by Nary
When people become angry and cynical about PZC (or the Academy’s MO) — there is a good reason for it. If you’ve seen NO conflict of interest while on PZC, you’ve had blinders on (to Jeff). I believe you practice no conflict of interest and for that, I am grateful.
My intention isn’t to attack you or anyone else, but Woodstock residents need to know what goes on for most people either don’t or can’t attend meetings to see and listen to things first hand. The minutes of meetings do not adequately cover what citizens and voters should know.
I’ve sat in a Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency Meeting where the members expressed their pleasure over a three-page letter written by former headmaster, Rich Foye. In the letter, Foye effusively thanked the IWWA for its “support of Football in Woodstock.” Not one member acted as if they understood the inherent danger of expressing anything after reading the letter. Obviously, we want Inland Wetland members who care about the protection of Wetlands and Watercourses. It really shouldn’t matter how these same members feel about football in Woodstock. How do those two subjects intersect as it pertains to their role as board memebers? But, this type of town board response and action is all too common in Woodstock.
Many board members work very hard and do so for no expectation of any type except in the knowledge that they care enough about their community to volunteer their time and talents. It is the ones who don’t work in this way that create the harm. Unfortunately, it is often the latter type who exercise the greatest power in their roles. Foye should have known better than to write the letter. The IWWA members should have had a clear understanding of why they should have given NO response to such a letter.
It is dangerous to make statements on the Cafe unless you can back it up. I believe you have no conflict of interest in your role as Chair on PZC. I believe that board and commission members in Woodstock rarely get anything else but criticism when they should receive community thanks. I believe all boards and commission members should receive the appreciation they deserve often. But, we also need greater professional training given to board members. All board and commission members need to have a clear understanding of the importance of their roles and a thorough understanding of what constitutes a conflict of interest. It is an extremely important topic carrying a very fine line but one that is crucial to fair and good municipal work.
Nary - Good idea mentioned about the thank-less job that many of the local board members do. These people like you said for the most part are doing all of the work with little acknowledgment of the time and energy that they have to put in to perform these unpaid positions well.
Training for these folks is something that I think boarders on a fine line between being a non-paid elected position and one that would require a professional (either part time or full time). This is part of why a town planner who is trained in understand the issues and ramifications of some of what seems to be small decissions and how it will effect the town for years if not decades.
As to Foye sending the letter - He was in a very political position for years and I have no doubt that he understood the political ramification of that letter. The headmaster position at WA is one that balances the BOT’s issues and the sending towns public topics. Can you imagine what kinds of WA topics are not brought up to the light that the headmaster has to deal with.
Enjoy the day as WA continues to put forth it’s physical plant plans with no input from town planner of Woodstock…
Nary, Any possibility of getting a copy of that letter?
Ron,
I don’t know what you are trying to express. Can you re-write this post so it is more clear.
Admin, I’ll see if I can find the letter in my files. After IWWA expressed their pleasure at being thanked — we discussed the conflict of interest it presented and decided as a group to refrain from responding. We also decided to keep the letter out of the minutes thus there should be no record of it but the Building Office would know if it was kept — of course the other board members should remember it as well.
Nary,
When you speak of “we”, who exactly are you referring to?
Everbodies worried about the Academy, but what about the new highway building and salt barn, what’s that going to cost? How much is that going to take away fron the schools?
Anon,
At the time, I was a seated member of IWWA. I am no longer on the Agency. Thus, the “we.”Sorry I didn’t make this clear.
PTO Friend, funding the salt barn and highway garage has no impact on the schools as that project will be bonded (i.e. we will borrow to pay for those projects). It does not fall under the Prop 46 calculations which controls other spending, not bonding.
Dean, in a sense, “PTO mom” is correct. Any bonding will inevitable “take” from the schools, because it will be perceived as too much “spending” for this town. Any spending at all, causes the anti spending/ anti taxes faction to verbally reek havoc and fear and stories of impending doom to the pocket book.
Soccer mom is correct. Perception is everything. Debt service~100k/year is going to take away any initiative to better fund our schools or obtain open space. Fix the salt barn as required by the state, the rest can wait.
Anonymous and Soccer Mom, did you go to the the Open House on Saturday? You would have learned why the highway garage is being proposed now. I will write an article later why. However, you should come to the Town Meeting on 12/1 to learn more.
Also, funding this project does not impact funding that gets allocated to the schools. Prop 46 puts debt service in a different category than the normal school spending.
In order to better fund the schools you need to either change Prop 46 or divert money from other Town departments. The Highway Garage project does not have any bearing on either.
Dean Audet, how long have you been in town? Your statement: “In order to better fund the schools you need to either change Prop 46 or divert money from other Town departments” will translate in Woodstockian CPS jargon as: “we spent a lot of money in bonding for the highway project. We got no more money. No more spending till the debt gets paid off. Not a penney more. No way. No how. Nothing gets diverted from our town services. No raising taxes to fund the schools. No money left.”
So Soccer Mom, are you saying that nothing other than the schools gets your support for funding ever?
Note that there will always be people that argue against any spending increase at any time, regardless of whether the garage is built or not.
Mr. Audet,
I don’t care what category debt service goes under. Someones got to pay for it one way or another. If taxes go up to pay for this monster, then no one will have any sympathy for the school budget next year and its gonna be a tough year to begin with. And why do we need salt. Isn’t the rest of the state going to something else to melt ice?
Dean Audet: I am one of those people who thinks that our Government budget could cut more in favor of the school budget. And I do understand what you are saying. The salt shed needs to be fixed. I just agree with “PTO friend” who says: “If taxes go up to pay for this monster, then no one will have any sympathy for the school budget next year”
PTO friend, the state DOT is going to a product that costs about 50% more than the salt that we use. They like it because it performs better. You also can’t let that material just sit in the open either. But their budget is better than ours.
You should go to the Town meeting to see how this will be financed to minimize any impacts to taxes. Also, to learn more why this is being proposed.
FYI, I am one of the volunteers that have been sitting on the Highway Garage Study Committee for the past several years to try to address these problems.
I think it is important to recognize that the salt shed has become an ecological disaster and that it was a fully preventable one. … (see Kevin’s new article. Admin).