Woodstock CT Café

I was just re-reading the Academy problem statement article that you have listed to the left. I don’t know who wrote that but I came across a paragraph that says that in 2016 the Academy’s status will revert back to private.

Is that really accurate? Because I just came across an old court case that oddly enough, rules that WA is essentially a public entity. Actually, this case looks pretty interesting. I only read a synopsis of it. I don’t know how to get the full details. I gather that the bottom line is that WA is the “functional equivalent” of a public agency and as such they are subject to FOIA requests just like the BOE.

I’m not trying to start trouble or attack the Academy. I was just trying to answer my own question as to why WA doesn’t just throw open their books for taxpayer review. Now with this court ruling, I guess I have my answer. The books legally have to be opened if they are requested by FOIA; same as for any other agency.

Maybe Kevin can explain this? Here’s the court case:

Board of Trustees of Woodstock Academy v. Freedom OF Information Commission, 181 Conn. 544 (1980). I also saw this case listed as 436 A.2d266 (Conn. 1980).

The synopsis that I read said that the test for determining whether an entity is the functional equivalent of a public agency within the meaning of 1-200(1)(B) G.S. is set forth in the case I just referenced above (BOT of WA v. FOI Commission). There are four criteria for determining whether or not an agency can be considered public and be subject to FOIA requests as set forth in this court ruling. The criteria are: Read the rest of this entry »

What is really bothersome about the latest assault on the Woodstock Public Schools by the Craig Powers/Dave Richardson “Smear Squad” is that Woodstock Academy has found yet another means to align themselves with it.

After years of using Academy Trustees Jay Livernois and Paul Lynn to attack the public schools, then years more of using Academy Trustee Ernie Wetzel in this role, this time it is Academy Trustee Avis Spaulding, who, according to the Villager, formally launched the Powers/Richardson “Citizens Audit” lynch mob in her own living room.

So once again, the Academy will pursue its interests by sponsoring an illegitimate attack on the finances of the Woodstock public schools, to help insure that they can proceed with their $3-4 million athletic complex, and their $16 million science center, for which they have no funds, while Powers and Richardson lead a townwide audit of the Superintendent’s pencil purchases.

With all the lawyers on their Board of Trustees, don’t these people know it is inappropriate for their Trustees to engage in such activities? The Academy was created to serve the Town of Woodstock, but having asserted political control over the entire town government, the town is now serving the Academy. It is like a feudal system of government, and the Academy is the castle.

Snuffy

In my opinion a certain local blowhard (and regular contributor to the weekly Village Idiot) is a real horse’s ass! I can’t stand it. Just because ‘someone’ has pushed figures around on some company’s ledgers for long enough to retire with a ‘gold watch’ doesn’t make that ‘someone’ the be-all and end-all of anything accounting.

There is a difference between marketplace budgeting and Board of Education budgeting. Marketplace budgeting (as we have all seen with the most recent Wall Street stupidity) evolves as it wants to and the only restrictions are whatever the market will bear (or can be fooled into believing). Board of Education budgets must be self-contained each fiscal year.

Common businesses can run in the red, can extend expenses from one year into the next, can do just about anything they want to – as long as they can make a convincing argument that eventually they will be profitable, successful and in the black. Some companies run for years before reality ever catches up with them. Most businesses are governed only by how can I/we get ours. That can work for a while and has. But if enough businesses choose to run fast and loose (looking only to get ‘theirs’ at any cost) the house of cards will eventually collapse.

Boards of Education have to put forth an annual budget that is finite. The taxpayers know, going into any fiscal year, exactly how much the education system is going to cost them. They know how many mils their property ownership is going to cost them. They aren’t asked to give the BOE a credit card or blank check (By the way, the Woodstock Public Schools DO NOT use credit cards).

Now, on to the idiocy of the previously noted certain ‘someone’ whom I feel is a blowhard and horse’s ass…

•    The timing of expenditures is not a spending free-for-all. It is a measured response to the expectation of higher costs for uncontrollable items such as heating oil, fuel, and utilities. In other words, such restraint would indicate the school administration is making sound fiscal decisions.
•    Some contracts and services aren’t due until the end of the school year.
•    Once it becomes clear to the school system will be able to fulfill their legal and financial obligations for the bulkier expenses, previously budgeted and approved items are then purchased. From the horse’s ass’ perspective (given his conspiratorial bent), I’m sure this is what he sees this as a frantic effort to spend money before the time runs out (the fiscal year end). However, most of us do the same thing. At the end of the month, I have maybe $500 dollars that I haven’t spent. Same thing the following month. So, do I really have $1000 that I can do whatever I want with? NO. After not spending that $500 each month, I have to go down to the Town Hall and pay my taxes! So just because monies haven’t been spent at some particular date chosen, doesn’t mean they are monies that should be turned back to the town’s coffers (which by the way DO NOT get returned to the taxpayers it gets put into the savings account for the Town). The BOE isn’t allowed to ‘save’ up for stuff that will have to be purchased in the future but the town is allowed to do so.
•    The horse’s ass reassures those of us who don’t-have-a-lot-of-experience-managing-multi-million-dollar-budgets that coming in at less the $100 difference between budgets and actual expenditures is “remarkable” reveals his absolute ignorance. The BOE is not allowed to spend more than their approved budget, period. With the rising costs of late it would be insane to think they would come in with any amount that would be a lot less than they had budgeted.
•    Each year our budgets start off at zero. Each department in the education system builds their budgets from the bottom up. It has been and still is a zero budgeting process. I’m sure that the horse’s ass doesn’t believe that because he is sure he actually knows everything, but just because he disagrees with the answer doesn’t mean it is wrong.
•    I’m not certain of the actual timeline associated with the State’s requirement for the retrofitting of the buses with crossing bars, but I do know it was well after the budget had taken nearly final form. Yes, it did come down before the voters approved the actual budget. The horse’s ass is upset because the district didn’t reduce the $21 per student for school supplies to $10.50 per student in order to accommodate this last minute decree from Hartford in this year’s budget. (By the way, most of our student pick-ups/drop-offs happen on the same side of the street so the crossing arms aren’t going to increase their safety for the most part… but it makes politicians feel like they’ve ‘done’ something productive.) So, we’ll get the crossing arm in the upcoming year. So, the horse’s ass doesn’t agree with the Superintendent’s decision of when to install the crossing arms.
•    Anyone who wishes to ‘go through’ the check register is going to come up with more expenditures than are called for in the budget. Why? Because, the budgeted expenditures approved by the taxpayers do not include items like grants, programs and activities funded outside taxpayer revenues, all of which will show up in the check register. Is this something subversive? Is this a conspiracy to defraud the taxpayer? Nonsense! Read the rest of this entry »

The P&Z can only enforce what the current regulations allow. Whether they like or agree with the proposal is irrelevant, as are the opinions of folks who show up at the meeting to voice their concerns. If WA does what is legally necessary to get an expansion plan approved, that’s that.

Also, it doesn’t really matter what any of the sending towns believe would be a good investment in WA’s infrastructure. The various town BOE’s and citizens can only voice disagreement. That’s the bottom line.

What disturbs me the most is that I support education expenditures, yet I have concerns about supporting the Academy, or at least some of their proposals.

I have heard from parents of students (not necessarily the undisputed truth):

1. The cafeteria is over-crowded. There is not enough room for students to sit at a table and eat.
2. The septic system needs work, and the bathrooms are in need of, well, something.
3. There are not enough lockers for all students.
4. There is difficulty in making sure there are handicap-accessible classrooms.
5. There is a need for better athletic facilities.

The BOT is interested in upgrading the Academy athletic facilities before any other concerns are addressed while the BOE has been put in a position to charge parents of Middle School athletic program participants in order for their children to participate in sports.

A few outspoken citizens are determined to find fault with the BOE but the same concerned citizens support anything WA proposes, at, apparently, any cost. This may be an unimportant point, depending on how much support/influence CPS really has.

JK

See Kevin In Woodstock http://kevininwoodstock.blogspot.com/ for his commentary on the Board of Education meeting last Thursday. He has interesting commentary on the Academy contract negotiations and the continuing Shultz FOIA complaints among other things.

From ‘Maggie’ : Why does there have to be 2 regulation sized fields? Why not just one? Why 800 parking places. Are they nuts! That is larger than Price Choppers parking area!

What is very sad is that a spokesperson for the Academy has said that they will begin the development with only a small portion of the estimated cost of 4 - 5 million dollars. As we all know, once this construction is started, it will be up to town taxpayers to pay for its completion. It’s a strategy that has worked countless times and one that the school is banking on now.

What is doubly sad is that we, as taxpayers, can do nothing about it. Most towns would need to pass a referendum for this large expenditure. We have no choice but to pay it while we’ll watch other key needs in education and town budgets go by the wayside.

At the last public hearing, the lawyer hired by the Academy (thus paid for by our tax dollars) formally requested that Woodstock’s Planning and Zoning Commission place NO restrictions upon the application for this complex.

The encroachment on wetland is necessary due to the amount of development the Academy seeks. If standard rules and regulations required by DOT, Army Corps of Engineers or DEP are followed, there’s a good chance that the school may not realize the plan. The Academy requests a pass on rules and regs. The school’s attorney requests such things as clear cutting and construction up to abutters’ property lines (the plan presently calls for no buffering). This is requested in part because the drier land near abutters is needed for both drainage and parking. When the complex is complete, there will be 800 parking spaces skirting wetland plus team rooms, concession stands, storage buildings and two regulations size fields. This is difficult to envision for most people. The CME Asso. graphics are designed well to mask the magnitude and impact of the development.

NO matter how you feel about this complex, an approval without any restrictions spells doom for future development in Woodstock as this will set precedence. As we are now witnessing globally along with paying the price for . . groups or entities who are allowed to operate without regulation will fail. In that failure, they will bring all others down with them. Civilized, healthy communities and countries are dependent upon good regulation.

The Academy’s lawyer also stated that abutters’ land isn’t “significant,” therefore it does not need a buffer. Would any of us label our land as insignificant? This statement, sanctioned and requested by the Academy, sums up how the school feels about its neighbors. Any neighbor/owner outside their property isn’t significant. Those same neighbors are taxpayers as well as donors to the school. Read the rest of this entry »

In December 2006 I waxed euphoric, as I often do, and published this article. In light of the article above by Nary a Peep and the article below by Mariah, I decided to re-publish it. John

Having lived in many fine places, I can say with some certainty that I recognize a good living environment when I find one. Of course, everyone has their own unique perspective on what’s good or pleasing and what is bad or disturbing so I can only speak for myself … and hopefully Becki. I thought it would be worth talking from my own point of view about the simple things that I value in Woodstock (they are indeed simple).

As I said, I have lived in many fine places - for example, my first 18 years in Rowayton CT on Long Island sound; then in Bethany, West Virginia for four years at the same college as Ernie Wetzel that prided itself as the “small college of distinction.” Ernie and I have shared a chuckle about ‘the small college of extinction‘. After that there were side trips to Spain, most of Europe, Tangiers and Scandinavia; a four year stint in Squirrel Hill, Pittsburgh; then in rural Howard County, Maryland, for 11 years; then in Palo Alto, California, for 14 years before our arrival in Woodstock almost 13 years ago. Each of these places had, at that time, a very special ambiance that has not necessarily been preserved through the decades. I guess this is why we cannot go back, we can only look for those qualities in choosing your current and future homes. I think that Becki and I agree that - barring unforeseen circumstances - Woodstock is our final home, and we feel very good about this choice. Read the rest of this entry »

Occasionally the Café publishes articles on local entrepreneurship.

“I am not judged by the number of times I fail, but by the number of times I succeed, and the number of times I succeed is in direct proportion to the number of times I can fail and keep trying.” Tom Hopkins

My mother always told me to eat my vegetables. I was a weird child and didn’t complain about those leafy, healthy little numbers, but my teenage years led me in to the darkness and broccoli was the enemy.

Now since I moved to Virginia Beach and got a few more years under my belt, I began to notice how crappy those crappy foods really make me feel. I’ve also become a lot more self-conscious about my figure to say the least.

So just about two months ago I was out to lunch with my business mentor and owner of the company I work for. He is very wealthy and business savvy, so I often pick his brain on business and advice. He had just gotten back from the National Tanning Convention in Las Vegas (for the record he owns one of the largest tanning chains on the east coast - where I work - as well as a dietary/weight loss company). He mentioned how he wanted to really focus on having a healthy lifestyle; he had started using his gym membership again and eating healthy. Then he mentioned something about Vemma/Verve, and how it was going to help him on this new quest. Read the rest of this entry »

Sherri Vogt - Democrat

Mike Alberts - Republican

Like it or not, trying to understand a person’s character is part (though not the be all/end all) of a voter’s decision-making process (speaking to Snuffy). Maybe not for every, single voter, but for many, including myself. No politician is squeaky clean. It’s an occupational hazard. So I have concerns about the associations of both candidates. You raised the issue of the Keating association with McCain. For me, McCain-Keating and Obama-Ayers are a draw. I don’t think as a voter that I’ll ever learn the true depth of either relationship.

Look at some of the people on their campaign staffs. I’m less than thrilled that McCain has some former high-powered lobbyists on his team and Obama’s got a guy who was high ranking at Fannie/Freddie. How will McCain be able to cut pork barrel spending and earmarks if he’s indebted to these lobbyists for getting him elected? How’s Obama going to have any say in straightening out the housing/mortgage/bank regulation issue when he’s got a tie to Acorn, this Freddie former exec on his campaign team, and Barney Frank as a member of his party’s leadership to deal with? He’s not. Both of these guys are going to have to sign whatever comes across their desk. Obama because he can’t buck his whole party and McCain because any vetoes will be over-ridden anyway.

With the deficit rising daily, neither man can say with certainty that they won’t raise taxes, so why say it? Why make promises when you’re uncertain that you can keep them?

Both candidates are doing the same thing because it’s how you get elected to the Presidency. Downplay the bad decisions, problematic ties, and ethics violations and tout the good stuff. For me, like I tried to say above, these men cancel one another out with some of this stuff but I still have to choose one of them. Read the rest of this entry »