Woodstock CT Café

Christian Toth won the following six tennis matches to win the Class M state tennis title. Christian is the son of Principal Victor Toth of the Woodstock Elementary School and a senior (I believe) at Woodstock Academy. Having played as the 8th seed in the state championship 48 years ago, I have to say “What a terrific accomplishment to actually win the tournament.”

As the #5 seed in the tournament he beat Thomas of Ellington 6-0, 6-2 in the 1st round.
In the 2nd round he beat Zhang of Guilford 6-2, 6-0.
In the 3rd round he beat Gordan of Darien 6-4, 6-2.
In the quarterfinal round he beat Berkowitz the 4th seed of Fairfield Ward 6-0, 6-1.
In the semifinal round he beat #1 seed Gebauer of Darien 1-6, 7-5, 6-4
In the Championship round he beat Luca Bagi the 6th seed of Branford 6-4, 6-2

Read the rest of this entry »

Richard Foye takes a new job. See the Norwich Bull article.

Remember that great Jive talking scene in the movie Airplane

Stewardess : Can I get you something?
Second Jive Dude : ‘S’mofo butter layin’ me to da’ BONE! Jackin’ me up… tight me!
Stewardess : I’m sorry, I don’t understand.
First Jive Dude : Cutty say ‘e can’t HANG!
Elderly Jive Lady : Oh stewardess! I speak jive.
Stewardess : Oh, good.
Elderly Jive Lady : He said that he’s in great pain and he wants to know if you can help him.
Stewardess : All right. Would you tell him to just relax and I’ll be back as soon as I can with some medicine?
Elderly Jive Lady : Jus’ hang loose, blood. She gonna catch ya up on da’ rebound on da’ med side.
Second Jive Dude : What it is, big mama? My mama no raise no dummies. I dug her rap!
Elderly Jive Lady : Cut me some slack, Jack! Chump don’ want no help, chump don’t GET da’ help!
First Jive Dude : Say ‘e can’t hang, say seven up!
Elderly Jive Lady : Jive dude don’t got no brains anyhow! Hmmph!

Since Taxpayer is a long time Cafe’er who has made many important contributions to the Cafe, I thought I would take a stab at translating his message to Honeydripper. Taxpayer, If I mis-characterize anything that you have said in comment #18 under “…Robo-Call…” just let us know .

Taxpayer said:

1. I vehemently argued against the petition based on what I perceived as a breach of ethics.
He was against the petition.

2. I vehemently protested the the BOE’s succumbing to a 0% budget increase because I feared the repercussions that would result in loss of programs and loss of jobs.
He was against the BOE accepting a 0% increase.

3. I have argued against the national Teacher’s Union because I believe they perpetuate the status quo, politically hinder movement of reform efforts, and as a result have compromised and infringed the ability our poorest and most at risk students from achieving a quality education that would allow them to escape a grave and desperate position in our society.
He is against having a teachers’ union.

4. I have questioned and argued the impropriety of what I perceive as an exhorbitant fire protection budget.
The fire protection budget is too high.

5. While I recognize the need for Academy athletic expansion, I have spoken out against it becaue I prefer an investment in academics and I fear the impact this would have on the K-8 budget.
He’s spoken against the Academy athletic expansion.

6. After many long and tortuous debates with ‘Snuffy” on this website, I had come to the same conclusions and agreements as he did (which I verbalized) that respected and supported Joe Breen’s efforts and concerns surrounding the risk of K-8 funding as a result of Prop 46 and preferential Academy spending.
He essentially agrees with the Breen proposal.

7. In addition, I believe strongly that the states and the liberal educrates have undermined small towns such as Woodstock by unfairly funding them while simultaneously spending exhorbitant amounts of money on inner city schools who continue to horrendously fail, while reform efforts are squashed because of the Democratic party has grotesque political ties to unions who prevent it (follow the money).
State Educrats have undermined small towns with inadequate funding. Read the rest of this entry »

Please see the Cafe Guidelines for practices that are discouraged at the Cafe.
These are not allowed:
• Extensive, gratuitous, or personally directed obscenities.
• Trolling which consists of posting inflammatory claims or assertions for the sole or primary purpose of inciting emotional or negative responses, especially if the commenter does not actually believe the claims or assertions. This is sometimes revealed by posting contradictory opinions using different pseudonyms.
• Using multiple pseudonyms and impersonating regular members as happened recently in the case of Newcomer.
• Deliberate and repetitious accusations, threats, or otherwise gratuitously abusive behavior.
• Multiple postings to one or more threads without substantive discussion as a follow-up.
• Sarcastic ‘one liners’ that fail to contribute substantive commentary.
• A post consisting of little or nothing more than links to another Websites is not considered substantive discussion. The Café is not a lecture hall.
• Avoid copyright violations by giving proper credit to the source of quotes. We expect posters to comply with copyright laws.

by Con

Does the woodstocktruth.com group advocate a new brand of ‘prior restraint’? Do they seek to SILENCE all opponents and AVOID public dialogue? Filing petty complaints is not constructive; it’s the vindictive act of a bully seeking to silence a valid collective voice. Filing a complaint is NOT an argument on the merits, but a sneaky attempt to punish and silence those who helped defeat a wrongful action. They talk about still being ‘part of America’, and yet they do their very best to silence the free speech of voices that are besting them in every argument.

A recent article on woodstocktruth.com states: “That’s your BOE/PTO- by hook or crook. Last time I checked Woodstock was still part of the United States.” Huh? – is this a suggestion that the PTO is now UN-American!?! Insinuating that the PTO is Un-American is destructive. Phrases like ‘loss of perspective’ and ‘double standard’ hardly begins to describe the situation. True ‘Freedom Fighters’ utilize Free Speech and open dialogue, not intimidating and resource-draining complaint processes and lawsuits (look at how much time and effort is wasted on this site discussing technicalities instead of Issues).

That same article gives SEEC legal advice (was it written by a someone practicing law without a license?) and seemingly encourages the filing of multiple Complaints against the PTO (they provide a direct link to the Complaint Form, but use evasive, sneaky language). Read the rest of this entry »

Quote of the day: “Truth exists, only lies are invented.” Horatius Bonar

by Quid Pro Quo

Now, let’s get back to the question in the previous article (which allowed Taxpayer to spin off into another irrelevant side track).

What about Rosendahl’s completely rude, disgusting, and unprofessional behavior at the last BOE meeting when he yelled and threw a package of papers at the Superintendent? Why weren’t Powers/Schultz there to video tape that lowpoint in town board meetings? Did they not want to be seen so soon in public after the public rejected their nonsensical petition? Or were they tipped off by Rosendahl that he would be assaulting the Superintendent at that meeting so they didn’t want a visual record of it? Is the BOE just going to let that go? Shouldn’t the BOE vote to censure Rosendahl? Otherwise what’s next …. how about putting Dr. Baran in a headlock until he says that Preston and Powers and Rosendahl have been completely correct in their attacks on the BOE all along?

Rosendahl is a rank egomaniacal hypocrite and he should be recalled. WoodstockMom and the PTO should circulate a petition amongst 20 Taxpayers, proposing an ordinance allowing them to use the Robo-call system on a daily basis throughout the remainder of Rosendahl’s term to remind parents what an absolutely disruptive, divisive and non-productive force he is on our BOE.

If not, then the BOE should just ignore the jerk, like they ignore his mentor, Avis Spalding.

This is a test. Can you pass?

Circular taken home from school in the backpacks of school children.

Circular handed out by PTO and non-PTO people to adults.

These rankings should not be taken seriously because they are not based on creativity and quality of thought. They vary quite a bit each week. But these are probably the top blogs out of hundreds in the state.

Rankings from BlogNetNews

by WoodstockMom

I, too, love, love, love the PTO, but in response to your comments (to Taxpayer):

1) The “robo call” system was not funded through tax dollars; it was funded by the PTO as a way to notify parents of situations of which they need to be aware.

2) The call I received simply said it was a reminder that the referendum vote was that day from noon-8. The message in no way advocated a position. A similar call, reminding us of the budget vote two weeks prior went out through the robo-call system and no one voiced objection to that. What is the perceived difference between those two calls?

3) Only adult to adult exchange of the PTO handout was utilized. The PTO specifically did NOT let the children bring home or carry the notices to their parents.

4) The PTO bylaws, which are posted on the PTO site, DO allow the PTO to take a position on referendum issues that affect the school system/children. The PTO bylaws would not allow the PTO to take a political position to advocate support for a particular candidate for any board; and none of the PTO members have utilzed the PTO funds or network to do such a thing. Since the PTO did not violate their bylaws, that is likely why the Bulletin, Courant, Shipman, etc. did not deem it newsworthy.

5) As for referring to Mr. Rosendahl’s behavior as a “faux pas”, I don’t see that as an accurate description of the incident. Throwing those papers and shouting at the superintendent was over-reactive and frankly, not the behavior expected from an adult. I don’t know him personally, but that type of outburst only serves to discredit his point of view. Also, a member of a group that is meant to advocate for our children, is also responsible to be an example for our children. Regardless of how angry he was towards the Superintendent, Mr. Rosendahl should have merely ‘used his words’ and not let his anger get the best of him.

I hope that all board members can step back, start anew and focus on advocating for the children, without holding on to the grudges born from the past events.

 by John

I can’t recall at what point in the agenda this happen. I believe it was at the beginning of Dr. Baran’s report to the Board. Mr. Rosendahl flung a bunch of papers at Dr. Baran barely missing hitting Lindsay Paul with the papers and the back of his right hand. There were 15-20 in the audience that watched this event. Rosendahl’s angry behavior is somewhat of a blur because it was over quickly. In a split second after Rosendahl flung his papers at Dr. Baran, he grabbed Ms. Paul’s agenda papers from in front of her and placed them in his folder thinking that he had retreived the papers flung at Dr. Baran. I’m not sure, but I think Dr. Baran kept Rosendahl’s papers.  Maybe we should exercise our right to FOI Mr. Rosendahl’s document.

This was an abrupt outburst that was not on the agenda. It was an angered hysterical response to Dr. Baran’s rebuttal of Rosendahl’s extensive list of erroneous claims against him and the school system that was published two weeks ago in the Villager. It appears that Mr. Rosendahl has put into writing a rebuttle-rebuttle of Dr. Baran’s rebuttle which may show up in the Villager next Friday.

Dr. Baran responded accordingly to Mr. Rosendahl’s distortions and lies in the Villager last Friday along with seven other supporters of the school system including one response in the form of a Letter to the Editor by yours truly. It seems that Mr. Rosendahl believes that he can say anything he wants with a grain of truth or anything that is completely false to the entire populous of the town without having to deal with any response from the victim(s) of his distortions, inaccuracies, and outright lies. But this is democracy with freedom of speech and the press, so Dr. Baran took the time to respond directly point-by-point to Rosendahl in the same venue, the Villager.

Rosendahl, like his friend Powers, doesn’t like it when anyone challenges what he says. They probably don’t read the Norwich Bull, the Worcester Telegram, or the Hartford Courant anymore since those media sources didn’t swallow their nonsense either. Powers claimed on his website that somehow the BOE arranged for Shipman and Goodwin to control what the Courant said; did Shipman and Goodwin also control the Norwich Bull and the Telegram? Rosendahl and Powers’ claims are hard to fathom by any reasonable person. I guess this is why they lost the referendum that they petitioned … and assumed that they would win. 

Preston Shultz’s Freedom of Information (FOI) requests have used up 59.8 hours of work time of the school administration staff in 2009. This detail was obtained by an FOI request by Becki Leavitt which took only 5 minutes to complete. Shultz’s requests requiring 59.8 hours is equivalent to 7.5 working days (1 and 1/2 weeks) for one staff member in the school and one large FOI project still has not been completed for Shultz. Assuming that there were 91 8-hour work days from January to the end of May, 59.8 hours is equivalent to 8.2% of an individual staff member’s work time. Furthermore, this is equivalent to $4100 in salary + fringe benefits for a person receiving $50,000 in salary + fringe benefits, not including overhead costs such as paper, copying, use of equipment, etc.

The left bar graft compares the hours consumed by Schultz’s FOI requests compared to all other FOI requests and Dave Richardson’s request. The right pie chart shows this same comparison in terms of percent of time wasted on FOI requests from different individuals. The pie chart at the bottom shows the portion or work hours that Shultz has sequestered for one administrative staff member from January through the end of May, amounting to 8.2% of that individual’s work time.

by Becki 

Elemental – Your tone does not help. But I do have to say, your point is well taken. Perhaps, we should be looking at the expectations we have of the BOE. I do think the BOE needs to communicate their actions to the taxpayer, but their primary function is oversee the business of the district. Its on them to make sure we educate our children adequately, ensure we have a safe facility that serves the needs of the populations using it, monitor the ongoing and ever-changing landscape of governmental regulations and requirements, protect the district from liabilities (and thus the town) and see to the development of budgets that allow us not only to fulfill those needs but also do so at the most cost effective manner.

We elected these people to be the stewards of our education process and its one huge task to undertake. While community outreach is part of what they need to do, we also have to let them actually do what they need to do. While I’m sure all these board members would be happy to have a conversation with any of us, they do hold their meetings in public so we can observe what they are doing.

As Elemental pointed out, there is a library of information readily available. The board also has to provide the ‘Ask the Board’ contact for any questions/input a citizen might care to ask. The district office is another place to ask questions. It is best if it is requested in writing so that it doesn’t get lost in the everyday workings of the staff. This allows them to address your question/concern properly at a time when they can focus on whatever it is that you are interested in.

I think that we need to be careful in what we define as the board’s responsibilities. Like anything, responsibilities have to be prioritized and it isn’t fair to insist that the whole system turn on a dime whenever we want a question answered. We too have a responsibility in this relationship.

by Elemental 

For Chrissakes! Can you stop trying to play referee or send somebody to a twenty-minute timeout for not playing nicely just for a minute? I mean really! I don’t want to be patronizing, well frankly at this point I don’t really care. Somebody has to put this into perspective.

This referendum was a parliamentary move to change the structure of the governance of our town by ordinance. It was a totally ‘legal’ means through a legislative loophole that provided its presenters with an arcane maneuver by which they could achieve their intended ‘ends’; firing/unseating/recalling the entire Board of Education. So, lets reach across the aisle and shake our fellow citizens’ hands for exercising ‘their’ rights as members of our community. Oh yes, and we should blanche at the thought that ‘anybody’ might have a negative thought or opinion of these, our innocent and thoroughly civic-minded compatriots.

So, where was the concern extended to the rest of us, here in the bonny hills and shires of Woodstock? Where was the community dialog? Who was it that decided we needed to change the number or the terms of the BOE? Did I miss THAT meeting notice? Keep in mind – 38 people is not quite ¾ of 1% of the registered voters. Believe me, I’ve been asking around and haven’t found anybody that remembers being asked if they thought the numbers/terms of the BOE was a problem!

If one more person tries to recite another bleeding-heart-let’s-try-to-understand ingratiation, I swear I’m going to scream! The blather! These people didn’t care to let anybody warm up to the idea that they put in motion. They are responsible for the lack of time the community was given to consider the issue. Thank god for the Selectmen sending it to referendum or the process would have been almost two weeks shorter. So, we’re NOT supposed to line up and defend a perfectly functioning DULY ELECTED board against a litany of contrivances and inventions? Bullshite! Read the rest of this entry »

by John

As a prerequisite to understanding the outcome of the referendum to repeal the BOE, I thought that I would start by looking at the history of voter numbers stored in the Cafe archives. These numbers can be seen in the addendum at the bottom of this article.

I was thrilled with the turnout yesterday, even though it was only 28% of the registered voters, because the turnout and enthusiasm of some of the voters suggested that there was some passion at work. We did not know many of the 880 NO voters but we could certainly figure out who was against us by the scowls and obscene jestures. No one on the side of NO was convinced that we would win this referendum and so we were braced to survive a loss more than expectant of a win. In fact, I decided to revise and re-post ”Hollywood Comes to Woodstock” which is a celebration of all things good about the BOE, as an upbeat jesture for the vanquished – that being us. I told Rick Green, columnist at the Courant, that I was going to post ’Hollywood’ win or lose (knowing that he had actually read the unrevised version the night before ). He said ‘yes you should’ re-post it because it’s good (with a hint of foreboding). Matt Sanderson at the Villager liked ‘Hollywood’ too but wondered why he wasn’t featured over Jennica Heifer (sorry, I digress ).

Then, what happened yesterday? It’s as simple as this. While it can be said that the UnTruth coalition had passion because of their vitriol, this passion was not attractive or contagious to anyone accept predisposed CPSers, Academy personnel, and the ignorant. These three factions amounted to 567 Woodstock voters.

The Academy must have ‘suggested‘ to the 18 year-olds and older students that they go vote YES for the Academy because a lot of Academy students came down to vote right at dismissal time. (Were they told they would get an A in Civics if they voted YES???). I would not be surprised if 10-15% of the CPSers quietly voted NO based upon the principle that the duly elected should not be unseated (they’re not all bad).

Yesterday the passion was on the side of the PTO and the Cafe, and right-minded people (not the offensive “like-minded people” that Powers talked about, reminiscent of well-known hate mongers). This referendum pitted Good against Evil and the Good won. The Good was an unplanned spontaneous coalition of right-minded people who understood the ramifications of defeat and wanted to lend their support of the school system. Read the rest of this entry »

But will they publish it? Admin

by Con
Posted on woodstocktruth.com:

While disappointment is understandable, the tone of some of these articles goes too far by suggesting that many voters simply didn’t know what they were doing. Please – give the citizens of this town the credit we all deserve as thinking adults. Your tone and your language (examples below) suggest that you all somehow ‘know better’ than the rest of us and that we are somehow naïve and gullible victims of propaganda. Please consider how you would feel if someone suggested this about you and your decision making. The notion we only voted a certain way because we are gullible victims of disinformation suggests that we are unable to think for ourselves (including knowing: what is good information and what is not, where to get our information and when to ‘consider the source and website’, etc.) and that notion is condescending and patronizing.

I’m sorry if I sound strident, but some of you seem to have lost some perspective. There was nothing extraordinary about this Vote or the fact that both sides presented opposing characterizations. Both sides made their case and the citizens listened and then made their choice – just as in any Vote. And just as in any Vote, there was plenty of misinformation, but we are adults capable of thinking for ourselves and we don’t need anyone to tell us what to believe; we don’t need anyone to characterize facts for us. And we certainly don’t need anyone to tell us afterward that we made the wrong choice because we failed to properly investigate, or that we failed to properly decipher the facts and information (and misinformation), or that we failed to view critically enough each side’s ‘propaganda’ – in short, to be told that we failed to properly think for ourselves. Every side thinks they are Right when it comes to important votes. Read the rest of this entry »

DATE: June 11, 2009
TIME: 7:30 p.m.
PLACE: Woodstock Middle School Music Room

AGENDA (on next page) Read the rest of this entry »