Woodstock CT Café

also serving Eastford, Pomfret, Brooklyn, Canterbury, Putnam, Ashford and Thompson. We’re as close as your mouse.
October 13th, 2006

Wholetzel Administration HearSay

Congratulations, residents of the Town of Woodstock.

We now have a hybrid Selectperson (gender unknown) running our town. We didn’t elect Wetzel and it is my opinion that we certainly should not have elected Ms. Wholean who now listens to every gripe of the rabid Mr. Wetzel (I voted for her :-( ). Just check the visitation to the Town Hall and you will see what I mean. I doubt that Wetzel is there so frequently for hugs and kisses with Delpha Very, Mitch Eaffy, Barbara Rich, or Judy Alberts. Since he has no property in Woodstock and admits to no residency in town to the Academy, he’s not visiting the Town Hall to pay his taxes or purchase a dump pass. Besides Barbara Rich and Judy Alberts are too busy managing Mike’s campaign out of their offices at the Town Hall.

In parallel with this subterfuge at the Town Hall, it’s also my understanding that the Democratic Town Committee is in disarray because of the rebellion of Ms. Wholean and her mate Jim Kaeding. They have rightly concluded that the majority of the DTC are against them and they are, therefore, trying to thwart the DTC to ensure Ms. Wholean’s repeat candidacy a year from now. There’s nothing like having the easy money that Ms. Wholean earns serving as the Woodstock’s CEO even in spite of her utter incompetence and dysfunctional state. Read the rest of this entry »

October 10th, 2006

The Woodstock BOE Released this Statement to the Cafe

October 10, 2006
Dear Woodstock Community:

On April 4, 2006, the Woodstock Board of Education submitted to the Board of Finance a budget totaling $14,566,120, which was required to maintain the level of programs that existed in the 2005-2006 school year. On May 9, 2006, the Woodstock Board of Finance directed the Woodstock Board of Education to reduce its budget by $426,896. The final education budget of $14,139,224 represents an increase of 4.35% ($588,881) over last year’s budget of $13,550,343.

The Board was faced with difficult decisions. We requested the Board of Finance reconsider its allocation to the education budget, and requested Woodstock Academy reduce the tuition rates for our 9-12 students. Neither request was granted. In addition, the Board offered an early retirement incentive to its certified staff.

The following have been eliminated in order to comply with the reductions requested by the Board of Finance:

• Cut Gifted/Talented Program at WMS (eliminating one teaching position),
• Cut Gifted/Talented Program at WES (eliminating one teaching position),
• Reduced total number of certified staff by one Grade 1 Teacher,
• Reduced total number of certified staff by one Grade 5 Teacher,
• Cut Athletic Program Funding (the program exists as pay to participate),
• Did not purchase Educational Testing Software,
• Did not purchase needed equipment, classroom supplies, textbooks, workbooks, and technology supplies.

The reduction in staff listed above has resulted in the following class sizes:

Elementary School
…………..Academic
Grade /Class Size Range

PreK…13-14
K…..10-16
1…..16-19
2…..19-20
Multi 1/2…..20-21
3…..19-22
4…..19-21

Middle School
…….Home…..Academic
…….Room…..Class Size
5…..22-25…..18-25
6…..20-22…..18-24
7…..23-24…..18-29
8…..23-24…..17-29

The system experienced a number of changes that were able to reduce the impact of the reductions on our class sizes. Read the rest of this entry »

October 10th, 2006

Commenters Respond to CrunchyCon, Mr. Wetzel & Anonymous

“…fiscal policy of Republicans in the last six years has been one of complete fiscal irresponsibility.”

Crunchy Con, (response to comment under the “Virtual Debate”, Admin)
I don’t understand how you can make this statement. “Don’t get me wrong, there are bad republicans, but the vast majority of them embrace traditional values that support education, sustain the environment, and protect the American way of life, which is the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness for all, but not at the expence of others and not in a fiscally irresponsible manner.”

The Bush Administration’s record in the areas you have identified, indicative of the current Republican philosophy, and that of Mike Alberts as well, has been abysmal.

Bush’s No Child Left Behind and the politics that preceded it of Bill Bennett and his cohorts has been an all out assault on the funding of education and an effort to privatize education. Democrats believe in full funding of public education. NCLB and other Republican education boondoggles have completely undermined our educational system.

The Bush Administration record in the area of environmental protection has been awful. Reversals of prior protections, faciliation of the exploitation of our natural resources for the benefit of corporate profit are all the hallmarks of the Republican control of our government of late. Republicans could care less about pollution controls, the effects of our industry upon global warming, and alternate energy development if it negatively impacts the corporate bottom line.

Protection of the American way of life which is the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness for all, besides being a fairly utopian ideal, to which Democrats are constitutionally committed, does not seem to be the objective of the current Republican Administration and is not achieved by the Republican directed attack on habeus corpus, belief in undermining of the Geneva Convention, torture of prisoners of war, invasion of sovereign nations under the guise of world wide evangelization of democracy, wiretapping surveillance of its citizens and its innumerable other violations of individual liberties.

More than 600,000 Iraqis have died by violence since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. USA Today, Oct 11, 2006; Why Vote for Lamont?

Read the rest of this entry »

October 7th, 2006

Mike and Sherri’s Virtual Debate

From now on Anonymous’ comments will be found in the Tasmanian file. Devotee’s of Anonymous can visit her there and exchange comments ad nausea.

If either candidate would like to add or clarify their responses to the CBIA questionaire, they can do so by emailing the Cafe at cafe_administrator@hotmail.com . Changes submitted as comments will not be accepted. Admin

The Connecticut Business & Industry Association (CBIA) sent a business-related questionnaire to all CT candidates for the coming election. The questions are in bold and followed by the candidates’ responses – “in his and her own words” (except in instances of pre-determined multiple choice answers, those responses are in italics).

Candidate Questionnaire Responses for:
Michael Alberts – House District 050
Sherri L. Vogt – House District 050

1) What do you think is the most important issue facing the state of Connecticut?
Mike: Improving the state’s business environment is our most critical issue.
Sherri: The most important issue facing the voters in the 50th district is the high property taxes and our over reliance to support schools with this tax.

2) Do you support strict adherence to the existing constitutional cap on the growth in state spending? Why or why not?
Mike: Yes. It’s the will of the people.
Sherri: I would like to see the legislature revisit the issue and redefine the spending cap.

3) If Connecticut faces a significant budget shortfall, how would you address it?
Mike: Cuts would be needed and priorities readjusted.
Sherri: Due to the past budget problems after 9-11 and all the cuts made then, I feel we are already living with a very lean budget and therefore, I think if we had another period of distress, the legislature would need to look at generating more funds. There are many loop holes in all the statues to raise revenue. There should not be over 40 exceptions to the sales tax scales. We should also demand sales over the internet carry the sales tax in every state. And if we streamline our paper trail in state spending in the healthcare field, we could save millions of dollars. We need an efficient government.

4) The state of Connecticut has a budget surplus; how would you use it?
Mike: I would use the budget surplus as an opportunity to reduce taxation.
Sherri: Schools, environment, roads.

5) For every $100 of sales, approximately how much profit do you think the average Connecticut business makes?
Mike: $5.00 (net)
Sherri: In food it is 60%, in auto sales maybe 30%, in manufacturing maybe 25%

6) The current level of state and local taxes paid by businesses and industry is:
Mike: Too high
Sherri: Response not noted on form

7) Compared with other states, do you think Connecticut’s business costs are:
Mike: Much too high
Sherri: response not noted on form

8) What can be done to make Connecticut’s business climate more competitive?
Mike: Continue to reduce state taxes for businesses and work to make CT more business-friendly.
Sherri: Better transportation systems, WI-FI avalibility, cheaper energy costs

9) Would you support legislation at the state level that imposes restrictions on companies outsourcing domestic jobs to foreign countries? If yes, please explain
Mike: No!
Sherri: Yes! Jobs are our number one priority in this state. If people are not working, people become a burden to the State. Companies that enjoy all that our state has to offer should have loyalty to the state and its workers and all the residual effects of that employment here. When the sub-base was going to close we heard about how many other businesses were tied to that local economy. Why should only the huge government employers be held to that standard. All companies work and thrive in a community that there is a relationship of give and take. The state should protect our jobs.

10) Connecticut has adopted workers’ compensation reforms to bring these costs more in line with those in other states. Would you support legislation that would repeal, in whole or in part, these reforms or adopt other measures that would increase employers’ workers’ compensation costs?
Mike: No!
Sherri: No!

11) The General Assembly has recently considered legislation that would prohibit communication between employers and employees, in mandatory meetings, concerning union organizing activities or that are of a political nature. Do you support such a prohibition?
Mike: No!
Sherri: Yes!

12) The cost of Connecticut’s environmental laws and regulations on business could best be reduced without negatively impacting environmental quality by:
Mike: Making our laws and regulations more consistent with federal requirements
Sherri: Providing greater state funding to DEP to operate its existing programs

13) Would you support a state-run and state-supplied health insurance plan for all citizens?
Mike: No!
Sherri: Yes!

14) Would you support new taxes or fees being imposed on companies that do not provide a state-determined level of health insurance benefits to their employees?
Mike: No!
Sherri: Yes!

15) Each year the state legislature considers expanding the definition of what “basic” health insurance ought to cover. Do you feel that each new health care mandate contributes to steadily rising health insurance costs in Connecticut?
Mike: Yes!
Sherri: No!

16) A well-educated future workforce is vital to Connecticut’s economy. Which TWO of the following education reforms would you identify as top priorities to improve the quality of public education?
Mike: Holding schools accountable for student’s test results
Sherri: Add after- school, Saturday or summer academies in academic areas in need of improvement
(neither candidate chose TWO responses)

17) The General Assembly has passed, and the governor has approved, two major transportation initiatives during the last two years totaling about $3.6 billion dollars. Are further significant investments needed to adequately address our transportation challenges?
Mike: Yes!
Sherri: No!

18) Where should the additional transportation funding come from?
Mike: “other” I’m not yet sure what the funding source should be. I would rule out increasing the income tax or bonding as sources, however.
Sherri: response not noted on form

19) Would you favor higher taxes and fees on energy to fund conservation programs?
Mike: No!
Sherri: No! Read the rest of this entry »

October 6th, 2006

Political Debate in Woodstock and the 50th District at the Café

This site belongs to those who choose to participate. The articles are written either in-house or by submission from readers. Sometimes comments that are developed well enough to stand on their own become articles. The Café welcomes different points of view and all opinions. If you would like to submit an article, please do. Articles can be submitted as comments or emailed to cafe_administrator @hotmail.com. Admin

“…no interest on the part of the Café … to present only one side”

I am sure most of us are repelled by the relentless TV ads that candidates use during the course of their campaigns leading up to election day not to mention the voluminous junk mail that we receive. We have seen that one accusation begets another in the Rob Simmons/Joe Courtney, Nancy Johnson/Chris Murphy, and Joe Lieberman/Ned Lamont campaigns while the substance of the issues fails to surface. The medium of the Café offers a unique venue for a quiet cogent exchange between candidates. Two candidates expressing well thought out opinions with clarity would help voters to get a clear picture of where these candidates stand on their favorite issues as well as the issues that are important to the residents of Woodstock and the surrounding towns.

Thus far we have seen two parallel articles on Mike Alberts and Sherri Vogt in the Villager describing the backgrounds, interests, and favored issues of each of these candidates. Only Mike and Sherri can speak about how they feel these articles have served their interests. When you turn your story over to a naïve reporter and somewhat inept editor anything can happen. For example, in Mike’s article if I were Mike I would have down-played my job at the Savings Institute and not called it a full-time job. I doubt that Mike would have stated it that way as I would think that emphasis on the campaign and his continuing work as State Representative have a higher priority in the final month leading up to election day. As for Sherri, she might have emphasized more on the side of expertise for tackling the challenging job of State Representative. Both candidates delegated control of their image and ideas to an uninterested and unknowledgeable writer when they gave these interviews. Read the rest of this entry »

October 3rd, 2006

Political Animals Are Numerous In Woodstock

“we need new blood…with some ‘intelligent interest’ “

Mark Ashton waxes euphoric in his recent editorial in the Villager (editorial page, Sept. 29th) entitled “Lessons of freedom need to be remembered frequently.� It seems that Mark feels, by quoting great intellects such as Thomas Paine, that this makes his editorial intelligent. Since the Villager is presumably focusing on current events, it is fair to conclude that his ‘lesson’ is addressing the current debate over the Iraq War and why we should support the war. Mark goes so far as to chastise his readers for forgetting the “worst terrorist attacks on American soil� and the lesson ‘that we are always forgetting (do we all have senile dementia?)’ that “freedom isn’t free and the price of liberty is eternal vigilance�…yuk, yuk, yuk … gag me with a giant spoon of castor oil. This is because Mark and the Villager think their readers are stupid human beings… perhaps proved by the fact that we are reading their articles. It always amazes me how one can generate a false ‘truth’ and then expound ad nausea on what is wrong (a la Rosanna-Rosanna Danna). The message talked down to us from the pedestal of the Villager is that Villager readers are stupid, stupid, stupid.

As a reaction to Mark’s message from the Villager, I suggest that what we should not forget to examine is the honesty, quality of thinking, and performance of our leaders/politicians from the President, to our Congressmen, to our State leaders, to our local State Representatives, and all the way down to our Selectmen and the members of our Town Committees and Boards. Someone said that “all politics is local.� He was probably saying that we only have influence at the local level because the higher up you go on the political food chain, the less your vote counts.

I apologize in advance to anyone who genuinely feels that the Iraq War was justified and all of those who genuinely wish to support the troops in their mission. We have a President that has adopted the slogan “stay the course�. I remember a war where the slogan was “peace with honor.� Kissinger and Nixon extended the Vietnam War for years with that slogan but the enduring image is the roof of the US embassy in Saigon where people were reaching up to a hovering helicopter in desperation as the US ‘cut and run’.

During that era, I played doubles every Sunday for a period of time in McLean VA with three CIA agents. We were for ever dodging errant tennis balls from the next court off of the rackets of Art Buckwald and Ethyl Kennedy (Ethyl was better than Art). This was in the Fall of 1973 and articles had started to surface in the Washington press about a petty brake-in at the Watergate. I naively asked one of my tennis partners “What’s going to happen to Nixon?� The agent I was talking to was a high level CIA operative in the Middle East who ironically had, at one time in his early CIA years, reported to Howard Hunt, one of the Watergate burglars. I was astounded when this fellow responded assertively “He’ll be out by June�. He was one and a half months off due to the protracted Watergate hearings. The fact of the matter is that inside Washington, everyone knew what had happened while many in the heartland hardly noticed.

Around the same year, I found myself strolling on the campus at Harvard. An esteemed Professor, Alvin Pappenheimer, had invited me for several weeks and was treating me to dinner at the faculty club. I took this opportunity to ask him how the faculty viewed Kissinger who had left Harvard to join Nixon’s administration. Pap expressed a little annoyance with Kissinger who was viewed predominantly by the higher ups at Harvard as a pure ‘political animal’. Read the rest of this entry »

October 1st, 2006

Citizens Question the Town Operating Budget

Simsac : What about the money in the budget for a new guy on the road crew? I haven’t heard of anybody being hired yet…where is the money set aside for that position going right now?

Or, what about the First Selectwoman’s ‘Executive Assistant’ who quit to go back to school in September? I heard that someone who was already “in-house” is doing the job. Where is that money going right now?

And, just how overworked is everybody if someone from inside can just switch over to do somebody else’s ‘full-time’ job?

Lucida : In the end, the 4% raise for the non-union employees was actually larger than that. Union employees have to pay dues to the union every month/payday. I don’t know if there are benefit increases as well, but overhead costs are usually based on pay scale. That would imply there would be increased costs in that category.

Seadog : How about Barbara Rich leading the Board of Finance charge against the Town Attorney’s interpretation of Prop 46, the Board of Finance then ordering a larger cut than what would have occurred if they followed their own lawyer’s opinion, and then Barbara ends up with a larger percentage raise than those employees in the school system the BOF whacked? That’s real justice isn’t it?

Talk about dishonesty in government. The FY 2006-2007 General Government Budget shows no salary increases in the accounts for Selectmen, Assessor, Tax Collector, Finance (Town Treasurer), Town Clerk, Town Planner, Building Official, Fire Marshall and Highway Road Foreman. The Contingency Fund account shows a 150% increase from $40,000 to $100,000 with a notation that Town Hall Union Contract was under negotiation. None of these employees are in the union are they? When do we get to find out how much of the contingency was used for the 4% pay raise those non-union employees grabbed? Is any surplus just squirreled away?

Karnac : Despondent – In the entire seven years I have closely observed the workings of the Board of Finance, I have never seen them do any evaluation of any expenditure relative to costs or discuss any options. Their process consists of three simple steps:

1. Calculate the Cap.
2. Calculate the Cut.
3. Allocate the Cut.

Then, run out of the room. The proposed bonding of capital projects is directly taken out of the Democratic campaign ads; Webster Bank handles the occasional bonding work; Treasurer Barbara Rich calculates the cap; and the allocation between Town/Education is based on previous year expenditures (+/-70%/30%). So all WBOF does is #2 – subtract the budget requests from the cap. Not a group of rocket scientists, I think this is all they can handle. If the voters want to keep P-46, we desperately need to upgrade this talent pool, so we can do what candidates keep talking about “be more creative”. I don’t think Wisneski/Rapose/Dowd/Hosmer are up to the task. Read the rest of this entry »

« Previous Entries