Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Open forum - May 12, 2010

The NHRs Luther Turmelle sizes up Monday's PZC public hearing on the northend development.

Jesse Buchanan of the MRJ reports that the Cheshire Public Schools have agreed to a 1.75% raise for teachers' aides.

And the Town Council met tonight. The agenda included a 7-1 vote (Adinolfi opposed, Ecke absent) to set a public hearing on the pool enclosure referendum. That Council meeting will likely occur on Tuesday May 25 and possibly be followed by a referendum on June 22. Furthermore, based on public comments tonight and in the past, I've counted the following Council votes regarding sending a pool enclosure to referendum:

Slocum - yea
Adinolfi - nay
Ecke - ???
Giddings - yea
Sima - yea
Schrumm - yea
Ruocco - ???
Falvey - nay
White - yea

I'll also try to keep track of whether Council members intend to support the pool enclosure at the ballot box.

If you see headlines about The Fed getting audited, it's highly misleading. The Fed will make a one time disclosure of the trillions they printed to distribute to their Bankster Buddies. But it's not a real audit. How could it be? Chris Dodd (D-Banksters) and Judd Gregg (R-Banksters) both supported it. So obviously, it's not a real audit. Nonetheless, it does shine some light on The Secrets of the Temple.

The GOP state Rep conventions were held tonight. I understand Kathy Brown will be the candidate in the 89th. I'm certain that Uncle Al got his nomination in the 103rd. And I think Richard Abbate may be running in the 90th. I'm assuming Vickie Nardello, Elizabeth Esty and Mary Fritz are all running for reelection.

And how did this David Cameron guy get to be PM of Britain?? I just assumed the Conservative leader with Dan Hannon... how great was his delivery in that one youtube clip?!

Please consider this an open forum... with the exception that any comments that even allude to the probate court race will probably be deleted even if the majority of the comment has value. I'm just not in the mood for it.

Tim White

12 comments:

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Stanley Marsh said...

Wait...the IAT's took a zero percent increase, worked without a contract for the current year and agreed to a 1.75% increase (1.08% when factoring in the zero year)?

The Teacher's Union cried "legal risks" as the reason for not cooperating. How is it that the IAT's found no "legal risks"? I think the teacher's union legal team should get in touch with the IAT's legal team and learn a few pointers about working through "risk" let alone humility.

The IAT's have the most difficult job in the school system...these people work with mentally and physically disabled children in the classroom. I know they enjoy what they do but the pay is dirt cheap. These people not only make certain special needs students are given attention but they also support the teachers in the classroom. THEY SUPPORT THE TEACHERS IN THE CLASSROOM. LOL.

I'm sorry but the teacher's union leadership is an embarrassment, cowardly and does a disservice to it's membership. I don't know how any of the teacher's union leadership can look at themselves in the mirror after the sacrifice made by the IAT's for Cheshire.

To the IAT's...THANK YOU!

P.S: Beverly Jerkowitz: It appears that the IAT's DID NOT ASK FOR GUARANTEED JOB SECURITY EITHER.

Anonymous said...

Fire every teacher and rehire non union employees. Start them at reasonable yet realistic salaries and only give performance based raises. See how quick the students test scores and future outcome change

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

"Do we want decisions like this to be in the hands of someone with experiance or a kid just out of law school?"

I'd much rather have the one with the least amount of baggage which is Bowman. I'll take Bowman (any of them) over a mason any day.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Well, some good news for a change. The turf committee raised the $150K requested by Tim Slocum. An RFQ has gone out to engineering firms to get cost estimates on engineering services. June should be yet another interesting month for this TC when the turf committee updates them on fund-raising and asks for permission (do they need to?) to move forward with the project.

Anonymous said...

Tim White - Sellout

Now on EBay- Tim White

Visit craigslist.org - you can buy Tims vote

"attention K-Mart shoppers - there is a Tim White sale in the seasonal Dept"

Why is it Tim has the balls to criticize our town manager that the other 8 councilors appear to be ok with but defends one of the most idiotic decisions the entire Republican party has ever made?

Tim White said...

I'm not defending the decision that was made. I'm simply accepting it. There is a process and it should be accepted. But the process continues. There could be a primary. At that point, I presume the party process will be complete.

There's a difference between defending and accepting.

Frankly though, I don't know why anyone would "expect" to be nominated for anything by a party. Didn't Hillary teach us that lesson? Ms. Inevitabilty!

Then Obama read up on the Montana and Texas caucus process and... wham... zing... bada boom... HRC lost and Obama is President.

Was he the most experienced?

No.

But he understood the party's process. And he won.

Regardless, that's just the party component. Anyone can run without a nomination from either of the two parties. So I really don't understand all this anger. It seems the anger is targeted in the wrong place.

Tony Perugini said...

Yes, the IAT's took a zero percent increase for the 2009-2010 school year and their contract expired last June.

Regarding the IAT contract negotiations...I wish every contract negotiation would go as smoothly, and as honestly, as the IAT's did. And no, there was no request for guaranteed job security. No legal risks were raised although this was a negotiation of new 2 year contract. I think the IAT's actions are commendable. They are saints IMO.

At this point, we were told by the teacher's union that there will be no concessions, no givebacks basically nothing at all. So that's the end of that.

We have one more contract negotiation in progress that should yield similar results as the IAT.

FWIW, it looks like we may be able to save the academically gifted program (AGP) by using ARRA money although it will only help for one school year unless the ARRA funds are replenished in 2011 (highly doubtful).

We had one more retirement notice come in and it looks like Steve Trifone found a way to save freshmen sports to some degree although the BOE has not seen a formal plan on it, yet.

The BOE planning committee held a series of meetings and we've come up with a 5 year $18M capital plan which should be discussed starting next week and make it's way to the TC for consideration before June.

On May 20th, the BOE will be voting on the budget reductions/increases and adopt the formal budget passed by the TC. I expect that we'll hear some feedback about the budget process from various BOE members Thursday night. It should be interesting to hear the comments.

I believe that on May 25th we'll be launching the "20/20" committee that will be researching/studying school utilization and planning. As I understand it, the committee will be made up of various stakeholders such as the BOE Planning members, TC members, PBC, Admin, PTA heads, parents, taxpayers, etc. I'll post more information as it becomes available next week.

Tony Perugini
BOE Member

Tony Perugini said...

"Well, some good news for a change. The turf committee raised the $150K requested by Tim Slocum. An RFQ has gone out to engineering firms to get cost estimates on engineering services. June should be yet another interesting month for this TC when the turf committee updates them on fund-raising and asks for permission (do they need to?) to move forward with the project."

It's true that the fundraising has reached $150K. I was this told by Gerry Brittingham last week. As I understand it, the decision to move forward (or not) with the Turf rests with the TC.

I met with Bob Behrer a couple of weeks ago and I shared my concerns about the lack of long-term planning/funding for the turf. The initial installation cost is not the issue for me.

He assured me that long-term planning would be addressed and I hope it will be addressed when the turf committee gives an update to the TC which I believe will be in June. As for budgeting...the 2009-2010 education budget has no money in it for turf-related expenditures. Nor is there anything budgeted for turf in the 2010-2011 budget.

I think before anyone gets too excited (or upset) let's get an update from the committee in June.

Tony Perugini
BOE

Anonymous said...

My guess is that Behrer will claim that replacement of the turf will be paid for through supposed savings in maintainance costs (yeah, right..lol) and income from rental of the field...HAHAHA This is not new info...he's said this before.

So if he claims to save say $10,000 per year in maintainance, I guess that means the $10,000 has to be budgeted into some account. So if you think about it, there's no real savings when the bottom line of the budget doesn't go down.