The state documents regarding the turf grant
As Anne Giddings (Council, at-large) mentioned elsewhere, she got the state documents regarding the turf grant. Here is the first page:
I'll post the rest of the pages over the next few days.
And here's a repeat posting* of the July 8, 2008 Council acceptance of the turf money.
My comments start around the 20 minute mark. I knew I had tried (and failed) to redirect the money, but had forgotten that my motion was described as "preposterous" by the Council majority.
Tim White
* This is the first of three videos
15 comments:
I wouldn't say that you "failed." I'd say it's the council majority who "failed" by voting to accept the grant as written.
Florio stated in his remarks that the council vote in 2008 did not commit the town to accept and install turf, but merely authorized the TM to "access" the funds for this purpose.
Therefore, there is nothing stopping this council (or the next council) from requesting our legislators to redirect these funds to more pressing needs at the HS. Don't let them try to tell you otherwise.
I will tell you what is preposterous:
We can't redirect these funds beacause the state put in the grant specifically what it should be used for. Yet, we have a referendum before us that is so vague that the $500K can be used for anything around the high school.That's preposterous!
Our "mayor" felt compelled to call the new ammendment preposterous, but also said we could have done this years earlier. We now face a real issue with the pool, but he would rather get turf.That's presosterous!
Altieri, aka turfhead, actually asked how Tim can ask for a redirection of the funds when we didn't have a cost for a permanent pool structure. Yet, we never had a final cost for the turf, but that didn't stop us from requesting the grant. That's preposterous!
Turfhead said he would put on the agenda for the turf meeting to see about redirecting the grant---did that ever get discussed?That's preposterous!
The health concerns don't seem to matter to the turfheads, yet the state of CT thought enough about it that they are investigating the health issues associated with artificial turf. Yet, we continue to persue it--That's preposterous!
How does our town attorney show up at a TC meeting and not have a coby of Robert's Rules? That's preposterous!
How dare they take a grant that will only cover half the cost of turf, while asking us, the tax payers, to continue to support the pool each year to the tune of $500K. Then they have the nerve to ask us for $500K to cover the "infrastructure" of CHS, which can go who knows where. That's preposterous!
Bob Behrer ells us they didn't want to present this during tougher times when we were taliking about pay to play, so they waited till now. Does he know we are probably in the worst recession we have had in 80 years? That's preposterous!
Tim, you seemed to be the only one making sense that night.
It is preosterous that this town allows the TC to operate the way they do, with all the ridiculous spending.
Lets make a change in November!
1:05 above presents an excellent summary case for why we need to elect a fiscally responsible council on Nov. 3.
I would only add that while the town alone may not be able to redirect the $525,000 grant for turf, the legislature can. And the council needs to formally ask the legislature to do so.
Tim, you stopped by my mother-in-laws house the other day...she liked what you had to say. I filled her in on some of the "shenanigans" and pointed her to your blog.. She is upset with town spending and she told me yesterday that she is not voting for the DEMS, even though she is a die hard Dem herself..... She is very upset with the pool and this talk about turf....she basically has had it....as a former long time teacher in town, she is well aware of the unnecessary spending and has often told me about the end of the year message from the school brass: "spend any money that was allocated, or we arent going to get as much next year"....
"Beware the people weeping
when they bare the iron hand."
- Herman Melville
Next council: 6 Rep, 3 Dem.
I just called David Stygar, the gentleman who signed the turf grant letter. His phone number was in the letter.
He told me that a modification would have to be approved by the bonding commission.
He also said that DEP is just administering the grant. This is an "Urban Act" grant, awarded to municipalities by political action. I told him that Mary Fritz had arranged it and he said that her office would have to request a modification.
It might be that the town council could request a modification, but would need to have Mary's office concur. My experience in waiting for action by the bonding commission on education grants is that they are very slow. However, a legislator, such as Mary, might get much quicker action.
Why during the greatest recession since the great depression, when close to 10% of the people are out of work, are Florio and Altieri so interested in installing ground up rubber tires on the football field.
I guess they just don't worry about any of the negative aspects of the stuff or what the real installation and maintenance cost will be, or how long it would last and how much it will cost to reinstall it. But, why should they care, both make big bucks, have great benefits and don't have to worry about health insurance or losing their jobs.
As far as Florio goes, he doesn't have to care about higher property taxes as he lives in Newington and gets $6,000 a year car allowance, nice deal.
So, you see neither of these two have any concept of the struggles of many people who are just trying to get by.
If the question on the referendum isn't specific regarding where the $500,000 will be spent, we should not vote for it. I for one think the issue of turf should be a referendum question all alone so the people in this town are actually aware of what their voting for. I also can't understand why we are entertaining the thought of turf when the state hasn't concluding it's investigation regarding the health issues.
"As far as Florio goes, he doesn't have to care about higher property taxes as he lives in Newington and gets $6,000 a year car allowance, nice deal."
He will never have to worry because the BoE recently voted to permanently waive the residency requirement for him. I thought they had to vote each year whether to waive the residency requirement, but they made it permanent with their vote. Wonder if they "broke the rules" on waiving it permanently.
"Anne Giddings said...
I just called David Stygar, the gentleman who signed the turf grant letter. His phone number was in the letter.
He told me that a modification would have to be approved by the bonding commission.
He also said that DEP is just administering the grant. This is an "Urban Act" grant, awarded to municipalities by political action. I told him that Mary Fritz had arranged it and he said that her office would have to request a modification."
So it should be obvious to all that this grant could be modified or redirected. WE JUST NEED THE COUNCIL TO GET TOGETHER, MAKE THE REQUEST TO FRITZ, AND MAKE SURE SHE FORWARDS THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPROPRIATE PEOPLE IN HARTFORD!!
At one town meeting with the legislators, Mary Fritz suggested that the Town ask for help in covering the pool which made some sense. The council never asked. Who asked for the turf grant?
Altieri and Ecke asked for the turf grant without asking the council or publicly consulting anyone. They just made this their pet project, and scr*w everyone else.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost, and one or both of them will be OUT on Nov. 3.
"The council never asked. Who asked for the turf grant?"
More than likely it was that bloated windbag Matt Bowman.
This town is being run like ancient Rome, which collpased because the emperors were only concerned about "bread and circuses."
Wake up folks. No one has any bread left to pay for the circuses.
Lemme ask this? Is it possible the town is financially better off NOT taking the state grant if the town share of this boondoggle is going to be well more than $500K over the long haul?
Over the life cycle of this project this grant looks like it is a net loser to me. Adding in the maintainace and pro-rata replacement cost; and considering probablt future inflation. I think we will end up spending over $1 M in town funds over the next decade to "get" a $500K state grant.
Did Altieri used to work for Enron?
Post a Comment