Wednesday, July 01, 2009

More spending on the pool

The NHRs Luther Turmelle reports on current pool happenings:

The town’s community pool normally opens for the summer shortly after Memorial Day, but not this year. The pool closed May 9 and didn’t reopen until Friday. That’s because in addition to taking down its cover, the town relined the pool, at a cost of $88,000.

Shocking! More money being spent on the pool. And when you include the other costs in June, the money spent on the pool last month was expected to be about $250,000.

But apparently at least one Council member believes this is money spent wisely:

Democratic Councilman Matthew Altieri said that even with the town mired in a recession, residents understand the need to repair the pool. “I think people would think less of us if we weren’t spending our money wisely to keep up with the pool,” Altieri said.

So we're spending a quarter million bucks on a facility that this Council is open to fully rebuilding? The entire saga is unreal.

I'm not big fan of the Obama stimulus package, but it's worth keeping mind that if the Council had taken action in February 2008 (as was requested), we may have had a "shovel-ready" project by December 2008. And we may be getting a permanent enclosure without the use of property tax dollars.

But some people prefer foot-dragging and remaining in "a state of paralysis" to decisive action.

Tim White

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I have heard that the trailers will be there through the summer. How much are they costing us?
Do they have handicap accessibility?
Michaelangelo is now saying all of the sheetrock is being removed, but they can "scrub" the floors. They will also be taking bids to rebuild the interior. Why are they just taking bids now?
This is totally insane on a 7 year old pool.

Now we are looking at a $4 million to $8 million expenditure to cover it?

I say fill it in and cut our losses.

I can't wait for Altieri to come around my neighborhood at election time...he may find that he isn't as popular as he thinks.

Anonymous said...

Now I also see that the Turf Heads are back at it....are they nuts??
Trifone thinks we will have 300 events on this turf a year? At that rate, we will be lucky to get 3 years out of it.

Anonymous said...

The incompetence of Cheshire Democrats never fails to disappoint. Maybe we can read a Marty Coburn editorial blaming mold in the pool on the Tea Party movement or some other much demented nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Cheapest alternative is to make it a summer only facility. Second cheapest is to fill it in

Anonymous said...

New first cheapest, drain pool allow residents to deposit bulk pick up items in pool.

Anonymous said...

If Tim was really a man of the people, he would publicly voice the idea of filling it in as well as leaving it the way it is. Does he have the sac?

tim white said...

The pool isn't the problem. The bubble is the problem. So why would I want to backfill it?

Anonymous said...

More people would rather the pool filled in than put another dollar into it. The pool is a drain and an eyesore

Anonymous said...

We just went through a tough budget year and the boe and tc know that we're likely to face several years of tough budgets with the current recession.

The pool is going to require millions of dollars to repair & replace the bubble.

The turf heads are pushing their fake field knowing it'll cost at least twice as much as the 525K grant.

When does it end?? That 525K should be put towards the pool or towards fixing the inside of the schools.

Please email the boe & the tc and tell them to REDIRECT the grant money to something we need.

Anonymous said...

That money is for an athletic complex so it cannot be used in the school. Being that we have to match some of the grant, the field is the wiser choice as it will cost the town less than forcing us to rebuild the pool

Anonymous said...

the field is the wiser choice as it will cost the town less

Ahhh...so is that how they think??

Why does it have to cost the town anything??

WE CAN'T AFFORD IT NOW!

Anonymous said...

The town will have to pay something because the state issues matching grants. Once the work is completed, we have to submit reciepts to the state to be paid. It is almost unheard of to get a fully funded project grant from the state.

Anonymous said...

Also, the worst thing we can do is give the money back. It would be years before we got another grant and money from the state for budgetary items will be scrutenized

Anonymous said...

"Also, the worst thing we can do is give the money back."

Your logic lacks credibility. If the town gives back the money the town loses $525,000 out of maybe $2,000,000 it would spend on the plastic turf over about a 7 year period.

If the town gives back the $525,000 now the town will spend nothing on plastic turf and be roughly $2,000,000 ahead at the end of the seven year period. Also our state is deeply in debt. The state has been unable to even pass its budget yet.

When it does there will be billions in red ink and new taxes upon taxes. Our $525,000 could make a small dent in the state's deficit. And of course maybe you don't understand that this town is in fact part of this state and when the state budget blows up it will be felt in every town in this state including this town.

It is time to cut spending now.

Anonymous said...

The town will have to pay something because the state issues matching grants.

Again, WE CAN'T AFFORD IT NOW!!

Anonymous said...

You still didn't mention the health concerns....
You admit there are some.

Anonymous said...

When a community applies for a grant, they are telling the state that this is an improvement that we need/want and cannot afford on our own. If the state agrees to help fund the project, they are agreeing that the community needs financial assistance in order to complete. There are 168 communities in this state and not all of them can recieve a grant at the same time so some communities are told "no" or "not at this time." If we return grant money, we are telling the state that either we do not need the money and can do this on our own, or we never wanted the project in the first place and wasted the approprations committee's time. Later on, (for example we want to apply for a grant to dredge Mixville) the state will look at our history of grant applications, job completions, costs estimates/actual cost comparisons etc... and see that we refused a grant that we applied for. That will result in an almost automatic refusal as there will be other towns with better acceptance and completion histories. Every town in the state will receive money many times over before we see a dime.

In short, do not give the grant back if there is the slimmest chance we may need/want to apply for another in the future. Since we applied and received the grant, we must do something with it.

Anonymous said...

"...When a community applies for a grant, they are telling the state that this is an improvement that we need/want and cannot afford on our own. ...or we never wanted the project in the first place and wasted the approprations committee's time. ..."

First, speaking for many residents we never wanted it in the first place.

Second, you got it, we can't afford it but in fact neither can our state at this point.

Third, the state is currently run by a pretty out of it supermajority which seems truly out of touch with reality. Take Rep. James O’Rourke, D Cromwell, who has just been reinstated as deputy House speaker now that prosecutors have declined to charge him in an untimely death. of course he seems to have plenty of company in terms of bad behavior while in the legislature. At least some town residents don't believe that with our current legislators worrying about playing by rules means much so not to worry if we give it back.

Now, if we don't give it back it's just that much more which will come directly out of our shrinking wallets.

Fourth, since the 1700's kids in this town have played and prospered on simple grass fields. Why after hundreds of years of success change that now?

Maybe it's because fake grass is more complimentary to the fake food big agribusiness has been foisting on us lately?

Anonymous said...

It does not matter how many people want the field, it only matters that we applied for and received the grant. Same sitsuation as the skate park, forced to build it after someone got us the grant.

Now, if we had a den of rattlesnakes at the field, we would not be able to apply the turf.