase, it would have saved the town money. Had the waiver never been discussed, bidding would have been proper from the onset.
After this year, Cheshire may be sending it's trash to another facility. Depending on the pricing between facilities in Wallingford (where we currently haul our trash) and Hartford, hauling prices can change. If we go to Hartford, it will cost more to haul and the new contract probably reflects that. If we stay in Wallingford, AJ Waste gets paid more to do the same job they have done for 5 years. The prospects of hauling to a new location were public knowladge and everyone on the council knew it.
The Cheshire Herald is a private business that is reporting what they are told. If the reporter sat in the audiance (which I believe was 5 reporters, 4 people from AJ Waste, myself, Mr. Squire, and the 2 people from the COGCNV project) and heard what was said, that is what they have to report. Cant get more honest than that.
Tim, why didnt you go to the committee meeting before the council meeting? You were in the building?
"If we go to Hartford, it will cost more to haul and the new contract probably reflects that. If we stay in Wallingford, AJ Waste gets paid more to do the same job they have done for 5 years."
Since you seem to know so much about the trash hauling, answer this for me.
If AJ's was given the no bid contract this year, what would we have done next year? Would it go to bid? Would we get a better deal? How would you know?
What if gas prices sky rocket again? Nobody has a crystal ball, but we do have procedures in place and that procedure was to put the contract out to bid.
I wonder what people would be saying if we got a lower deal....oops, I forgot, we are dealing with trash haulers...we should know better.
RE: State Senator Thomas Gaffey of Meriden (& Cheshire), recently admitted to felonies. Yet leaders of your Democratic legislative supermajority can't even bring themselves to condemn the conduct, let alone remove the offenders from their leadership posts, or censure them...
"Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? ... gold is your God. Which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the people?"
-- Oliver Cromwell, 1653
Someone made the comment that they didn't know why so few trash haulers bid on the contract. It seams that a few years ago, a Mr. James Gallante, had organized the haulers divide the market and to not bid in certain markets. Could the organization still be intact?
It seems strange that there were only 3 bidders. One from Bridgeport with the low bid, but he didn't even try to get a required bond, what was he thinking, did he really want it? The second gave a price higher than his pencil sharpened quote, now after doing all the pencil work, why their bid increased? And, the third was so high that it showed that they didn't really care.
Well anyway, it just seems like it was a fair process, after all there were three bids, but it did seem a bit strange. I guess we have gotten used to strange things happening in Cheshire.
I agree with Mr. DeVylder about the CH article. I didn't see anything unfair about it. In my opinion their news stories are always balanced. People from both sides are always quoted and each side is presented fairly. I see where you (11:42)think they
"slant" the stories. From the meetings and events I have attended over the years the reporting has been fair . What happens at the meetings happens,and it is reported on, period.
An editorial on the other hand is an opinion and people and newspapers are still all entitled to have one, whether others agree or disagree with it.I would imagine when you agree with an editorial the paper is right on; but when you disagree they are no longer fair and honest. I suppose that's human nature.
I haven't agreed with an editorial since Shannon Becker has gone!
People from both sides are always quoted and each side is presented fairly. The Herald has a motto "don't stir the pot." In the past they've refused to print information that was discussed during, and highly relevant to, a meeting.
Look back to the 2005 article when I asked "How many teachers do we have?"
That part of the discussion (which led to an immediate adjournment of the meeting without me being allowed to ask further questions) was not in the article.
That was a conscious decision to keep Cheshire's Political Class happy. A $30,000 advertising budget goes a long way toward a "fair & balanced" newspaper.
Also keep in mind that reporting can be done in a very hard-hitting manner. But that reporting doesn't necessarily get printed. For instance, an editor may delete some important information. Or perhaps someone else could do it... someone who has authority over the editor.
F.Y.I. The advertising budget is not limited to the Herald. It is used for all legal notices in all appropriate papers. The Herald might only see $5,000 of it.
The Herald might only see $5,000 of it. True. Or it might be $25,000.
An equally important issue is access to information... remember... control the information, control the agenda.
Any Chief Executive "owns" the information in an organization. It's well-known that the White House Press Corps goes soft on every President because each individual member of the press is constantly concerned about losing access to the WH... and, in turn, losing their livelihood.
There's no difference when it comes to press corps and CEOs in Cheshire and Hartford. That's not to say that Cheshire's press corps skirts over every issue. I'm simply saying it's a reality with which they must deal on a daily basis. And every Chief Executive knows it.
Tim mkes a valid point...when a TC promises $25K in revenue and many of them are involved in local businesses who also advertise, they may sway their opinions.
"I haven't agreed with an editorial since Shannon Becker has gone!"
She doesn't seem to care about too much except to be the mouth piece for the special interest. She will always take the side of the special interests, all articles are carefully manage so as not offend the special interest groups. If we relied on the Cheshire Herald for the real news, we would be in a sad state.
Post a Comment