Anne Giddings on the concerns of residents
Here's a short clip of Anne Giddings (Council, at-large) sharing her thoughts on what people are saying to her as she bikes and canvasses neighborhoods in Cheshire:
Tim White
Monday, September 28, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Regarding another issue, I stopped at Town Hall this morning and submitted an FOI request for information regarding the "turf grant." That was very promptly sent to me and I have forwarded it to Tim.
The paperwork is clear that the grant must be used for srtificial turf at CHS.
Addendum to my last post: Grant must be used for artificial turf, UNLESS there is a modification to the grant.
Who can do the modification?
At what point does this TC stand up and say the hell with turf, we have other needs. Why strap the tax payers even further if we already have a grant in place that we can modify and use to relocate the locker rooms.
What is the plan if the referendum is defeated?
Keep the same crappy lockr rooms but get a nice field?
It's too bad the majority hasn't figured out the priorities yet.
The Council should pass a resolution requesting a modification of the grant, for example, that it be redirected to more pressing needs like the locker rooms.
Get the Council members on record one way or the other, and see if Mary Fritz will go to bat for the wishes of the town majority on this issue.
Anne - can you print the info you got from Town Hall re: the turf grant?
As far as I know ( and I have heard it read many times at meetings) it says - "for renovations and improvements to the CHS athletic complex, including artificial turf."
Renovations and improvements can mean many things. Shouldn't the real question be, "Shouldn't the TC come together and request that Mary Fritz get these funds redirected to a more pressing project?"
This is what needs to happen.
The real question is who as in a resident from the Town requested the grant in the first place. Mary Fritz did not think this up by herself, I understand that resident has to make the request.
As far as I know, it was Matt Altieri and Ecke.
I sent the entire document to Tim, thinking that he might want to publish it. It is an Adobe document and the description of the work to be done (in Attachment B) is explicit:
"Description: The improvements to this educational resource, the football field which is located at Cheshire HIgh School is defined as:
The purchase and installation of an articiaial turf athletic field. Development of this field is to include but not to be limited to design, excavation, clearing and grubbing, purchase and placement of earthen material required for the instalation of the turf filed, fencing, grading, drainage, field marking and associated landscaping to disturbed non-playing field areas."
That is the gist of the work to be done, though the entire document is 8 pages--typical of state grants. I wrote a lot of grant applications, and am familiar with some of the requirements the state puts in r.e. how to actually get the money, requirements for proof of expenses, etc.
It's too bad the majority hasn't figured out the priorities yet.
This is why we need people like Anne Giddings on the Town Council. Vote for change!
When you republicans win the majority vote, please make Anne the "Mayor". How long has this been debated on this site about the use of the grant money; can it be used for other than turf expenditures?
Anne goes to Town Hall, gets the information, reads it, and we have the answer.
Now lets see what the minority of four do with it.
Thanks Anne.
Dumbasses-that is usually what a grant is-to be used exclusively for a certain purpose-stop patting yourselves on the back GOP
Dumbass 857 - this is what a democracy is - to redirect spending which is not approved by the people to purposes which are approved by the people. And to replace politicians who do not represent their interests with others who do.
8:57 So explain how Wallingford redirected one of their grants if it was "exclusively for a project."
Only a "dumbass" would want to use the $525,000 for artificial turf. The truly smart councilors will request the legislators to authorize a redirection of those funds.
Tim, no explanation for the removal of the first post?
In my experience with education grants modifications of originally stated use of funds were considered and usually approved, especially if the modifications were slight. In this case the modification would be to use the funds for other athletic program improvements at CHS.
Whether that would be a "slight" modification or a major one would depend upon the judgement of the reviewer.
I posted more information regarding this in the comments following Tim's post of page 1 of the turf grant documents.
There's a great deal of skepticism on the minds of folks throughout town. They believe something is wrong. I can summarize my door-door feedback I've received to date as "Mismangement". Be it the pool, taxes, public works, spending, budgets, turf, etc. The general consensus is that something is wrong.
How does this relate to the turf grant? Well, some people like the turf idea, others are against it and some are on the fence. But everyone seems to agree it's just not the highest priority at this point in time. The town doesn't trust that some of the officials are capable of doing the right things. Hence, the skepticism.
Someone once told me..."Tony, if one person calls you a horses' ass you tend to ignore it. A second person calls you the same, you start paying attention. After the third person...it's time to saddle up!"
Question is what will our current majority on these boards/councils do about it? Will they saddle up and take responsibility or continue to ignore voters' concerns?
Tony P said: "I can summarize my door-door feedback I've received to date as "Mismangement". Be it the pool, taxes, public works, spending, budgets, turf, etc. The general consensus is that something is wrong."
"Beware the people weeping
when they bare the iron hand"
- Herman Melville
Next Council: 6 Rep, 3 Dem.
Post a Comment