Woodstock CT Café

Ms. Wholean’s Tour of the Town with “Meals” led us to look more closely at this organization

(source – www.mowaa.org)

The Meals On Wheels Association of America (MOWAA or “Meals”) is the oldest and largest organization in the United States representing those who provide meal services to people in need. It should be noted up front that recieving this meal service is NOT and indication of poverty! Meals works toward the social, physical, nutritional, and economic betterment of vulnerable Americans. The guiding principle to which it subscribes is to help those men and women who are elderly, homebound, disabled, frail, or at risk.

Meals provides the tools and information its programs need to make a difference in the lives of others. It also gives cash grants to local senior meal programs throughout the country to assist in providing meals and other nutrition services. Read the rest of this entry »

Why can’t (the town Leadership’s) legacy be to rebuild respectability in Woodstock’s government?

Alex Cinquanta wrote a very revealing Letter to the Editor in the Villager, March 24th, 2006. He spoke in favor of the defeat of the referendum to repeal Proposition 46. He pointed his finger at a class of Woodstockians labeled the “TAX & SPENDERS” and stated that this group was targeted by the 1329 who voted NO “to keep the ‘TAX & SPENDERS’ from bleeding us dry.” He said that these voters were “defending their hard earned money.” He stated further “Our hard earned money will not be safe until the same (NO) voters sweep the Town Hall clean.” Finally, Alex did mention that the voters in the last election defeated the “independent” slate that were the defenders of Proposition 46, but he failed to point out that the defeat of his candidates was by a much larger margin than the defeat of the referendum to repeal 46. Is there a contradiction in messages here?

Who are the “TAX & SPENDERS” The only answer I can think of is ALL of the officials in City Hall (“sweep the Town Hall clean”) and the 499 who said YES. When I talked to the independent candidate for First Selectman (the defender of 46) before the last election, I learned two things from this discussion. His plan was to sit on his hands (if elected) and do nothing and, secondly, he needed a job. Read the rest of this entry »

There will be a special town meeting on April 12, 2006 at 8pm at the Woodstock Elementary School to vote on the proposed amendment of Proposition 46.

The following is the text of the proposed amendment:

“Resolved, that the Town Ordinance known as Proposition 46, adopted December 8, 1979, is hereby amended as follows (new language italicized):

Resolved, the town shall limit the increase in the town’s combined annual budget to revenue generated by growth in the Grand List, plus the following Exceptions defined as increases in State and Federal assistance, and in other income, and increases, voted upon by town meeting, necessary to cover debt service on legal obligations, court judgments against the town, State mandated programs and emergency expenditures.

In the event of property revaluation, the actual dollar increase in the combined town budget shall be limited to the dollar amount of increase in the preceding year’s budget or the average amount of increase over the preceding three years, whichever is greater, plus the Exceptions as defined above.

This amendment shall be effective immediately upon adoption at Special Town Meeting or Referendum.” Read the rest of this entry »

Hats off to Ms. Wholean, Ms. Rapose, Ms. Coughlin, anonymous “Sound Off”, and, yes, the Villager… I think…#%@*

Nearly every day, in Woodstock, Meals-On-Wheels distributes enough food to provide lunch and dinner to the elderly population in town. This last week “Meals� had company on their route through the Town. Yes, Ms. Wholean, our First Selectwoman, helped to deliver the meals and through this effort she came in touch with the elderly population of Woodstock. The Villager appears to have been unaware of Ms. Wholean’s creative approach to meet the elderly citizens when the Villager described Ms. Wholean’s initiative to provide tax relief to the elderly (see “Wholean:Tax Relief in Future� in the March 24th issue of the Villager).

In the same article, Ms. Rapose, chairwoman of the Woodstock Board of Finance, announced plans to appoint a “blue-ribbon panel� of Town citizens to look at the Town’s budgetary issues. Ms. Rapose gave credit to an anonymous individual for this suggestion. It was stated by the Villager that Ms. Wholean is also in favor of forming this panel to look at Town spending. But Ms. Rapose said that “every fiscal faction…should be represented� on this panel. Since about 75% of the Town budget is for education, it is the hope of WoodstockCTCafe that Ms. Rapose will consider assembling a group of clear thinking, open-minded citizens with backgrounds that indicate a respect for education but who also don’t automatically equate ‘quality’ with the amount of money spent.

It is somewhat worrisome, however, that the Villager reports the thought, or perhaps mindset, of either Ms. Wholean and/or Ms. Rapose in stating “One thing that (a blue-ribbon panel) might be looking at in the near future is spending by the Board of Education.â€? Hopefully this is a mis-quote, or perhaps it is just poorly worded because the Board of Education does not spend money without the approval of the Town, the citizenry, and the Board of Finance. The Board of Education should be given credit for advocating the needs of the Woodstock School System. Read the rest of this entry »

For anyone who thinks of this as an attack on the Town education budget – guess again! It is, instead, an attempt to better understand this budget which is very difficult to read in its current format. What is missing from the proposed budget document provided by the BOE, is detail on the numbers and justification of teaching positions and other key support staff. Since teachers and Special Ed staff with fringe benefits account for as much as 30% of the education budget and since all other costs stem from teaching, a stronger argument should be made for these positions to present the best possible case for the proposed education budget- and I truly believe that the BOE can do this! This is especially pertinent given the BOF Chairman’ s statement in the Villager this week. Ms. Rapose’s statement in the Villager on “spending by the BOE” drips with blame even though it is the BOF and the Town that authorize spending by the BOE. It makes good sense to encourage the BOE to make the strongest case possible for the proposed budget rather than leave details unexplained. In doing so the BOE would be the most articulate advocate for the education system in Woodstock. Also, note that the BOF has ‘stolen’ initiative from the BOE by laying claim to the suggestion below that the BOE select a panel to ‘objectively’ review the proposed budget. It would have been far better if the BOE embraced this process and claimed it for their own.

In the Norwich Bull this last week, there was an article about the increase that Towns are facing in their Education budgets for the next fiscal year, 2006-2007. Apparently, the average BOE budget increase for towns in this part of the state is 8.3% according to the Bulletin. Norwich’s increase was quoted at 7.9% with state entitlements increasing only 0.4%. The proposed education budget for Woodstock is $14,750,879, an increase of $1.2 million or an 8.86% increase. The total projected budget derived from Town taxation is $9,885,902 after deduction of $4,864,977 educational funding from the State of Connecticut. If a budget increase of about $600,000 is allowed under Prop 46, then this means that we are about $600,536 over budget.

If we examine properly annotated expenditures in this proposed budget such as Woodstock Academy tuition, regular teachers’ salaries, superintendent salary, and salaries for the two principals, the validity and significance of these costs to the taxpayers of Woodstock can be evaluated and understood.

Woodstock Academy tuition – In 2006-2007 it is projected 481 students will be sent to the academy at a cost of $4,675,710 in tuition. In addition, there is a $145,912 additional cost called “construction costs� and $134,000 tuition for Special Ed to be paid to the Academy. In the academic year 2005-2006, the number of students actually enrolled was 475 at a cost of $4,370,870 based upon projected enrollment of 468. So in the new projected budget, we are paying for 7 students that were not projected for last year’s budget. Looking back over the last eleven years (including the current projected WA budget), the tuition rose on average each year at a rate of 3.13%. The projected tuition increase for 2006-2007 is 4.9%; however, there was no tuition rate increase last year so the last two years will average a 2.45% increase. This increase in tuition may be reduced from 4.9% to 4.5%, but this is uncertain.

If we examine the growth of Woodstock students enrolling in WA over the last eleven years, the enrollment has increase 50% from 1996-1997, growing from only 321 students to a projected 481 in 2006-2007. During this period, WA tuition expenditures in the BOE budget increased 112%. This is explained by the fact the cost of WA tuition increased 45%. Thus, rising WA tuition and a 50% increase in students is responsible for the growth of the WA portion of the Woodstock BOE budget.

To determine how much the tuition has changed over the last 11 years taking into consideration the rate of inflation, one can take the total tuition for 321 students in 1996 of $2,202,028 and multiply this number by a factor that represents the growth in number of students by 2006-2007. Read the rest of this entry »

It is herein proposed that a commission of Town citizens be created for the purpose of carrying out an independent review of Woodstock’s education budget.

This commission, composed of three to five Woodstock citizens, should be authorized by the Board of Education (BOE) to carry out their mission independently of the BOE with the exception of the BOE’s cooperation with the commission in exchanging information and providing clarifications as needed by the commission.

Nominations for appointment to this commission should be posted publicly on the internet and in local newspapers as these nominations should be known by the Town citizenry. It should be stipulated that nominees to the commission (1) should have no prior role with the BOE or the Academy including candidacy for election to the BOE or the Board of Trustees of the Academy, (2) should never have run for Town office or appointment to any Town committee, (3) should have some form of higher education combined with sustained experience in a profession, and (4) no commission nominee should have a child entering or coming through the Woodstock school system in the fiscal year 2006-2007 or thereafter. The commission members can be chosen by the BOE or after the BOE selects appropriate nominees, but only if there are many nominees, the final commission members might be elected by the Woodstock electorate based solely on the nominee’s published credentials.

The mandate of this commission should be as follows: (1) To complete a line-by-line review of the proposed BOE budget for the 2006-2007 school year; (2) provide an independent review of reasonable needs of the school system based upon review for the proposed budget; and (3) provide a review of the events that led to a proposed budget that currently exceeds the allowable budget presented by the Board of Finance by about $660,000. To complete its mission, this commission will compile a written report that will be published in a timely fashion on the internet and in local newspapers.There is no set time line for completion of this review. It’s not expected that this review could be completed before the 2006-2007 budget is established.

This proposal is open for discussion and/or re-wording.

“…everyone will be (happy) to know their taxes will only be about 25% of what they are now!�

It was a difficult meeting and all knew it before they took their seats. The decision they came to make had never been made in anyone’s recollection of history. As expected, there were only a handful of devoted witnesses in attendance. But the evening’s meeting would come to the attention of not only every citizen in town, but by the next evening’s news cycle, the town would be embarrassed at a national level. The Board of Education had assembled to formally vote to shut down the schools. Emotionally battered, pummeled by the process, and out of options, none could avoid this assemblage. To be fair, pointing a finger to any individual cause is not possible. The causes are far too numerous, ignorance, selfishness, shortsightedness, miserly-ness, denial, incompetence, disengagement and arrogance. But, all stand bound together in the blazing spotlight of shame.

For more than two hundred years, the community has valued education, knowing the benefit society receives from that kind of investment and understanding how much civilized society depends an educated populace. But now, the townspeople have lost their way. Somehow, people have forgotten (or choose to ignore) that their forefathers bore the cost of their collective education, as did those who came before them. Read the rest of this entry »

Are we “morons” if we disagree with Mr. Wetzel.

It looks like the Woodstock Villager should be renamed the Wetzel Villager because of the excessive quoting of his opinions about the Town. It appears that the Villager views Mr. Wetzel as a rational spokesman for the Town of Woodstock. In addition to quoting Mr. Wetzel excessively in recent weeks in major articles about the Town budget and management, W is even cited excessively in the “Corrections� section for apparent mis-quotes. Mr. Wetzel appears to have a hotline to the Villager.

In a town with so many stable citizens who contribute in so many positive ways to the Town of Woodstock, it would seem that it would be in the best interests of the Villager and the Town of Woodstock if the Villager would seek out more of a balance of viewpoints within the Town citizenry. Space could always be reserved for Mr. Wetzel in “What are they saying�. Most of these other citizens, however, will not be available between 8AM and 5PM because of other obligations.

The article on the non-repeal of Prop 46 says “Wetzel, a resident of Woodstock, was available for comment after the referendum…â€? What is W’s residential status in Woodstock? W was also available a lot for comment before the referendum. It’s as though W has too much time available for the Town. Perhaps the Villager could tell us a little more about Mr. Wetzel to re-establish his credibility. Read the rest of this entry »

“Let us not assume it will be easy, worthwhile, or even successful…”

Back in 1998, I posted a few quotes in the only available publication- the “shopper’s guide�- ugh! Anyway, they may be worth repeating, if you are serious, since history tends to repeat itself:

“Does he (our government) know us? Or we, him? NO. Have we any restriction over his conduct? NO. IS he bound in duty and interest to preserve our liberty and property? NO. Is he acquainted with our circumstances, situation, or wants? NO. What then are we to expect from him. Nothing but taxes without end.â€? – James Otis, March 10, 1768

“Liberty will maintain her empire till a dissoluteness of morals, luxury, and venality shall have prepared…some future age to prefer the mean lucre, the bribes, and the smiles of corruption, and arbitrary ministers…to patriotism, to glory and to the public good.” – Charles Carroll- January 29, 1760.

“Elected representatives are trustees for their constituents to transact for them the business of government…and for this service they, like all other agents, were paid by their constituents, till they found it more advantageous to sell their voices…â€? – Virginia Gazette- March 17, 1768

“What happened yesterday will come to pass again, and the same causes will produce like effects in all ages.â€? – James Otis- December 24, 1733

NO FORM OF GOVERNMENT WILL SECURE LIBERTY, HAPPINESS, AND PROSPERITY WITHOUT VIRTUE IN ITS PEOPLE, AND WITHOUT THE ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT OF ITS CITIZENS. – Ken Rapoport, May 1, 1998 Read the rest of this entry »

Here ye, here ye, here ye. Will the meeting come to order!

Last Tuesday’s referendum revealed a strong constituency base for repealing Prop 46. There are 499 of us and I can think of two who I could have taken to the polls for 2 more YES votes. So it’s safe to say that there are at least 500 voters in Town that could form the basis for a new political Town party – the YES party.

The core of the platform of this party could be the as follows: Read the rest of this entry »

This vote means that the citizenry of Woodstock has NO confidence in the town government – I frankly understand this. Cafe Admin.

TOWN OF WOODSTOCK
RESULTS OF ADJOURNED
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING/REFERENDUM

Tuesday, March 14, 2006 from 12 Noon to 8:00 pm.

“Shall the Town of Woodstock repeal the ordinance adopted at Adjourned Special Town Meeting on December 8, 1979 known as Proposition 46?â€?

YES VOTES: 499
NO VOTES: 1,329

PROPOSAL IN ITEM #1 ABOVE IS DEFEATED.

All government is political, regardless of the methodology of governing. Nonetheless, we (as a town) should at least open up the discussion of establishing a “town charter�.

The troika of current selectmen…particularly with current ‘republican’ 2nd selectman (Mr. Eaffy) hidden in democratic robes…as has been the case for so many years in Woodstock…continues to rob the first selectman and majority party of making any significant changes.

I would agree that the Town treasurer also brings little creativity and financial innovation to the job…and any opportunity of a strong leadership role to help guide the BOF would be very welcome. Unfortunately, we’ll have to wait another 1.5 years to change things.

I find myself agreeing with both Wetzel and Adams…could one have ever imagined seeing them on the same side of the issue?…but I will admit to feeling that this poorly devised campaign to “repeal� Prop. 46 was doomed to fail given the lackluster support publicly…and wonder if it wasn’t thrown out there as the perverbial “third rail� to attempt to contact the current first selectman…or as a possible potential club for the originators of the petition to fight their way back into the majority political party?

So..now to offset the potential short-term pain of paying more for our current usage of services…Woodstock will probably bond issues…which may very well make sense for longer term capital items. Read the rest of this entry »

“…Proposition (46) has outlived its usefulness, and is an impediment to good, responsible government…”

Unfortunately, Woodstock does not have a Charter, nor are there “Bylawsâ€? per se, except for those adopted by each individual board or commission (his comment to ReNews Writer in Woodstock’s Leadership Dilemma). There is no job description for the position of First Selectman, or BOS, for that matter.

Our town is governed by state statute, and any ordinances passed by the Town Meeting, including Prop 46. While both list the powers and duties of the positions, they are neither a road map nor a job description. The position is what the occupant of the office makes of it.

I have long been an advocate of our community establishing a Charter Commission to draft such a road map to effective local government, and then presenting it to the electorate so that they may decide if that is what they want. Unfortunately, my arguments have fallen upon deaf ears.

To those that oppose a Charter for Woodstock (I’m not sure why), I agree that if we have ineffective leaders, an organic document such as a Charter will not be worth the paper it is printed on.

Ineffective leaders are the result of a lack of choice on Election Day. What causes that lack of choice? And after nearly a quarter century of public service in four communities in our state, two things have become clear to me: we can only blame ourselves if we don’t step forward to serve our communities, and come out to vote on the issues and the candidates. This statement is not meant to lecture, but merely to give an observation of what I have experienced in that time.

As far as Prop 46 is concerned, my opposition to it has been no secret to our town, and apparently, Citizens for Prudent Spending, for the past several years. As a private citizen, I have no problem with taking a position and standing by it. In the past, I helped initiate two petitions, one to repeal, and one to amend. This year, I signed Ernie Wetzel’s petition to repeal after he appeared unannounced in my family room one night. And while my former neighbor and I may not agree upon most, if not all of the issues facing Woodstock, especially the Education budget, we appear to be on the same page for diametrically opposing positions. I believe that the Proposition has outlived its usefulness, and is an impediment to good, responsible government, including the appropriate funding of our educational system. I also believe that it takes the decision making process out of the hands of the electorate. Finally, it uses a formula for determining spending that has no relationship with the needs of our community, and our ability to pay for those needs. Read the rest of this entry »

“What about Prop 46…(and)…kudos to the BOE!â€?

“Powers and Duties of the First Selectman and the Board of Selectmam: Responsible for supervising the affairs of the town and responsible for guiding town officers and town bodies toward accomplishing the objectives of the town’s long-range comprehensive plans. Responsible for presenting to the Board of Finance the amount, purpose and proposed method of financing projected capital expenditures, holding joint meetings at least two times a year with one or more members of all boards, commissions and agencies to coordinate the planning and action of such, reviewing the current and projected administrative and fiscal needs of the town and developing and maintaining a long-range comprehensive financial plan. Responsible for making appointments to applicable town offices. May propose to a town meeting duly called, ordinances consistent with the General Statutes and the Charter.â€? (Durham Connecticut) Read the rest of this entry »

Recently I was involved in circulating a petition for the repeal of Prop 46. I support the repeal of Prop 46 for many reasons gained over the last 8 years while on the Board of Education, First Selectman, Selectman, Board of Trustees Woodstock Academy, parent, taxpayer and citizen. Prop 46 has polluted the democratic process in Woodstock. One group supports 46 because they believe it protects them with very little effort on their part. The other group who wants to spend money is protected because they have been allowed to spend money with no questions asked. The citizens of Woodstock are disconnected from their own town politically. They don’t care who gets elected because Prop 46 won’t let them spend much money (so they think). Are Woodstock’s tax rates really any better than Pomfret?

Government that goes unquestioned is dangerous. I find it very curious that the groups who have been complaining about 46 and how it is destroying Woodstock and our Educational system are strangely quiet. I wonder why. The only thing they haven’t blamed 46 for is global warming and I think that is on the agenda for April after the vote, if 46 is still on the books. Right now as we speak, the spenders in Woodstock are working with Attorneys to “re-interpret 46″. As you know, if you pay an Attorney enough, they will tell you it says whatever you want it to say. The limits of spending under 46 will magically increase because of the new interpretation. For example, I refer to the Bond Issue pursued by Barbara Rich and Delpha Very last year. They spent alot of your money getting the interpretation that the Academy had violated the Bond Agreement with the purchase of the Hicks land. Funny that they had to add new language to the existing Bond Agreement to prevent the Academy from any future purchases.

The Academy was not in violation of the Bond Agreement. I had an opinion from these same lawyers several years ago when Barbara Rich declared the Academy was in violation with the purchase of the Cutler property. The same lawyers who now say the Academy is in violation, then said it was a gray area of the law, and that the Academy was not in violation by purchasing property as long as it did not hinder their ability to repay the Bond.

The Spenders in Woodstock are now working on a new Bond issue to pay for all of their wish list items that Prop 46 will not pay for. Dave Hosmer even suggested we put textbooks in the new Bond Issue. What next, teachers salaries? Prop 46 is under attack and will be under attack forever. They will modify it, amend it, or reinterpret it. Meantime, we don’t have any meaningful dicussions about the challenges Woodstock is facing with our Educational system and town services, which can be paid for out of limited resources. Read the rest of this entry »

The Villager’s translation of “Cognito ergo sum” is “I think, therefore I exist.” WoodstockCtCafe’s translation is “I think, therefore I am!” Afterall did Hamlet say? “To exist or not to exist…” Me thinks not. Cafe Admin

“He’s bright and has good ideas and he’s getting the hell out of Woodstock.�

On Friday March 3rd, the Villager published one humongous cow pie! My eyes were quickly drawn to two front-page articles, one entitled “Prop 46 going to the polls� and a second entitled “Town planner resigns in letter to Woodstock.�

On the lower left of the cow pie, the Prop 46 article begins with a double tease stating “… it seems the days of Proposition 46 may be numberedâ€? redundantly followed in the second sentence by the statement that “…it appears Proposition 46 may be on its way to being repealed.â€? Do two sentences back-to-back saying the same thing count as two votes against? Since the prospect of repeal seems so certain I read on with great thirst to see the basis for the likely repeal. I was thinking that maybe the intent of this article was to stir people to rally against this repeal. There was no mention throughout the article about what vote, YES or NO, repeals 46. Read the rest of this entry »