Woodstock CT Café

that lovin spoonful

For months there has been a story circulating about how the salt barn pollution of the surrounding neighborhood was discovered. Apparently Mr. Bennett, whose farm abuts the salt barn facility, developed serious high blood pressure which was hard to explain. In trying to understand the cause of his condition, the well water was tested and found to have a high salt content. It appears that over the years the Bennett’s adapted to unnoticeable increases in salt in their well water as the salt facility quietly contaminated their land. This is a sad testament to the 3rd world managerial and fiscal irresponsibility of the Town of Woodstock and we, the taxpayers are ultimately at fault and liable. Dave Hosmer clearly recognized the importance of this pollution problem when he stated the “Town is under DEP mandate to replace (the) salt shed … salt run-off has polluted the Bennett farm … the Bennett family should wait no longer for clean water” when he single-handedly promoted the passing of the bond referendum last week.

I did some literature searching on Google to try to educate myself on the relationship between salt intake and hypertension (e.g. high blood pressure). I simply searched “hypertension and salt” (in quotes) and the first paper I discovered was by Bisi et al. from the Departamento de Enfermagem, Centro Biomedico, Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo, Vitoria, ES, Brasil entitled “Hypertension and salt intake in an urban population”. The conclusion of the paper was that “salt intake is strongly influenced by socioeconomic level and may partially explain the higher prevalence of hypertension in lower socioeconomic classes” (published in Rev. Saude Publica 37:743-750, 2003 in Portuguese). Woodstock is not supposed to be part of the 3rd world (like the lower class neighborhoods of Brasil), we do not live in an urban area, and the Bennett’s are not from a lower socioeconomic class, but the result is the same. Insidious chronic salt pollution of drinking water can lead to hypertension and, no-doubt, other health problems. Read the rest of this entry »

News Flash! The school bus problem has been solved. Six second-hand school buses have been located for a third of the cost. These buses will be shipped from the Philippines to Woodstock in the coming weeks.

There are good reasons and not-so-good reasons for the failure of the recent CIP referendum. It seemed destined to fail from the start. I voted for the plan even though I thought it was poorly constructed. After all, most everything on the list is needed. So those left to read the tea-leaves, after the fact, will be hard pressed to divine a clear message.

Here are some notes from conversations I had before and after the vote, conversations I overheard, and some just plain personal observations.

• You just don’t bond things that have a useful life of less than twenty years!
• How old is the Town Hall? Why does it need remodeling?
• I’m not going to approve bonding an estimated cost for the salt shed and garage. When they figure out what they need and how much it will cost, then come talk to me.
• So, we’re going to shoot this one through, before we even get the results of the feasibility study for the school?
• This plan seems to be kind of thrown together.
• You’ve got to be kidding! Do they really think we are going to approve this?
• I may not be a finance man, but I’m not stupid enough to believe this won’t make my taxes go up!
• I feel sorry for the Bennetts, but it looks like somebody is using them as an excuse for a shopping free-for-all!
• I don’t like being told that I already approved this five-year capital plan. We are required to have a five-year capital plan on file by the state. We approve it every year with the budget – to fulfill this state requirement, not as an absolute road plan. Now, it is suddenly time to approve the funding?
• Haven’t we just installed new carpeting in the Town Hall? I don’t remember that in the budget. Where did that money come from? Now, they want another $200K’s worth of ‘improvements’?
• I’d say this vote was one of ‘no confidence’. Even if it was all stuff we need, I don’t think the voters think we have the personnel in place to adequately shepherd these projects through.
• The voters are tired of being jerked around. These constant referendums are an abuse of the citizen’s trust. Everybody claims to be the knight in shining armor, but the armor only shines until the mud starts getting slung. I’m tired of it all. Read the rest of this entry »

“Shall the Town of Woodstock appropriate $5,195,000 for costs related to the fiscal years 2006/07, 2007/08 AND 2008/09 Capital Improvements Programs and authorize the issue of bonds, notes and other obligations to finance the appropriation?�
Voting YES - 319
Voting NO - 635
Only 954 voted out of 4715 registered voters - a 20.2% turn-out. A pathetic 6.8% voted YES. Please note that Ms. Alberts reported the correct vote (we assume) but also reported that 19.6% voted. The Cafe did the math and came up with 20.2% voted assuming the number of votes and registered voters was reported correctly. Seemingly, it’s a small matter. But, this reminds us that we need to pay more attention to detail when accepting information from the government and news media. Indeed, the Bull accepted Ms. Alberts calculation without double checking it against the numbers she provided.
See Marge Wholean speaking to the Bull.

“This bonding plan (Capital Improvement Plan) will take the heat off Prop 46″

Such Arrogance responds to There’s No Place Like Home,

I think you’ve missed something about all of this. Charlies Snow and Dave Hosmer are on the same end of the screw job in this case. They want to save Prop 46 but need to avoid the next phase of its strangulation on Woodstock, to prevent a revolt against it. If the bond referendum fails, the Town will be getting hammered by the lack of acceptable solutions to some of its infrastructure problems like decayed bridges and decrepit roads, as well as the environmental “Love Canalâ€? of the salt shed next to the Bennett farm. There is no way that the solutions to those problems can be funded as an allowable expenditure under the Prop 46 straightjacket. They cost too much in one year. (Don’t believe the CPS idiots that the costs of these solutions can be bid out to private contractors, because the expense of such contracts would be a line item under the Selectmen’s budget and there would be no room for it, as there hasn’t been to date, under Prop 46 limit). Snow/Hosmer and their friends have come up with this Capital Improvement Plan to get some breathing room, get the funds they need to deal with these criticaly pressing problems and then go on their happy way with Prop 46 intact. They can then live secure in their remaining days in Woodstock, having maintained the choke hold on spending that Prop 46 ensures, even if that means the town can’t function properly. The same holds true for Shirley Rapose, Russ Dowd, Dick Wisniewski, Barbara Rich and their supporters some of whom have been ousted from visibility, but you can bet are still calling the shots from the bunker (e.g. Everett Shephard (don’t believe his WINY lies), Fred Rich and the old Guard Republicans). Read the rest of this entry »

Trustees close to W.A. Confidential report two important news items from the Academy.

First, Jay Livernois, long-time president of Citizens for Prudent Spending, and (t)ruthless agitator to the Woodstock Public Schools, has resigned his position as a Trustee. Word has it the Trustee inner circle “suggestedâ€? that Livernois resign as he had become more a liability than an asset in the budgetary public relations campaign against the Woodstock Public Schools. The announcement at the Trustees meeting this week was met with silence; however the relief was palpable. Members of the Board of Ed were less restrained, with several reportedly viewing the development as the basis for true Thanksgiving this holiday. The only remaining question, one said, was when the Academy would arrange the departure of Ernie Wetzel, a close Livernois ally. Wetzel has cranked up the old CPS rhetoric, and greatly increased tensions with the Board of Education, with whom the Academy is hoping to negotiate a contract. Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve got my stuffing and cranberry sauce made, the sweet potatoes are simmering and I’ve worked out the timetable for dinner. This is that quiet middle ground between the do-ahead dishes and the last minute frenzy. I realized I haven’t gotten back to you all with a more detailed report of Superintendent Baran’s presentation regarding the cost savings of retaining the ninth grade at the middle school and the fifth grade at the elementary school.

In order to estimate the cost of the ninth grade attending the Academy next year, the superintendent used an extrapolated mathematic formula using a range of student populations (146, 141, 136, 131, 126, & 121) and tuition percentage increases (0%, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, and 5%). Currently, the student population stands at 141 and this year’s tuition rate (0% in the superintendent’s formulation) is $9,849. So, the cost range of sending this year’s eighth grade class to the Academy is $1,191,729.00 (121 students @ 0% tuition increase or $9,848 per student) to $1,509,932.00 (146 students @ 5% tuition increase or $10,342 per student). Read the rest of this entry »

ATTENTION WOODSTOCK VOTERS!

YOU APPROVED A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN IN MAY
IT IS TIME TO APPROVE THE FUNDING OF THIS FIRST THREE YEARS OF THAT PLAN

WILL NOT INCREASE TAX RATE

• Makes economic sense – Governments, businesses, farmers, homeowners finance “big ticket� items rather than using current income
• Replacing equipment, school buses, etc. before expensive repairs, safety issues and costly down town makes sense
• Town is under DEP mandate to replace salt shed – salt run-off has polluted the Bennett farm – the Bennett family should wait no longer for clean water
• Highway facility must be brought up to code
• Infrastructure repairs and upgrades need to be done
• New debt will be added as old debt is retired
• Bonding does not circumvent Proposition 46

WILL NOT INCREASE TAX RATE

VOTE YES

REFERENDUM
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28
12 NOON TO 8 PM
TOWN HALL

Not Paid For by David Hosmer…This was transcribed from the Shoppers’ Guide, Admin.

Please get your facts correct before you irresponsibly assign blame for public “mistrust” to the BOE (Iraqued in Woodstock’s statement is below as an addendum, Admin). First, there is no surplus of $200,000. Remember, at the end of last school year/beginning of this school year, BOE cut $426,000 at the direction of Bd of Finance. The $200,000 (actually $216, 000) is the direct result of the overpayment to Woodstock Academy that arose from the fact that after both Woodstock Academy and BOE set their budgets and the public had voted upon it in May 2006, 22 students left Woodstock Academy from July to October 2006. Neither WA nor BOE could have anticipated that amount of student withdrawls from the Academy during that time period. In addition, BOE could not have anticipated that the Academy would refuse to take the excess tuition payment as determined by BOE’s good faith budgeted student estimate, thereby resulting in a savings of $216K for BOE this year but still leaves them $200K short of funding at last year’s level, another serious downgrade of the K-8 program. Thus, it is dishonest for you to assign knowledge to BOE of facts as yet to have occurred when BOE was faced with a directive by BOF to cut $426K. BOE did not threaten and did not grandstand, but you are correct, they did cut (and if you have been paying even casual attention to the facts, you must have seen just a hint of explanation here of ACTUAL CUTS that BOE DID MAKE in its budget for this year). Those cuts happened. Just ask kids who no longer have SPICE enrichment and parents paying for their kids to play soccer and run cross country this Fall.

Where do you come up with the statement that BOE overpaid Woodstock Academy $400K? Are you referring to the fact that Woodstock Academy overbudgetted by $370K last year in addition to charging the sending towns an additional $100K to increase their reserves? This is not a $400K overpayment by Woodstock alone. That is attributable to an OVERCHARGE by the Academy to all of the sending towns. Read the rest of this entry »

I’m sorry but I don’t think I can simply report on the presentation tonight dealing with the financial cost/savings of retaining the 9th grade at the middle school without injecting my personal feelings. I will present the grand overview because I don’t have the time to transcribe all the information tonight.

Moving the 5th grade to the Elementary School will cost $310,023.
Moving the 9th grade to the Middle School will cost $531,229.
District Costs will be $218,724.
The above costs will add up to a total cost of $1,059,976

The estimated Academy tuition for Grade 9 is $ 1,191,729 to $ 1,509,932.

The range of savings for retaining the 9th grade at the Middle School is projected to be $131,753 to $449,956.

The figures reflect only the financial costs of retaining the 9th grade at the middle school site. These calculations of district costs and the savings are based upon an assumption of how the Academy will price their per pupil tuition figure. In reality, the Academy’s quote for per pupil tuition is based on the number of students in grades 9-12 that we send to the Academy. Obviously, if we retain the 9th grade and deny the Academy approximately 10% of their overall revenue, the per pupil tuition will increase for Woodstock students. So the anticipated savings will be less than the figures quoted above. It must be clearly stated that this presentation focused only on the financial costs. These costs do not reflect the analysis of space available and the social, psychological, and program impacts. Read the rest of this entry »

I find it noteworthy that the two most recent advertisements that appeared in the Shopper’s Guide promoting the Academy and posturing for a contract with Woodstock Board of Education were paid for personally by Academy Trustees President Jeri Musumeci and Academy Finance Committee Chair Paul Kelly (look closely at the bottom of the ads to see who paid for them- it wasn’t the Academy). Did they think that those ads would not have been condoned by the Trustees had they proposed them for approval of content and as an advertising expense of the Academy itself and thus took on the expense personally? Perhaps they did not want full light shone upon the content before the ads were published. If that happened, the ads might have been different or perhaps not published at all. While anyone is entitled to their personal opinion, aren’t those who are in leadership/chair positions also responsible for making sure that they do not usurp the authority of the Board they chair to determine whether it was in the best interest of the Academy to publish these ads? Read the rest of this entry »