Article from the KCT on last night's Financial Town Meeting:
Residents approve Coventry budget
Tuesday, 30 June 2009
HANNAH PIECUCH
hclarkin@ricentral.com
COVENTRY — With lines wrapping around Coventry High School and all legal parking spots taken well before 7 p.m., a crowd of 1392 residents showed up for the Financial Town Meeting to set the budget for fiscal year 2010, as counted by the Board of Canvassers.
Given the choice between no tax increase, as presented in the budget prepared by the town council, and increases presented in amendments, the residents chose no increase.Tax bills in 2010 will be identical to those that went out in 2009, according to figures projected on the screen at the meeting by Finance Director Warren West. Since it is not a revaluation year, there will be no change in property taxes. The school department was level-funded in the council’s recommended budget, coming in at $41,580,728 in local contributions and a total of $62,895,882 including state and federal aid, grants and other revenues.
Before the budget was adopted, resident Joel Johnson offered an amendment to add $750,000 to the total school budget, in order to preserve Oak Haven Elementary School, he said.That amendment, after discussion, was modified by resident Bruce Desrosiers to amount to $600,000 — the amount that Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro said the schools needed to keep the school open.Although there was a loud cheer when this amendment was proposed, not all residents wanted to add the amount into the budget. An even louder cheer and applause rose in the high school gymnasium when resident John Assalone commended the council for presenting a budget without an increase.“This is the first time in maybe 30 years that the council has brought before you a budget with no increase. Everyone is taking a hit — municipal workers, police, sports,” he listed. “I move we reject adding an increase for 2010.”
Since increasing the budget by more than $175,000 requires an all-day referendum, as mandated by the town charter, Moderator Gregory Laboissonniere called for a paper ballot to determine if the proposed amendment would pass.After an hour of voting with paper ballots, the amendment failed with 438 supporting the amendment and 836 voting against it, according to the Board of Canvassers.The school budget passed as presented by a voice vote.
The municipal budget was recommended at $20,580,728 by the council — 6.6 percent less than the 2009 budget. When it came up for discussion, resident Wayne Asselin presented an amendment to add $113,651 to the municipal budget, which would restore funding to charities and civics organizations. Local sport leagues, the Johnson’s Pond Association, Coventry Veterans associations and the Greene Library — among other organizations — would all have had their funding restored under this amendment. Desrosiers tried to amend the amendment to include $30,000 a year for Human Services, but as author of the amendment Asselin did not allow the change. Not everyone wanted funding restored, pointed out one resident. “I think there are a lot of people who are in this room because this is the time for a zero increase in the budget. I feel really bad that people have to make sacrifices,” she said. “If you want money for your little league team, then come to my house and I will give you a donation because I can afford it. Don’t put that burden on our tax bill.”After discussion the amendment was voted down by a voice vote.
The voice vote for the municipal budget as presented went to those in favor, but Laboissonniere made the call without taking a voice vote for those opposed.Resident Nicholas Gorham made a point of order and requested that those opposed have a chance to vote, but Laboissonniere said that his call held.
A school capital improvement budget of $250,000 to install new roofs at Alan Shawn Feinstein Middle School of Coventry and a municipal capital improvement budget of $109,138 to purchase a new recycling truck passed with few objections.
The finance director was authorized to collect taxes and the tax levy was set at no more and no less than $59,000,000. The meeting began at roughly 7:45 p.m. and lasted until 9:50 p.m. The paper ballot took nearly an hour and the rest of the meeting was discussion of amendments.
After the meeting the gymnasium emptied quickly as residents returned to their cars.This crowd was the biggest that Board of Canvassers Chairman Frank Perry had seen in years, he said. “Maybe the last time this many people showed up was 1992.”
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
News Article on Budget
Following is an article from today's KCT on the budget. The FTM is tomorrow night; if you want a zero tax increase suggest you attend tomorrow nigght's meeting at the high school GYMNASIUM (not the auditorium).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Officials dispel budget ‘rumors’
Sunday, 28 June 2009
HANNAH PIECUCHhclarkin@ricentral.com This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it COVENTRY — A zero percent increase in taxes will be put before the voters of Coventry at the Financial Town Meeting on Tuesday, June 30, says Council Vice-President Laura Flanagan.“There is no other community in Rhode Island whose council has provided a 0 percent increase in their budget,” she said. “And this isn’t a revaluation year, so that means that taxpayers won’t see a cent difference on their tax bill.”In spite of the work that she, Council President Raymond Spear and the Coventry Finance Director Warren West have put into constructing a budget that gives tax relief, Flanagan feels that the budget has been misrepresented through rumors and incorrect statements, she said.
Rumors about the impact of the budget have been spread in a disingenuous manner, Flanagan said — that layoffs will topple town departments, that the council has forced the closing of Oak Haven Elementary School, is demanding huge fees to be paid by the sports league and to attend town summer camps, is depriving charities of operational expenses in the town and is spending thousands of unnecessary dollars on their recently contracted law firm Edwards Angell Palmer and Dodge. Most of these rumors do not have a factual basis, Flanagan and Spear said. The total budget comes in at $87,021,668, representing a 6.6 percent reduction in the operating costs, a more-than halved capital improvement budget and a level-funded school budget, according to figures provide by West.This budget is nearly $2 million less than the fiscal year 2009 budget, according to numbers provided by West, but it will not cripple town departments, Flanagan and Spear said. “I trust Warren [West],” Flanagan said. “I think he knows what he’s doing and knows this town enough that he would tell us if these cuts we’re making would prevent the town from operating.”
The department of public works will lose three employees, West said, but none of these positions are lost through layoffs. Over the course of the year two DPW employees passed away — one refuse courier and one roads and bridges driver — West said. One mechanic from vehicle maintenance left his position for medical reasons. These positions will not be filled, but the department has already been operating with them empty this fiscal year.The only layoffs that will occur in the municipal budget are the elimination of one part-time position in the tax collector’s office, that only cost the town $2,000 a year and the elimination of one part time position in the town clerk’s office for an employee who will keep their position in another town department, West said.
The hiring freeze leaves the town manager’s office down one clerk and the tax assessor’s office down one clerk because of layoffs, West continued. At the police department, the budget removes funding for an officer who was called up for the National Guard, Flanagan said — that officer will receive pay through the National Guard so it is unnecessary to budget for him — and two officers who would have been trained to replace a retirement and the officer called up for the National Guard will remain in their current position. In short, there will be three open positions at the police department.
The discussion surrounding the closing of Oak Haven has placed the blame for the decision on the town council. This is not fair, said Spear, speaking as a former superintendent and the chairman of the school committee. “Closing Oak Haven School has been on the docket for three years in a row,” he said. “The town council did not put it there, the school committee put it there.”Oak Haven is only an issue because it has been made an issue, Spear continued. The biggest impact is going to be in the Oak Haven neighborhood, but other areas will lose or gain 20 to 40 students.The way that Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro has presented it, Spear said, “you’d think that every kid in the town was getting turned upside down.”Handling the school closure this way is “very unprofessional on the part of the superintendent,” Spear said. “It’s been made a political issue when it doesn’t have to be a political issue. If you can educate kids well in five schools instead of six and save money, then you can do it.”
Many residents may forget, Spear added, that when he was superintendent in the 1980s, the town leadership found it expedient to close the Tiogue Elementary School for a time. “I don’t remember it being a great big mess back then.” The school department leadership, the school committee and the parents of elementary school students in the district need to stay calm, Spear said, and if they do, their children will get through the initial change and be just fine. The council does not decide to close a school or keep a school open, emphasized Flanagan, the school committee does. The school committee has had since January to reconcile the fact that they are being level-funded by the town council, she added.
Many complaints have circulated regarding cuts to the Parks and Recreation Department budget, Flanagan said. Ironically, this department is the only one where the department head was given a set budget and allowed to determine his own cuts. Recreation Director Guy Lefebvre was given a set amount, she said, “we told him that he could increase his revenues by increasing the fees to the summer camp — which was only $12 a week. I don’t know of anywhere in this state that you could send your kids to summer camp for $12 a week. It was $100 a week at the YMCA ten years ago. We told him that we need to get our fees to a place where they’re covering our costs so we strongly encouraged him to raise fees.”For families who cannot afford the increase, Flanagan added, there is assistance available through the Department of Human Services and they are welcome to apply for aid through the Waterman/Fiske Assistance Program.
The increase in fees to play on sports teams, such as the Ram’s Football team, was also Lefebvre’s own decision, Flanagan said. Now, instead of the town donating the money to pay for lights and field use, players will have to pay themselves.“What this amounts to is that every child pays $5 more — for the season,” Flanagan said. “It’s important to note that the way we are changing things makes our programs more user-oriented,” Flanagan said. “Rather than put the burden of paying for summer camp or recreation leagues on all the taxpayers in this town, we’re putting it on the people who want to use them.“We don’t think any of the user fees are exorbitant,” she added. “If I don’t see an increase in my taxes, I can put out $5 for my kid to play football or pay $25 a week this summer to send them to summer camp.”
Cutting out the charitable donations line-item has generated a lot of complaints, Flanagan said. Veterans programs, the Greene Library, the Good Samaritans and other organizations will not receive any money from the town this year.Charitable donations amounted to $90,775 in last year’s budget, West said and were proposed to amount to $95,775 in the town manager’s budget for this year. The council has zeroed out that amount. This does not mean that those charities will not be supported in the future, Flanagan said, “but in a year when we’re asking municipal employees to take no pay raises and asking them to increase their health-insurance contributions — it seems like a slap in the face to turn around and donate nearly $100,000 to charities.”When it came to looking at all the charities that the town has supported, Flanagan said, the council did not want to pick and choose which to keep and which to discontinue. They simply decided, “this year we’re not going to do it.”
Employing Law Firm Edwards, Angel, Palmer and Dodge has received a lot of public criticism when residents saw the amount that was budgeted, Flanagan said. This year’s legal budget is listed in one line item, West said, and it includes $175,000 for legal services, $200,000 budgeted for ongoing litigation, based on a recommendation from the firm, and $75,000 to cover legal expenses for the school department. The whole number this year is $449,000 for all legal items, West said. In prior years there was a line-item for legal services that was considerably smaller, but other legal expenses were worked into other sections of the budget and nothing was budgeted for ongoing litigation. When all these fees were compiled in one place, the council in Fiscal Year 2008 had budgeted $374,000 for legal services, West said.
Many of the rumors that Flanagan and Spear addressed were published in the Reminder this week, a copy of which was provided by Flanagan. The advertisement was paid for by Bruce Desrosiers acting as Treasurer of “Concerned Citizens for Coventry,” according to the ad. Desrosiers could not be reached for comment.Supporting the budget this fiscal year are Flanagan and Spear and Councilman Glenford Shibley. Both Councilman Frank Hyde and Councilman Kenneth Cloutier voted against the budget when it came before the council.
Although the budget passed the town council 3-2, Flanagan said, it’s not a done deal. Taxpayers in Coventry do have the power to add or subtract items from the budget or to defeat the budget altogether.People who are excited that there is no tax increase in the budget should not be thanking her now, Flanagan said. “It’s not a done deal. Don’t thank me, come out to the Financial Town Meeting and make it happen.”Now is the time to begin cutting taxes so that Coventry can cease being one of the highest-taxed communities in Rhode Island, Spear said. In order to do so, the town must start somewhere and “now is the time and now is the place to start.”Copies of the town council’s recommended budget are available on the Coventry town Web site: http://town.coventry.ri.us.
Residents can weigh in on the budget by voting at the Financial Town Meeting this Tuesday, June 30 at 7 p.m. at the high school auditorium.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Officials dispel budget ‘rumors’
Sunday, 28 June 2009
HANNAH PIECUCHhclarkin@ricentral.com This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it COVENTRY — A zero percent increase in taxes will be put before the voters of Coventry at the Financial Town Meeting on Tuesday, June 30, says Council Vice-President Laura Flanagan.“There is no other community in Rhode Island whose council has provided a 0 percent increase in their budget,” she said. “And this isn’t a revaluation year, so that means that taxpayers won’t see a cent difference on their tax bill.”In spite of the work that she, Council President Raymond Spear and the Coventry Finance Director Warren West have put into constructing a budget that gives tax relief, Flanagan feels that the budget has been misrepresented through rumors and incorrect statements, she said.
Rumors about the impact of the budget have been spread in a disingenuous manner, Flanagan said — that layoffs will topple town departments, that the council has forced the closing of Oak Haven Elementary School, is demanding huge fees to be paid by the sports league and to attend town summer camps, is depriving charities of operational expenses in the town and is spending thousands of unnecessary dollars on their recently contracted law firm Edwards Angell Palmer and Dodge. Most of these rumors do not have a factual basis, Flanagan and Spear said. The total budget comes in at $87,021,668, representing a 6.6 percent reduction in the operating costs, a more-than halved capital improvement budget and a level-funded school budget, according to figures provide by West.This budget is nearly $2 million less than the fiscal year 2009 budget, according to numbers provided by West, but it will not cripple town departments, Flanagan and Spear said. “I trust Warren [West],” Flanagan said. “I think he knows what he’s doing and knows this town enough that he would tell us if these cuts we’re making would prevent the town from operating.”
The department of public works will lose three employees, West said, but none of these positions are lost through layoffs. Over the course of the year two DPW employees passed away — one refuse courier and one roads and bridges driver — West said. One mechanic from vehicle maintenance left his position for medical reasons. These positions will not be filled, but the department has already been operating with them empty this fiscal year.The only layoffs that will occur in the municipal budget are the elimination of one part-time position in the tax collector’s office, that only cost the town $2,000 a year and the elimination of one part time position in the town clerk’s office for an employee who will keep their position in another town department, West said.
The hiring freeze leaves the town manager’s office down one clerk and the tax assessor’s office down one clerk because of layoffs, West continued. At the police department, the budget removes funding for an officer who was called up for the National Guard, Flanagan said — that officer will receive pay through the National Guard so it is unnecessary to budget for him — and two officers who would have been trained to replace a retirement and the officer called up for the National Guard will remain in their current position. In short, there will be three open positions at the police department.
The discussion surrounding the closing of Oak Haven has placed the blame for the decision on the town council. This is not fair, said Spear, speaking as a former superintendent and the chairman of the school committee. “Closing Oak Haven School has been on the docket for three years in a row,” he said. “The town council did not put it there, the school committee put it there.”Oak Haven is only an issue because it has been made an issue, Spear continued. The biggest impact is going to be in the Oak Haven neighborhood, but other areas will lose or gain 20 to 40 students.The way that Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro has presented it, Spear said, “you’d think that every kid in the town was getting turned upside down.”Handling the school closure this way is “very unprofessional on the part of the superintendent,” Spear said. “It’s been made a political issue when it doesn’t have to be a political issue. If you can educate kids well in five schools instead of six and save money, then you can do it.”
Many residents may forget, Spear added, that when he was superintendent in the 1980s, the town leadership found it expedient to close the Tiogue Elementary School for a time. “I don’t remember it being a great big mess back then.” The school department leadership, the school committee and the parents of elementary school students in the district need to stay calm, Spear said, and if they do, their children will get through the initial change and be just fine. The council does not decide to close a school or keep a school open, emphasized Flanagan, the school committee does. The school committee has had since January to reconcile the fact that they are being level-funded by the town council, she added.
Many complaints have circulated regarding cuts to the Parks and Recreation Department budget, Flanagan said. Ironically, this department is the only one where the department head was given a set budget and allowed to determine his own cuts. Recreation Director Guy Lefebvre was given a set amount, she said, “we told him that he could increase his revenues by increasing the fees to the summer camp — which was only $12 a week. I don’t know of anywhere in this state that you could send your kids to summer camp for $12 a week. It was $100 a week at the YMCA ten years ago. We told him that we need to get our fees to a place where they’re covering our costs so we strongly encouraged him to raise fees.”For families who cannot afford the increase, Flanagan added, there is assistance available through the Department of Human Services and they are welcome to apply for aid through the Waterman/Fiske Assistance Program.
The increase in fees to play on sports teams, such as the Ram’s Football team, was also Lefebvre’s own decision, Flanagan said. Now, instead of the town donating the money to pay for lights and field use, players will have to pay themselves.“What this amounts to is that every child pays $5 more — for the season,” Flanagan said. “It’s important to note that the way we are changing things makes our programs more user-oriented,” Flanagan said. “Rather than put the burden of paying for summer camp or recreation leagues on all the taxpayers in this town, we’re putting it on the people who want to use them.“We don’t think any of the user fees are exorbitant,” she added. “If I don’t see an increase in my taxes, I can put out $5 for my kid to play football or pay $25 a week this summer to send them to summer camp.”
Cutting out the charitable donations line-item has generated a lot of complaints, Flanagan said. Veterans programs, the Greene Library, the Good Samaritans and other organizations will not receive any money from the town this year.Charitable donations amounted to $90,775 in last year’s budget, West said and were proposed to amount to $95,775 in the town manager’s budget for this year. The council has zeroed out that amount. This does not mean that those charities will not be supported in the future, Flanagan said, “but in a year when we’re asking municipal employees to take no pay raises and asking them to increase their health-insurance contributions — it seems like a slap in the face to turn around and donate nearly $100,000 to charities.”When it came to looking at all the charities that the town has supported, Flanagan said, the council did not want to pick and choose which to keep and which to discontinue. They simply decided, “this year we’re not going to do it.”
Employing Law Firm Edwards, Angel, Palmer and Dodge has received a lot of public criticism when residents saw the amount that was budgeted, Flanagan said. This year’s legal budget is listed in one line item, West said, and it includes $175,000 for legal services, $200,000 budgeted for ongoing litigation, based on a recommendation from the firm, and $75,000 to cover legal expenses for the school department. The whole number this year is $449,000 for all legal items, West said. In prior years there was a line-item for legal services that was considerably smaller, but other legal expenses were worked into other sections of the budget and nothing was budgeted for ongoing litigation. When all these fees were compiled in one place, the council in Fiscal Year 2008 had budgeted $374,000 for legal services, West said.
Many of the rumors that Flanagan and Spear addressed were published in the Reminder this week, a copy of which was provided by Flanagan. The advertisement was paid for by Bruce Desrosiers acting as Treasurer of “Concerned Citizens for Coventry,” according to the ad. Desrosiers could not be reached for comment.Supporting the budget this fiscal year are Flanagan and Spear and Councilman Glenford Shibley. Both Councilman Frank Hyde and Councilman Kenneth Cloutier voted against the budget when it came before the council.
Although the budget passed the town council 3-2, Flanagan said, it’s not a done deal. Taxpayers in Coventry do have the power to add or subtract items from the budget or to defeat the budget altogether.People who are excited that there is no tax increase in the budget should not be thanking her now, Flanagan said. “It’s not a done deal. Don’t thank me, come out to the Financial Town Meeting and make it happen.”Now is the time to begin cutting taxes so that Coventry can cease being one of the highest-taxed communities in Rhode Island, Spear said. In order to do so, the town must start somewhere and “now is the time and now is the place to start.”Copies of the town council’s recommended budget are available on the Coventry town Web site: http://town.coventry.ri.us.
Residents can weigh in on the budget by voting at the Financial Town Meeting this Tuesday, June 30 at 7 p.m. at the high school auditorium.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Financial Town Meeting June 30th
Posting a letter from Town Council Vice Pres. Laura Flanagan urging Coventry residents to attend next week's FTM. I have some comments on item numbers 3, 4, 7 and 8.
----
Hi All,
I need to ask for your help in spreading the word on the IMPORTANCE of every registered voter attending the
Financial Town Meeting on Tuesday, June 30th, 2009 at 7 pm in the High School Auditorium.
Many people are under the false impression that the Council's adoption of a no tax increase budget, means that it is set in stone. This is NOT the case.
IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE YOUR TAXES GO UP, YOU MUST ATTEND AND VOTE AT THE FINANCIAL TOWN MEETING
CAST YOUR VOTES AGAINST CHANGES TO THE BUDGET
CAST YOUR VOTES FOR PASSAGE OF A ZERO TAX INCREASE BUDGET AS PRESENTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL.
In Coventry, the PEOPLE adopt a budget at the annual financial town meeting, not the Council. This is mandated by our Town's Charter.
The Council only works to develop what is presented at this meeting. There will be a vote taken, and every registered voter has a right to weigh in.
There are many special interests groups lobbying against what the Council has adopted, and they will be at this meeting to add money, increasing taxes, with their votes.
You will hear many exaggerations of this budget's impact on Town Services - these are misleading, at best. Here are a few and the truth of these matters:
1) The summer camp program run through Parks and Recs is going up from some $80 to $175.
a. THE TRUTH IS THIS FEE REPRESENTS THE CHARGE FOR AN ENTIRE 7 WEEKS OF FULL DAY CAMP! WE HAVE BEEN CHARGING ONLY $12 per week for full day camp! We all know paying the employees and all other related expenses costs far far more than $12 - and there is no other organization around that offers this great of a deal. The fee has been increased to $25 per week in the proposed budget... Still a really discounted rate for full day camp. The program is 7 weeks long - for a total of $175.
2) Raising the rate on Day Camp will make it impossible for families to afford.
a. THE TRUTH is that if a family cannot afford $25 per week, and is in need of camp in order to work, they can apply for Assistance through the Department of Human Services Waterman Fiske Assistance Program, established earlier this year by this Council. If qualified, the program can pay for the entire fee on behalf of a family.
3) Outside Organizations losing funding.
a. THE TRUTH IS that the Town of Coventry gives away approximately $100,000 each year to help support outside organizations. When times are tough, and we are asking town employees to take salary freezes, it would seem appropriate to stop making charitable contributions. The majority of this council eliminated the entire contribution budget, and did not single out any particular organization. It is my hope that contributions can be restored when the economy improves, and as the taxpayers deem appropriate.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer civic groups. WA ************
4) Funding for private sports organizations that use the Parks and Recs fields has been eliminated.
a. THE TRUTH: The Parks and Recs department, through its own budget (and not the Town's "Contribution" budget noted in (3) above), has made donations in the past to support private youth leagues. The Council did not instruct that these contributions be cut. The director of this department was given a figure for his budget and he alone decided to eliminate these donations, rather than trim other expenditures, or increase fees on programs (such as the day camp, dance lessons, and other programs offered through Parks & Rec for a nominal fee). At the financial town meeting, every taxpayer has the opportunity to move funding from one line item to another by Motion, Second and a vote of all in attendance.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer sports organizations. WA **************
5) PAYING FOR TRASH PICKUP.
a. THE TRUTH: This budget does not include paying for trash pickup. This service will continue to be provided and supported by tax dollars.
6) CLOSURE OF OAK HAVEN SCHOOL.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council does NOT have the authority to close schools. The Council sets the overall budget for the school department - this year, some $62,000,000. The school committee is the elected body who decides if a school will remain opened or closed.
7) SENIOR TAX FREEZE.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council has worked diligently to cut expenses, rather than changing or eliminating the Senior Tax Freeze. If this budget fails, and the State continues to reduce its aid to cities/towns (as is likely), the Senior Tax Freeze may well be jeopardized, as there are very few places left to generate new revenue, if expenses cannot be cut. It is not the desire of this Council to change the Senior Tax Freeze, as evidenced by the budget now before the taxpayers. We prefer reducing expenditures and running more efficiently.
************ MY COMMENT - We probably all know some friends, neighbors or relatives who have benefited from the senior tax freeze. The tax freeze was implemented some years ago without having first been studied to understand what the effects would be. Some eligibility guidelines were amended a year or two ago but otherwise the freeze was not changed. Before the freeze is ever amended, I recommend that a comprehensive study of the freeze be done first to determine how it has affected all taxpayers in town. WA ************
8) ATTORNEY'S HAVE BEEN GIVEN A 159% INCREASE IN PAY
a. THE TRUTH. In prior years, the Solicitor's budget of $179,000 has been put before and approved by the taxpayers of this community. All the while, the reality of actual expenditures for these fees tells a much different story. For the past two years, we have continually run far over the solicitor budget and these expenses have been paid from a variety of other line items, outside of the solicitor account. In 2007, the town spent approximately $340,000 on legal expenses and in 2006, the number was closer to $400,000, but still the $179K figure was budgeted. The current Town Council has chosen to place all expected legal expenses in one account, as opposed to under budgeting and overspending, failing to disclose to the taxpayer the true cost. This year the council has additionally agreed to take over school legal expenses, for approximately $75,000, in an effort to help the schools achieve a level funded budget. In all reality, we are forecasting a true increase of about 7 percent over last year's expenditures, AND NOT 159% AS FALSELY STATED. The result of attempting to bring these costs into one budget has the appearance of a large increase, however, this is not reality.
************MY COMMENT - The the town has not been disclosing the actual amounts that were spent on legal at least in the previous two years in a manner that any ordinary resident would notice. Starting this year there will be some transparency with this expenditure. We finally have the specialized legal counsel that was badly needed to deal with a few lawsuits pending against the town. A judgment against the town from any of these suits could cost us millions of dollars. This is money well spent. WA **************
When I campaigned earlier this year, I heard each voice in my district. Overwhelmingly, people desired tax relief and seniors desired protection of the tax freeze. It was my desire to reduce taxes, but that was simply impossible due to the cuts Coventry sustained from the state. Holding taxes steady, with no change to the freeze is the best we are able to bring forward, without hurting essential services to our residents. Now, however, it is up to the each of you to approve or disapprove of our proposal. As your councilwoman, I have kept my commitment to you. Now, I would ask you to come out on June 30th and cast your vote. Let's join together and say enough to high taxes, enough to hurting property values, enough to business as usual, enough to the greed of the vocal minority. These are your tax dollars and this is your town. Please be present on June 30th and VOTE! Every one counts.
Warmest regards,
Laura
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
District 2
----
Hi All,
I need to ask for your help in spreading the word on the IMPORTANCE of every registered voter attending the
Financial Town Meeting on Tuesday, June 30th, 2009 at 7 pm in the High School Auditorium.
Many people are under the false impression that the Council's adoption of a no tax increase budget, means that it is set in stone. This is NOT the case.
IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE YOUR TAXES GO UP, YOU MUST ATTEND AND VOTE AT THE FINANCIAL TOWN MEETING
CAST YOUR VOTES AGAINST CHANGES TO THE BUDGET
CAST YOUR VOTES FOR PASSAGE OF A ZERO TAX INCREASE BUDGET AS PRESENTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL.
In Coventry, the PEOPLE adopt a budget at the annual financial town meeting, not the Council. This is mandated by our Town's Charter.
The Council only works to develop what is presented at this meeting. There will be a vote taken, and every registered voter has a right to weigh in.
There are many special interests groups lobbying against what the Council has adopted, and they will be at this meeting to add money, increasing taxes, with their votes.
You will hear many exaggerations of this budget's impact on Town Services - these are misleading, at best. Here are a few and the truth of these matters:
1) The summer camp program run through Parks and Recs is going up from some $80 to $175.
a. THE TRUTH IS THIS FEE REPRESENTS THE CHARGE FOR AN ENTIRE 7 WEEKS OF FULL DAY CAMP! WE HAVE BEEN CHARGING ONLY $12 per week for full day camp! We all know paying the employees and all other related expenses costs far far more than $12 - and there is no other organization around that offers this great of a deal. The fee has been increased to $25 per week in the proposed budget... Still a really discounted rate for full day camp. The program is 7 weeks long - for a total of $175.
2) Raising the rate on Day Camp will make it impossible for families to afford.
a. THE TRUTH is that if a family cannot afford $25 per week, and is in need of camp in order to work, they can apply for Assistance through the Department of Human Services Waterman Fiske Assistance Program, established earlier this year by this Council. If qualified, the program can pay for the entire fee on behalf of a family.
3) Outside Organizations losing funding.
a. THE TRUTH IS that the Town of Coventry gives away approximately $100,000 each year to help support outside organizations. When times are tough, and we are asking town employees to take salary freezes, it would seem appropriate to stop making charitable contributions. The majority of this council eliminated the entire contribution budget, and did not single out any particular organization. It is my hope that contributions can be restored when the economy improves, and as the taxpayers deem appropriate.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer civic groups. WA ************
4) Funding for private sports organizations that use the Parks and Recs fields has been eliminated.
a. THE TRUTH: The Parks and Recs department, through its own budget (and not the Town's "Contribution" budget noted in (3) above), has made donations in the past to support private youth leagues. The Council did not instruct that these contributions be cut. The director of this department was given a figure for his budget and he alone decided to eliminate these donations, rather than trim other expenditures, or increase fees on programs (such as the day camp, dance lessons, and other programs offered through Parks & Rec for a nominal fee). At the financial town meeting, every taxpayer has the opportunity to move funding from one line item to another by Motion, Second and a vote of all in attendance.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer sports organizations. WA **************
5) PAYING FOR TRASH PICKUP.
a. THE TRUTH: This budget does not include paying for trash pickup. This service will continue to be provided and supported by tax dollars.
6) CLOSURE OF OAK HAVEN SCHOOL.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council does NOT have the authority to close schools. The Council sets the overall budget for the school department - this year, some $62,000,000. The school committee is the elected body who decides if a school will remain opened or closed.
7) SENIOR TAX FREEZE.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council has worked diligently to cut expenses, rather than changing or eliminating the Senior Tax Freeze. If this budget fails, and the State continues to reduce its aid to cities/towns (as is likely), the Senior Tax Freeze may well be jeopardized, as there are very few places left to generate new revenue, if expenses cannot be cut. It is not the desire of this Council to change the Senior Tax Freeze, as evidenced by the budget now before the taxpayers. We prefer reducing expenditures and running more efficiently.
************ MY COMMENT - We probably all know some friends, neighbors or relatives who have benefited from the senior tax freeze. The tax freeze was implemented some years ago without having first been studied to understand what the effects would be. Some eligibility guidelines were amended a year or two ago but otherwise the freeze was not changed. Before the freeze is ever amended, I recommend that a comprehensive study of the freeze be done first to determine how it has affected all taxpayers in town. WA ************
8) ATTORNEY'S HAVE BEEN GIVEN A 159% INCREASE IN PAY
a. THE TRUTH. In prior years, the Solicitor's budget of $179,000 has been put before and approved by the taxpayers of this community. All the while, the reality of actual expenditures for these fees tells a much different story. For the past two years, we have continually run far over the solicitor budget and these expenses have been paid from a variety of other line items, outside of the solicitor account. In 2007, the town spent approximately $340,000 on legal expenses and in 2006, the number was closer to $400,000, but still the $179K figure was budgeted. The current Town Council has chosen to place all expected legal expenses in one account, as opposed to under budgeting and overspending, failing to disclose to the taxpayer the true cost. This year the council has additionally agreed to take over school legal expenses, for approximately $75,000, in an effort to help the schools achieve a level funded budget. In all reality, we are forecasting a true increase of about 7 percent over last year's expenditures, AND NOT 159% AS FALSELY STATED. The result of attempting to bring these costs into one budget has the appearance of a large increase, however, this is not reality.
************MY COMMENT - The the town has not been disclosing the actual amounts that were spent on legal at least in the previous two years in a manner that any ordinary resident would notice. Starting this year there will be some transparency with this expenditure. We finally have the specialized legal counsel that was badly needed to deal with a few lawsuits pending against the town. A judgment against the town from any of these suits could cost us millions of dollars. This is money well spent. WA **************
When I campaigned earlier this year, I heard each voice in my district. Overwhelmingly, people desired tax relief and seniors desired protection of the tax freeze. It was my desire to reduce taxes, but that was simply impossible due to the cuts Coventry sustained from the state. Holding taxes steady, with no change to the freeze is the best we are able to bring forward, without hurting essential services to our residents. Now, however, it is up to the each of you to approve or disapprove of our proposal. As your councilwoman, I have kept my commitment to you. Now, I would ask you to come out on June 30th and cast your vote. Let's join together and say enough to high taxes, enough to hurting property values, enough to business as usual, enough to the greed of the vocal minority. These are your tax dollars and this is your town. Please be present on June 30th and VOTE! Every one counts.
Warmest regards,
Laura
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
District 2
Friday, June 19, 2009
Meetings next week
Town Council June 22: THIS MEETING HAS BEEN CANCELLED http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/75664.pdf
School Committee June 23. Includes workshop on elementary school redistricting plan:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/75721.pdf
Planning Commission June 24:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/75741.pdf
Includes the following agenda items -
Pre-Application: “Coventry Asphalt Silos”; Coventry Asphalt Realty,
LLC
Installation of 4 Hot Mix Asphalt Storage Silos
AP 52, Lot 62.1; Zone I1
75 Airport Road
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING-Continued
Master Plan: “Coventry Meadows”; Coventry Housing Associates
Corporation
Comprehensive Permit for Low/Mod Housing Land Development
Project
AP 38, Lot 100; Zone GB and AP 30, Lot 161; Zone R-20
Tiogue Avenue
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Major Land Development/Master Plan: “CVS Pharmacy”; R.I CVS
Pharmacy, LLC.
Proposed New Store
AP 38, Lots 105, 106 & 107; Zone GB
Tiogue Avenue & Wood Street
Board of Canvassers June 25:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/75609.pdf
Note: The annual Financial Town Meeting will take place on June 30th.
The next Zoning Board meeting is scheduled for July 1st.
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/75585.pdf
School Committee June 23. Includes workshop on elementary school redistricting plan:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/75721.pdf
Planning Commission June 24:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/75741.pdf
Includes the following agenda items -
Pre-Application: “Coventry Asphalt Silos”; Coventry Asphalt Realty,
LLC
Installation of 4 Hot Mix Asphalt Storage Silos
AP 52, Lot 62.1; Zone I1
75 Airport Road
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING-Continued
Master Plan: “Coventry Meadows”; Coventry Housing Associates
Corporation
Comprehensive Permit for Low/Mod Housing Land Development
Project
AP 38, Lot 100; Zone GB and AP 30, Lot 161; Zone R-20
Tiogue Avenue
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Major Land Development/Master Plan: “CVS Pharmacy”; R.I CVS
Pharmacy, LLC.
Proposed New Store
AP 38, Lots 105, 106 & 107; Zone GB
Tiogue Avenue & Wood Street
Board of Canvassers June 25:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/75609.pdf
Note: The annual Financial Town Meeting will take place on June 30th.
The next Zoning Board meeting is scheduled for July 1st.
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/75585.pdf
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Our Greatest Deficit
Below is a letter sent by TC Vice President Laura Flanagan to all the members of the School Committee on May 31, 2009. In it she clearly states her reasons for objecting to the new 3-year contract that was ultimately approved last Tuesday night. It's very informative.
If any member of the School Committee would like to provide me with a serious analysis of the new agreement with the CTA from their perspective, I would be glad to post it here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 31, 2009
Hand Delivered
Honorable Members of the Coventry
School Committee
Ms. Kathleen Patenaude, Chairperson
Mr. Andrew Perra, Vice Chairman
Mr. Thomas Heatherman
Ms. Lisa Tomasso
Ms. Nancy Sprengelmeyer
Dear Members of the School Committee:
The purpose of this letter is to state my position in a formal, written manner over the potential ratification and approval of a proposed new 3 year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance (“CTA”).
Let me begin by saying that I believe that all parties have been working very hard, and I want to recognize the value of those efforts. I also acknowledge that the School Committee, by virtue of our charter, has full authority to enter into contracts with the CTA, with or without the consent of the Town Council.
In late March, I received an e-mail from Ms. Kelly Erinakes, President of the CTA, requesting a meeting or telephone conversation. We did connect by telephone and talked for some time, in an effort to find common ground, regarding the tentative terms of an arrangement whereby the CTA would make some $700,000-$800,000 in salary concessions in exchange for a commitment from the Town Council to Levy $750,000 in new taxes as a show of its “commitment to education”. I firmly stated my belief was that a $62,000,000 budget was quite a commitment to education. I was also very clear in stating my fundamental disagreement to any union being allowed to bargain with a demand for tax increases.
On May 16th, Council President Spear indicated to me that Mr. DiPietro thought he could secure a “0-0-0” contract with the CTA, essentially freezing the 08-09 salary schedule. Mr. Spear and another member of the council met with Mr. DiPietro on Sunday, May 17th, to discuss the proposal. Mr. DiPietro indicated that if the Council adopted a budget that level funded the schools, as it was prepared to do on Monday, May 18th, the CTA would cut off all negotiations and he would be forced to close Oak Haven and cut the programs he had previously outlined to the public. Based upon this representation, the Council unanimously tabled the budget at its May 18th meeting to allow time for the school committee to finalize this agreement.
Last week, Mr. Spear and Mr. DiPietro met to review the final details of a tentative agreement reached with the CTA. I was provided with copies of a detailed analysis of the agreement. Rather than a “0-0-0”, the deal more accurately represents “0.23%-0.74%-2%” (weighted average increase to salary schedule in each of the next 3 years). The following weekend was spent reviewing, analyzing and discussing the new 3 year contract your committee now seeks to approve. My understanding is that the committee originally sought the “blessing” of the Council over this arrangement, and a commitment to increase taxes by $750,000. I contacted Mr. DiPietro by phone with concerns/questions, not entirely dismissing the proposal, but seeking clarification on a few points. We had several lengthy, detailed conversations. I also discussed the arrangement with 2 members of the School Committee, expressing my concerns over the agreement, and listening to their points of view.
The apparent unwillingness of the CTA, the Superintendent and School Committee to attempt to secure concessions in the remaining year of the current contract (rather than a 3 year contract), with true givebacks to the community to save children’s programs is disturbing and prevents the Town from ascertaining funding sources next year. Why are the parties closing their eyes to the potential risks associated with guarantees of salary increases 3 years out, in a time of such great uncertainty? RIPEC has publicly released information in its article appearing on the front page of the May 25, 2009 Providence Journal indicating its forecast for Rhode Island Towns/Cities. The forecast is bleak: expenses are expected to rise at a greater rate than revenues and the deficit we now face is projected to grow greater in the coming years. In addition, I was recently made aware by Mr. West, our finance director, that the State is considering reducing the Reimbursement of Auto Excise tax exemptions to Cities and Towns this year; this has the potential to represent up to $1,000,000 in lost revenue for Coventry. It is unclear whether or not we will be allowed relief from Senate Bill 3050 regarding any such reduction. Further, the leadership of the Council has been advised of additional liabilities likely payable in 09-10 exceeding $1,000,000, although we are not at liberty to publicly discuss the particulars, due to the sensitive ongoing nature of litigation discussions.
After having the opportunities described in the paragraphs above to listen, ask questions and analyze the tentative agreement, as well as the current economic climate and other issues the Town will face this year and next, it is clear to me that this proposal does not represent what was originally offered and contains risks that the Town should not responsibly assume.
My interpretation and understanding of some of the details contained in the proposal are as follows:
1) A reduction of the work year by 3 days, from 186 to 183, with a slight increase in salary.
2) The addition of 3 days in the form of “Professional Development”, at a cost of $150,000.
3) An increase in the longevity schedule of $250 at every level, with an estimated expense of $50,000 in the first year. This addition gives the majority of top step teachers a salary increase outside of the salary schedule and these numbers will be difficult to reduce in future negotiations.
4) The freezing of co-payments towards health insurance for the first 2 years at a fixed dollar amount that represents 15% of the cost today. I believe there is significant risk in this concession, the greatest being in year 2. Blue Cross has publicly stated its intentions to increase its rates by some 15-18%. Although we participate in the West Bay Collaborative, this increase could significantly affect the cost of the Stop Loss Policy, and would then be entirely borne by the school/town, having the potential to wipe out any savings achieved in that year. A significant increase in claims would also pose an added risk of increases. I believe this concession is a gamble we may not win.
5) The illustrations which I reviewed indicate that the proposal gives teachers not on top step a weighted average increase this year of 7.27%, next year of 7.07% and 8.27% in year three.
6) The proposal contains the option for the CTA to renegotiate another three year contract, in the event that funding is not available in later years.
I believe that the time allowed by tabling the budget has been used to finalize the terms of an agreement already in the works for months, as evidenced by Ms. Erinakes' email and telephone call, in late March, outlining and seeking support for the same.
If it is true, as represented to me by members of the School Committee, that Mr. Erinakes and Attorney Tobin took part in School Committee executive session discussions held on Tuesday, May 26th, 2009, over this proposal, then I find the negotiation process deeply disconcerting. The nepotism provisions of the Rhode Island Code of Ethics are quite clear on the prohibition of the involvement of public employees in contract negotiations, when in fact their spouses, or other immediate family members, are covered by the subject contract.
Where is our Courage? Why are we not standing together (the school committee and the Council) seeking a one year contract with concessions? Is it simply too difficult? Is the union unwilling? Is this the way it is always done? When are we going to start considering the consequences of the decisions we make today on our ability to pay tomorrow?
It is my belief that the end does not always justify the means. While I recognize that the salary schedule is slightly lower at the end of this new 3-year deal, than it would be in the 09-10 current contract (which would be fantastic in a prosperous, predictable economy), a new three year contract in the current climate is truly more beneficial to the union than the school/town. It offers protection for the union during difficult economic times and places all of the risk on the town/taxpayers. It is my belief that the School Committee would have a significant bargaining advantage and the ability to achieve greater, long-term results, most beneficial to the children and residents of our community, if the last year of the current contract were simply renegotiated.
Lastly, and most importantly, if this proposed contract is accepted, I believe it is highly probable the Town will not have the resources available next year or the year after to fund it, due to all of the aforementioned considerations. We may well find ourselves in the same position we are in today…. choosing between salaries and programs/services for children.
Perhaps our greatest deficit in Coventry is COURAGE.
Very truly yours,
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
cc: Council President Raymond Spear
If any member of the School Committee would like to provide me with a serious analysis of the new agreement with the CTA from their perspective, I would be glad to post it here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 31, 2009
Hand Delivered
Honorable Members of the Coventry
School Committee
Ms. Kathleen Patenaude, Chairperson
Mr. Andrew Perra, Vice Chairman
Mr. Thomas Heatherman
Ms. Lisa Tomasso
Ms. Nancy Sprengelmeyer
Dear Members of the School Committee:
The purpose of this letter is to state my position in a formal, written manner over the potential ratification and approval of a proposed new 3 year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance (“CTA”).
Let me begin by saying that I believe that all parties have been working very hard, and I want to recognize the value of those efforts. I also acknowledge that the School Committee, by virtue of our charter, has full authority to enter into contracts with the CTA, with or without the consent of the Town Council.
In late March, I received an e-mail from Ms. Kelly Erinakes, President of the CTA, requesting a meeting or telephone conversation. We did connect by telephone and talked for some time, in an effort to find common ground, regarding the tentative terms of an arrangement whereby the CTA would make some $700,000-$800,000 in salary concessions in exchange for a commitment from the Town Council to Levy $750,000 in new taxes as a show of its “commitment to education”. I firmly stated my belief was that a $62,000,000 budget was quite a commitment to education. I was also very clear in stating my fundamental disagreement to any union being allowed to bargain with a demand for tax increases.
On May 16th, Council President Spear indicated to me that Mr. DiPietro thought he could secure a “0-0-0” contract with the CTA, essentially freezing the 08-09 salary schedule. Mr. Spear and another member of the council met with Mr. DiPietro on Sunday, May 17th, to discuss the proposal. Mr. DiPietro indicated that if the Council adopted a budget that level funded the schools, as it was prepared to do on Monday, May 18th, the CTA would cut off all negotiations and he would be forced to close Oak Haven and cut the programs he had previously outlined to the public. Based upon this representation, the Council unanimously tabled the budget at its May 18th meeting to allow time for the school committee to finalize this agreement.
Last week, Mr. Spear and Mr. DiPietro met to review the final details of a tentative agreement reached with the CTA. I was provided with copies of a detailed analysis of the agreement. Rather than a “0-0-0”, the deal more accurately represents “0.23%-0.74%-2%” (weighted average increase to salary schedule in each of the next 3 years). The following weekend was spent reviewing, analyzing and discussing the new 3 year contract your committee now seeks to approve. My understanding is that the committee originally sought the “blessing” of the Council over this arrangement, and a commitment to increase taxes by $750,000. I contacted Mr. DiPietro by phone with concerns/questions, not entirely dismissing the proposal, but seeking clarification on a few points. We had several lengthy, detailed conversations. I also discussed the arrangement with 2 members of the School Committee, expressing my concerns over the agreement, and listening to their points of view.
The apparent unwillingness of the CTA, the Superintendent and School Committee to attempt to secure concessions in the remaining year of the current contract (rather than a 3 year contract), with true givebacks to the community to save children’s programs is disturbing and prevents the Town from ascertaining funding sources next year. Why are the parties closing their eyes to the potential risks associated with guarantees of salary increases 3 years out, in a time of such great uncertainty? RIPEC has publicly released information in its article appearing on the front page of the May 25, 2009 Providence Journal indicating its forecast for Rhode Island Towns/Cities. The forecast is bleak: expenses are expected to rise at a greater rate than revenues and the deficit we now face is projected to grow greater in the coming years. In addition, I was recently made aware by Mr. West, our finance director, that the State is considering reducing the Reimbursement of Auto Excise tax exemptions to Cities and Towns this year; this has the potential to represent up to $1,000,000 in lost revenue for Coventry. It is unclear whether or not we will be allowed relief from Senate Bill 3050 regarding any such reduction. Further, the leadership of the Council has been advised of additional liabilities likely payable in 09-10 exceeding $1,000,000, although we are not at liberty to publicly discuss the particulars, due to the sensitive ongoing nature of litigation discussions.
After having the opportunities described in the paragraphs above to listen, ask questions and analyze the tentative agreement, as well as the current economic climate and other issues the Town will face this year and next, it is clear to me that this proposal does not represent what was originally offered and contains risks that the Town should not responsibly assume.
My interpretation and understanding of some of the details contained in the proposal are as follows:
1) A reduction of the work year by 3 days, from 186 to 183, with a slight increase in salary.
2) The addition of 3 days in the form of “Professional Development”, at a cost of $150,000.
3) An increase in the longevity schedule of $250 at every level, with an estimated expense of $50,000 in the first year. This addition gives the majority of top step teachers a salary increase outside of the salary schedule and these numbers will be difficult to reduce in future negotiations.
4) The freezing of co-payments towards health insurance for the first 2 years at a fixed dollar amount that represents 15% of the cost today. I believe there is significant risk in this concession, the greatest being in year 2. Blue Cross has publicly stated its intentions to increase its rates by some 15-18%. Although we participate in the West Bay Collaborative, this increase could significantly affect the cost of the Stop Loss Policy, and would then be entirely borne by the school/town, having the potential to wipe out any savings achieved in that year. A significant increase in claims would also pose an added risk of increases. I believe this concession is a gamble we may not win.
5) The illustrations which I reviewed indicate that the proposal gives teachers not on top step a weighted average increase this year of 7.27%, next year of 7.07% and 8.27% in year three.
6) The proposal contains the option for the CTA to renegotiate another three year contract, in the event that funding is not available in later years.
I believe that the time allowed by tabling the budget has been used to finalize the terms of an agreement already in the works for months, as evidenced by Ms. Erinakes' email and telephone call, in late March, outlining and seeking support for the same.
If it is true, as represented to me by members of the School Committee, that Mr. Erinakes and Attorney Tobin took part in School Committee executive session discussions held on Tuesday, May 26th, 2009, over this proposal, then I find the negotiation process deeply disconcerting. The nepotism provisions of the Rhode Island Code of Ethics are quite clear on the prohibition of the involvement of public employees in contract negotiations, when in fact their spouses, or other immediate family members, are covered by the subject contract.
Where is our Courage? Why are we not standing together (the school committee and the Council) seeking a one year contract with concessions? Is it simply too difficult? Is the union unwilling? Is this the way it is always done? When are we going to start considering the consequences of the decisions we make today on our ability to pay tomorrow?
It is my belief that the end does not always justify the means. While I recognize that the salary schedule is slightly lower at the end of this new 3-year deal, than it would be in the 09-10 current contract (which would be fantastic in a prosperous, predictable economy), a new three year contract in the current climate is truly more beneficial to the union than the school/town. It offers protection for the union during difficult economic times and places all of the risk on the town/taxpayers. It is my belief that the School Committee would have a significant bargaining advantage and the ability to achieve greater, long-term results, most beneficial to the children and residents of our community, if the last year of the current contract were simply renegotiated.
Lastly, and most importantly, if this proposed contract is accepted, I believe it is highly probable the Town will not have the resources available next year or the year after to fund it, due to all of the aforementioned considerations. We may well find ourselves in the same position we are in today…. choosing between salaries and programs/services for children.
Perhaps our greatest deficit in Coventry is COURAGE.
Very truly yours,
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
cc: Council President Raymond Spear
Thursday, June 11, 2009
News Articles, Town Budget, New Teacher Contract
Kent County Times article on Town Budget passage:
Cov. council narrowly passes budget
Tuesday, 09 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — On a council split two against two, Council President Raymond Spear had the deciding vote on the fiscal year 2010 budget Monday night.
The budget, which Spear prepared with Council Vice-President Laura Flanagan, Finance Director Warren West and acting Town Manager Paul Sprague, came in at a total of $87,021,668, representing a 6.6 percent reduction in the operating costs, a more-than halved capital improvement budget and a level-funded school budget.This budget, nearly $2 million less than the fiscal year 2009 budget, was vocally supported by Flanagan and Councilman Glenford Shibley at the meeting. Both Councilman Frank Hyde and Councilman Kenneth Cloutier said they were uncomfortable with the cuts in the budget and the way it would impact town services. Spear did not state his opinion until the other council members had discussed the budget.The idea of a 0 percent tax increase is an admirable one, Cloutier said, but he was cautious to pass the budget without residents realizing how their services would be impacted. “I fear people won’t know what the cuts are until they happen,” he said. In his personal experience, cuts to the recreation department will take a third of the budget from the local football team, the Rams, and put a $7,000 burden on the people who play.“There are 4,200 kids who play in the town leagues,” he said. “So cuts to recreation are a sore spot with me.”
Hyde was in agreement with Cloutier, he said. “I see the positive reasons for a 0 percent tax increase,” he said. “But we’re cutting a snow plow driver, we’re hurting the kids, and its hard for me to look at my consituents knowing that their children will have to pay to play on the town fields and their services won’t be what they used to be.”Taking money out of the reserves to sustain the 0 percent tax increase and soften the cuts was his suggestion, Hyde said.There is currently $4.9 million in the unrestricted fund balance, said West. Of that, the town has to keep at least $4.4 million in order to keep a good credit rating, this leaves approximately $400,000 that could be used to suppliment the budget this year, West said. There is already $140,000 from the fund balance in the budget to account for deficits in the upcoming fiscal year. She supported the budget, Flanagan said, not because she was elected by any special interest groups, but because she listened to folks as she walked door to door during her campaign season. The overwhelming request from her constituents was for a tax break, and she vowed to support that.“My position hasn’t changed,” Flanagan said. “We’re asking folks to do more with less money. But if we don’t make some major changes it’s going to get worse and worse. I feel badly about some of the things in the budget — in the past we’ve given money away as charitable donations — but we can’t do that this year.“The taxpayers in this town deserve to have leaders who will fight for them,” Flanagan continued, “no matter what pressure comes or how it comes to them.”
Shibley’s campaign promises were similar to Flanagan’s, he said. “This is not an easy budget,” he admitted. “People are making concessions, but they can make that work. We have to hold the line on taxes.”Spear recognized the two sides of the table, he said, and came to a decision after many hours of thought and prayer, bearing in mind his years of background and experience.“Our obligations for tomorrow are already extended beyond reasonable and responsible levels of expectation, resources and funding,” he said in a prepared address. “This requires the necessity to deal with all related factors on a short term of expanding commitment, more careful and responsible planning, and based on more stable assurance that the funding ability to meet such commitments can be reasonably and responsibly met.”Implicit in his remarks, Spear made clear later, was disapproval of the newly negotiated school contract that the school committee will consider this week.“Let us not reach beyond that which we can responsibly control and commit to, based on the facts of today, as we strive to meet our needs and wants of our tomorrows,” he continued.“With these thoughts in mind, I find it necessary, appropriate, and in the best interest of the taxpayers of the community of Coventry, to set forth the programs and services for fiscal 2010 as established in the budget that herewith presented.”
When Spear moved the question so the council could vote on the matter, a resident in the audience made a point of order. She wanted to comment on the budget before the council voted, she said.This was not the appropriate forum, said Spear. “We have had four to six workshops on this budget where you could have commented,” he said. “Now we are going to finish the council’s business and public comment will be after we vote.”The auditorium erupted with shouts, boos and attempts to speak. The auditorium at the Town Hall Annex, the old Flat River Road Middle School, was filled with at least 200 residents who had come to weigh in on the budget. Teachers, veterans, seniors, members of local sports associations, and residents of every political persuasion were there to have their say.But this was not the forum, insisted Spear, even as Hyde challenged him, yelling and waving his arms. Spear took a short recess and allowed the police and town sergeant to quiet the meeting attendees.When the meeting opened back up, the audience began to chant, “let us speak, let us speak, let us speak,” along with claps and stomps.“You have your opportunity to speak at the Financial Town Meeting,” Spear said. “You have had your time to speak at our work sessions. This is not a public hearing and there is no public comment on this item.”
Shibley made a motion to accept the budget, Flanagan seconded it, and the budget passed with a vote of 3-2, Hyde and Cloutier dissenting.In the public comment that followed, the council received both accolades and criticism. But, almost universally, taxpayers were disappointed that the council had not allowed them an opportunity to speak before the budget was voted on.
KCT article on School Committee's passage of new teacher contract:
New teacher contract passed
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — The Coventry School Committee entered into a new three-year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance on Tuesday night with a vote of 5-0.
Passage of the contract was not originally the plan for the evening, Chairwoman Katherine Patenaude said, but after hearing from the public and gaining a consensus that the whole school committee was ready to vote, she was ready to take the vote.“Because there was public notice previously that we were having the discussion I think that people who really wanted to know more about it could have made it out to the meeting,” she said. “The people who were there had their say.”The contract, as outlined by Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro represents a cut of approximately $2,210 per teacher over the next year and will save roughly $1 million in the first year.
The first year of the contract is frozen at the 2008-2009 salary schedule, the second year gives every teacher a flat raise of $500 and the third year each step receives a 2 percent increase. When that 2 percent increase comes in, DiPietro said, salaries will still be lower than they would have been just in 2009-2010, had the previous contract continued through to the end of next year. In addition to salary concessions, DiPietro said, some other concessions in the contract included freezing advanced degree increments, curriculum coordinator stipends, coaches stipends, co-curricular club stipends, and hourly professional development rates at the 2007-2008 schedules, DiPietro said. These will be frozen until 2012. Longevity rates were increased, given a flat increase all three years, he added.Through negotiations, the contract also contains language to specify the appropriate uses of advisory, the acceptable uses of common planning time, and the protocol for closing a school. “People say that contracts never talk about students and making a school better,” DiPietro said. “This one does. It puts requirements and expectations on planning time for teachers. And it gives checklists for teachers monitoring their students’ graduation portfolio and capstone projects. I don’t think most districts have these things written into their contracts.”
The contract does give teachers a health insurance contribution freeze, DiPietro said. But the freeze is only in effect for Fiscal Years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. In 2011/2012 the full 15 percent co-pay will be reinstated. Teachers will be given a $350 reimbursement for purchasing instructional materials, DiPietro said. This funding will come from the supplies lines in the budget.A major give-back that the school committee gave the teachers is a limited layoff provision, DiPietro said. “Tenured teachers with four years of service in Coventry are not subject to layoff,” he said in his presentation. Currently there are only 20 to 30 teachers in Coventry who would be eligible for layoff until the contract is ended. While several teachers and residents did speak in favor of the contract, several residents spoke against it.One resident who identified himself as Joe Brown was not satisfied with DiPietro’s presentation of the budget. “I have to be honest, I’m real confused,” he said. “That’s a lot of information. It looks to me like there is a lot of fluff in the teachers’ salaries with the step increases and I don’t think you’re giving us an accurate picture.”DiPietro did not explain the step increases. “You’re amazingly disrespectful, Mr. Brown,” he said. “You’re accusing me of giving you incorrect information and I am not, these are the numbers.”
The school committee was interested in questions, Patenaude added. “If you have a question, we’ll answer it. Your opinions are not what we are interested in. If you want to stay for public comment you may do so.”Brown requested that the school committee try one more time to go back and get further concessions from the union.“Mr. Brown,” Patenaude responded. “We have met with the unions and we have done our job.”“So you’re satisfied?” Brown asked.“Yes,” Patenaude responded. The answer to the request of more concessions would be “no,” said President of the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance Kelly Erinakas after Brown’s question.“The school committee did what they were asked to and negotiated,” she said. “So did the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance. Members are giving up $2,700 each next year. That’s a lot out of anyone’s pocket and no, you cannot get more.”
Town Republican Committee Chair Charles Vacca asked for a figure of the cost of this contract over the next few years.Coming up with a specific number of the cost involves too many factors, DiPietro told him. The contract will cost an additional $1 million more in health care alone, and many other things will weigh in. Entering a contract without knowing the financial forecast of the town concerned him, Vacca said. “This whole system has a pitfall where we enter into contracts before we know what funds we will have.”
Having closed discussion, the school committee voted unanimously to accept the contract. Yesterday morning, Patenaude was still satisfied with the new contract, she said. “The people who really have their ear to the ground so to speak on what’s going on with contracts in the town knew the details already because we had shared them with the town council the day before,” she said. “[Council President Raymond Spear] showed up and didn’t have any questions, we certainly didn’t get any other calls from people saying ‘what are you thinking?’ And [Councilman] Frank Hyde came to the meeting and commended us for signing the contract.”
Cov. council narrowly passes budget
Tuesday, 09 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — On a council split two against two, Council President Raymond Spear had the deciding vote on the fiscal year 2010 budget Monday night.
The budget, which Spear prepared with Council Vice-President Laura Flanagan, Finance Director Warren West and acting Town Manager Paul Sprague, came in at a total of $87,021,668, representing a 6.6 percent reduction in the operating costs, a more-than halved capital improvement budget and a level-funded school budget.This budget, nearly $2 million less than the fiscal year 2009 budget, was vocally supported by Flanagan and Councilman Glenford Shibley at the meeting. Both Councilman Frank Hyde and Councilman Kenneth Cloutier said they were uncomfortable with the cuts in the budget and the way it would impact town services. Spear did not state his opinion until the other council members had discussed the budget.The idea of a 0 percent tax increase is an admirable one, Cloutier said, but he was cautious to pass the budget without residents realizing how their services would be impacted. “I fear people won’t know what the cuts are until they happen,” he said. In his personal experience, cuts to the recreation department will take a third of the budget from the local football team, the Rams, and put a $7,000 burden on the people who play.“There are 4,200 kids who play in the town leagues,” he said. “So cuts to recreation are a sore spot with me.”
Hyde was in agreement with Cloutier, he said. “I see the positive reasons for a 0 percent tax increase,” he said. “But we’re cutting a snow plow driver, we’re hurting the kids, and its hard for me to look at my consituents knowing that their children will have to pay to play on the town fields and their services won’t be what they used to be.”Taking money out of the reserves to sustain the 0 percent tax increase and soften the cuts was his suggestion, Hyde said.There is currently $4.9 million in the unrestricted fund balance, said West. Of that, the town has to keep at least $4.4 million in order to keep a good credit rating, this leaves approximately $400,000 that could be used to suppliment the budget this year, West said. There is already $140,000 from the fund balance in the budget to account for deficits in the upcoming fiscal year. She supported the budget, Flanagan said, not because she was elected by any special interest groups, but because she listened to folks as she walked door to door during her campaign season. The overwhelming request from her constituents was for a tax break, and she vowed to support that.“My position hasn’t changed,” Flanagan said. “We’re asking folks to do more with less money. But if we don’t make some major changes it’s going to get worse and worse. I feel badly about some of the things in the budget — in the past we’ve given money away as charitable donations — but we can’t do that this year.“The taxpayers in this town deserve to have leaders who will fight for them,” Flanagan continued, “no matter what pressure comes or how it comes to them.”
Shibley’s campaign promises were similar to Flanagan’s, he said. “This is not an easy budget,” he admitted. “People are making concessions, but they can make that work. We have to hold the line on taxes.”Spear recognized the two sides of the table, he said, and came to a decision after many hours of thought and prayer, bearing in mind his years of background and experience.“Our obligations for tomorrow are already extended beyond reasonable and responsible levels of expectation, resources and funding,” he said in a prepared address. “This requires the necessity to deal with all related factors on a short term of expanding commitment, more careful and responsible planning, and based on more stable assurance that the funding ability to meet such commitments can be reasonably and responsibly met.”Implicit in his remarks, Spear made clear later, was disapproval of the newly negotiated school contract that the school committee will consider this week.“Let us not reach beyond that which we can responsibly control and commit to, based on the facts of today, as we strive to meet our needs and wants of our tomorrows,” he continued.“With these thoughts in mind, I find it necessary, appropriate, and in the best interest of the taxpayers of the community of Coventry, to set forth the programs and services for fiscal 2010 as established in the budget that herewith presented.”
When Spear moved the question so the council could vote on the matter, a resident in the audience made a point of order. She wanted to comment on the budget before the council voted, she said.This was not the appropriate forum, said Spear. “We have had four to six workshops on this budget where you could have commented,” he said. “Now we are going to finish the council’s business and public comment will be after we vote.”The auditorium erupted with shouts, boos and attempts to speak. The auditorium at the Town Hall Annex, the old Flat River Road Middle School, was filled with at least 200 residents who had come to weigh in on the budget. Teachers, veterans, seniors, members of local sports associations, and residents of every political persuasion were there to have their say.But this was not the forum, insisted Spear, even as Hyde challenged him, yelling and waving his arms. Spear took a short recess and allowed the police and town sergeant to quiet the meeting attendees.When the meeting opened back up, the audience began to chant, “let us speak, let us speak, let us speak,” along with claps and stomps.“You have your opportunity to speak at the Financial Town Meeting,” Spear said. “You have had your time to speak at our work sessions. This is not a public hearing and there is no public comment on this item.”
Shibley made a motion to accept the budget, Flanagan seconded it, and the budget passed with a vote of 3-2, Hyde and Cloutier dissenting.In the public comment that followed, the council received both accolades and criticism. But, almost universally, taxpayers were disappointed that the council had not allowed them an opportunity to speak before the budget was voted on.
KCT article on School Committee's passage of new teacher contract:
New teacher contract passed
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — The Coventry School Committee entered into a new three-year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance on Tuesday night with a vote of 5-0.
Passage of the contract was not originally the plan for the evening, Chairwoman Katherine Patenaude said, but after hearing from the public and gaining a consensus that the whole school committee was ready to vote, she was ready to take the vote.“Because there was public notice previously that we were having the discussion I think that people who really wanted to know more about it could have made it out to the meeting,” she said. “The people who were there had their say.”The contract, as outlined by Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro represents a cut of approximately $2,210 per teacher over the next year and will save roughly $1 million in the first year.
The first year of the contract is frozen at the 2008-2009 salary schedule, the second year gives every teacher a flat raise of $500 and the third year each step receives a 2 percent increase. When that 2 percent increase comes in, DiPietro said, salaries will still be lower than they would have been just in 2009-2010, had the previous contract continued through to the end of next year. In addition to salary concessions, DiPietro said, some other concessions in the contract included freezing advanced degree increments, curriculum coordinator stipends, coaches stipends, co-curricular club stipends, and hourly professional development rates at the 2007-2008 schedules, DiPietro said. These will be frozen until 2012. Longevity rates were increased, given a flat increase all three years, he added.Through negotiations, the contract also contains language to specify the appropriate uses of advisory, the acceptable uses of common planning time, and the protocol for closing a school. “People say that contracts never talk about students and making a school better,” DiPietro said. “This one does. It puts requirements and expectations on planning time for teachers. And it gives checklists for teachers monitoring their students’ graduation portfolio and capstone projects. I don’t think most districts have these things written into their contracts.”
The contract does give teachers a health insurance contribution freeze, DiPietro said. But the freeze is only in effect for Fiscal Years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. In 2011/2012 the full 15 percent co-pay will be reinstated. Teachers will be given a $350 reimbursement for purchasing instructional materials, DiPietro said. This funding will come from the supplies lines in the budget.A major give-back that the school committee gave the teachers is a limited layoff provision, DiPietro said. “Tenured teachers with four years of service in Coventry are not subject to layoff,” he said in his presentation. Currently there are only 20 to 30 teachers in Coventry who would be eligible for layoff until the contract is ended. While several teachers and residents did speak in favor of the contract, several residents spoke against it.One resident who identified himself as Joe Brown was not satisfied with DiPietro’s presentation of the budget. “I have to be honest, I’m real confused,” he said. “That’s a lot of information. It looks to me like there is a lot of fluff in the teachers’ salaries with the step increases and I don’t think you’re giving us an accurate picture.”DiPietro did not explain the step increases. “You’re amazingly disrespectful, Mr. Brown,” he said. “You’re accusing me of giving you incorrect information and I am not, these are the numbers.”
The school committee was interested in questions, Patenaude added. “If you have a question, we’ll answer it. Your opinions are not what we are interested in. If you want to stay for public comment you may do so.”Brown requested that the school committee try one more time to go back and get further concessions from the union.“Mr. Brown,” Patenaude responded. “We have met with the unions and we have done our job.”“So you’re satisfied?” Brown asked.“Yes,” Patenaude responded. The answer to the request of more concessions would be “no,” said President of the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance Kelly Erinakas after Brown’s question.“The school committee did what they were asked to and negotiated,” she said. “So did the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance. Members are giving up $2,700 each next year. That’s a lot out of anyone’s pocket and no, you cannot get more.”
Town Republican Committee Chair Charles Vacca asked for a figure of the cost of this contract over the next few years.Coming up with a specific number of the cost involves too many factors, DiPietro told him. The contract will cost an additional $1 million more in health care alone, and many other things will weigh in. Entering a contract without knowing the financial forecast of the town concerned him, Vacca said. “This whole system has a pitfall where we enter into contracts before we know what funds we will have.”
Having closed discussion, the school committee voted unanimously to accept the contract. Yesterday morning, Patenaude was still satisfied with the new contract, she said. “The people who really have their ear to the ground so to speak on what’s going on with contracts in the town knew the details already because we had shared them with the town council the day before,” she said. “[Council President Raymond Spear] showed up and didn’t have any questions, we certainly didn’t get any other calls from people saying ‘what are you thinking?’ And [Councilman] Frank Hyde came to the meeting and commended us for signing the contract.”
Monday, June 1, 2009
Meetings
Land Trust 6/2:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4244/2009/74733.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 6/2:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/74736.pdf
Zoning Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/74273.pdf
Library Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4245/2009/74517.pdf
Board of Canvassers June 8th:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/74532.pdf
The FTM is now scheduled for June 30th.
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4244/2009/74733.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 6/2:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/74736.pdf
Zoning Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/74273.pdf
Library Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4245/2009/74517.pdf
Board of Canvassers June 8th:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/74532.pdf
The FTM is now scheduled for June 30th.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Town Budget
This may not be a good year to propose a tax increase. WW voted their budget down last night. See article from the KC Times:
WW residents vote down budgets
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
hclarkin@ricentral.com
WEST WARWICK — Taxpayers defeated the municipal budget, school budget, and voted down any tax levy with a resounding majority at the Town Financial Meeting last night.
Of the 416 voters counted by the West Warwick Board of Canvassers in a ballot vote, 333 voted against the municipal budget presented by the town council at $30,512,700, a majority in a standing vote defeated the school department budget of $49,269,685, and all but three people voted down a motion to keep the tax levy the same as it was last year.With nearly three times the attendance of last year’s financial town meeting, the meeting began at 7 p.m. and did not let out until 10:45 p.m. In his opening remarks Council President David Gosselin appealed to the taxpayers of West Warwick for help by supporting the budget. “We are in the perfect storm and this is a wave we need to get through and a wave we will overcome you’re your support tonight,” he said.But multiple residents criticized the council and the school committee for coming to them with a budget that included a 4.75 percent increase in a time of economic difficulty. More than one resident warned the council that an increase in taxes would push them into foreclosure on their home.
Seniors and other residents of fixed incomes voiced the same concerns. A comment from resident Alan Johnson drew applause and cheers from the audience when he told town leadership that they would never have better attendance at their meetings until they started running the town differently. “Until you learn how to handle department heads, pensions, and health insurance, they’re not going to come to your meetings because they don’t believe that they can make a difference,” he said. Although School Committee Chairwoman Lindagay Palazzo introduced the school budget for Fiscal Year 2010 as a victory of recent history, coming in at $3,645,140 less than the allocation the schools requested last year, the residents voted it down. The resolution regarding the tax levy was originally worded to allow for a 4.75 increase in the tax levy, but when he presented it, Councilman Peter Calci set the figure at the fiscal year 2009 tax levy, in an effort to prevent any increase in taxes. It was voted down in spite of this adjustment.Even if the levy stayed at the 2009 level, Beattie said, there would still be an increase in taxes because the state has changed motor vehicle taxes and money is apportioned differently in the town this year.
By voting down the budgets for 2010, Council President David Gosselin said at the end of the meeting, the taxpayers chose a municipal and a school budget that are higher than the ones proposed for this year. The $2.2 million increase in the fiscal year 2010 budget, Gosselin said, was to close the gap left by losses in state aid and other local revenues and by the new settlement payments for the Station Fire, the actual budgets presented by the schools and the municipal government represented a decrease in operating expenses. Leaving the Town Financial Meeting, residents expressed confusion about what would happen next.Even as tax assessor, Beattie wasn’t sure, he said. “Both the budget and the tax levy have not been voted down for at least the last thirty years,” he said on his way out of the meeting. “I have no idea what comes next. As far as I know we’re not even authorized to send out tax bills.”
The Home Rule Charter does speak to this situation, according to Town Solicitor Gregory S. Inman, who provided legal counsel during the meeting. In Section 504, “Failure to complete the budget,” the council is direct that “in the event that the budget shall not have received final approval by the start of the fiscal year, the departments, officials and agencies of the town shall have the authority to continue making expenditures at the rates authorized in the budget of the previous fiscal year until such a time as a new budget shall have been approved,” the charter reads.
Unlike many municipalities, Inman said, West Warwick is not required to take any further action. They may continue to operate until the fiscal year 2009 budget if they see fit. They do have the option, he added, under the West Warwick Special Acts Code, to call an all-day referendum to vote on an amended budget that is lower than the amount proposed that was voted down, or to call another Financial Town Meeting and try for any amount by presenting warrants. “But there is no time frame,” Inman said. “Nothing bars them from [continuing with last year’s amount.]”
The voters did look favorably upon two of the five warrants read at the Town Financial Meeting. They voted to allow the town to pay bills that come in after the fiscal year is over, as long as they were for items that fell within the fiscal year 2009 budget. They also voted to allow the school department to spend any federal or state funding that they are awarded over the next fiscal year.
WW residents vote down budgets
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
hclarkin@ricentral.com
WEST WARWICK — Taxpayers defeated the municipal budget, school budget, and voted down any tax levy with a resounding majority at the Town Financial Meeting last night.
Of the 416 voters counted by the West Warwick Board of Canvassers in a ballot vote, 333 voted against the municipal budget presented by the town council at $30,512,700, a majority in a standing vote defeated the school department budget of $49,269,685, and all but three people voted down a motion to keep the tax levy the same as it was last year.With nearly three times the attendance of last year’s financial town meeting, the meeting began at 7 p.m. and did not let out until 10:45 p.m. In his opening remarks Council President David Gosselin appealed to the taxpayers of West Warwick for help by supporting the budget. “We are in the perfect storm and this is a wave we need to get through and a wave we will overcome you’re your support tonight,” he said.But multiple residents criticized the council and the school committee for coming to them with a budget that included a 4.75 percent increase in a time of economic difficulty. More than one resident warned the council that an increase in taxes would push them into foreclosure on their home.
Seniors and other residents of fixed incomes voiced the same concerns. A comment from resident Alan Johnson drew applause and cheers from the audience when he told town leadership that they would never have better attendance at their meetings until they started running the town differently. “Until you learn how to handle department heads, pensions, and health insurance, they’re not going to come to your meetings because they don’t believe that they can make a difference,” he said. Although School Committee Chairwoman Lindagay Palazzo introduced the school budget for Fiscal Year 2010 as a victory of recent history, coming in at $3,645,140 less than the allocation the schools requested last year, the residents voted it down. The resolution regarding the tax levy was originally worded to allow for a 4.75 increase in the tax levy, but when he presented it, Councilman Peter Calci set the figure at the fiscal year 2009 tax levy, in an effort to prevent any increase in taxes. It was voted down in spite of this adjustment.Even if the levy stayed at the 2009 level, Beattie said, there would still be an increase in taxes because the state has changed motor vehicle taxes and money is apportioned differently in the town this year.
By voting down the budgets for 2010, Council President David Gosselin said at the end of the meeting, the taxpayers chose a municipal and a school budget that are higher than the ones proposed for this year. The $2.2 million increase in the fiscal year 2010 budget, Gosselin said, was to close the gap left by losses in state aid and other local revenues and by the new settlement payments for the Station Fire, the actual budgets presented by the schools and the municipal government represented a decrease in operating expenses. Leaving the Town Financial Meeting, residents expressed confusion about what would happen next.Even as tax assessor, Beattie wasn’t sure, he said. “Both the budget and the tax levy have not been voted down for at least the last thirty years,” he said on his way out of the meeting. “I have no idea what comes next. As far as I know we’re not even authorized to send out tax bills.”
The Home Rule Charter does speak to this situation, according to Town Solicitor Gregory S. Inman, who provided legal counsel during the meeting. In Section 504, “Failure to complete the budget,” the council is direct that “in the event that the budget shall not have received final approval by the start of the fiscal year, the departments, officials and agencies of the town shall have the authority to continue making expenditures at the rates authorized in the budget of the previous fiscal year until such a time as a new budget shall have been approved,” the charter reads.
Unlike many municipalities, Inman said, West Warwick is not required to take any further action. They may continue to operate until the fiscal year 2009 budget if they see fit. They do have the option, he added, under the West Warwick Special Acts Code, to call an all-day referendum to vote on an amended budget that is lower than the amount proposed that was voted down, or to call another Financial Town Meeting and try for any amount by presenting warrants. “But there is no time frame,” Inman said. “Nothing bars them from [continuing with last year’s amount.]”
The voters did look favorably upon two of the five warrants read at the Town Financial Meeting. They voted to allow the town to pay bills that come in after the fiscal year is over, as long as they were for items that fell within the fiscal year 2009 budget. They also voted to allow the school department to spend any federal or state funding that they are awarded over the next fiscal year.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Busy Meeting Week
There's a lot of meeting activity this coming week:
Town Council May 18. Please note the location of the meeting:
Town Hall Annex Auditorium
1675 Flat River Road, Coventry, RI
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/74156.pdf
Board of Canvassars May 19:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/73207.pdf
Town of Coventry Animal Control, vicious dog hearing May 19:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/3763/2009/74005.pdf
Housing Authority May 20:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4242/2009/74022.pdf
Planning Commission May 20:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/74029.pdf
Town Council May 18. Please note the location of the meeting:
Town Hall Annex Auditorium
1675 Flat River Road, Coventry, RI
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/74156.pdf
Board of Canvassars May 19:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/73207.pdf
Town of Coventry Animal Control, vicious dog hearing May 19:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/3763/2009/74005.pdf
Housing Authority May 20:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4242/2009/74022.pdf
Planning Commission May 20:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/74029.pdf
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Thomas Jefferson Quotes
I received an e-mail with some T. Jefferson quotes which I found interesting.
John Kennedy once said to a assembled group of scholars in the White House "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."
The quotes below could prove his point.
His words have come to pass..................
The quotes --
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe .
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
These are all quotes attributed to Mr. Jefferson. See also http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasjeff109181.html
John Kennedy once said to a assembled group of scholars in the White House "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."
The quotes below could prove his point.
His words have come to pass..................
The quotes --
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe .
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
These are all quotes attributed to Mr. Jefferson. See also http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasjeff109181.html
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Letter to the Editor
Posting an LTE written by Joel Johnson that appeared in the KC Times on 05/11/09.
Time for Creative Thinking in Coventry
Based on the initial reaction of the School Committee to the suggestion by the Town Council that their budget might be level-funded for FY 2009-10, it appears that very little thought went into how to meet that challenge while having the least effect on the education received by the town’s school children. Instead, the School Committee chose to trot out the same old, tired list of threatened cuts that every school committee has held over the heads of frightened parents for at least the past 40 years: “We’ll have to cut sports!, We’ll have to cut extra-curricular activities!, We’ll have to eliminate ROTC!, We’ll have to close a school!” - all the while feigning incredulity. Oh so predictable, oh so disingenuous.
There is no doubt that the Town of Coventry pays a premium to have its children educated. Asking the school department to absorb what amounts to only a 3% cut to its increased funding request (while the municipal side is being told to brace for what amounts to a 10% cut below the current level of funding) is, under the circumstances, getting off easy. To claim that “It can’t be done!” implies an admitted lack of creativity and/or laziness on the part of the School Committee and the administration. I choose to believe that isn’t the case. Rather, I believe that Superintendent Di Pietro is more than up to the challenge of meeting the goal set before him by the Town Council. No one can dispute that he’s a smart, savvy individual who knows his way around a budget dilemma. It’s now time for him to prove his worth and deliver the goods.
Please stop the hysteria! It is time that the taxpayers of Coventry demand that their elected School Committee representatives stop the bellyaching and do what is prudent and justifiable in light of the current financial challenges facing our town, state and nation. Furthermore, this can be accomplished without having to plead their case while groveling at the feet of the Coventry Teachers Alliance. Renegotiating that contract at this point is a bad idea, completely unnecessary and, in the long term, counter-productive. To do so now would be tantamount to merely “kicking the can down the road”. Past experience would indicate that every dollar in union “concessions” would likely yield two or more dollars in additional costs somewhere down the line - thus, shouldering the Coventry taxpayer with an even bigger burden in the future.
Enough is enough. No tax rate increase in Coventry is possible. Dedicated public officials can make it a reality if they choose to do so. Taxpayers should thank them for it.
Joel Johnson
Coventry, Rhode Island
Time for Creative Thinking in Coventry
Based on the initial reaction of the School Committee to the suggestion by the Town Council that their budget might be level-funded for FY 2009-10, it appears that very little thought went into how to meet that challenge while having the least effect on the education received by the town’s school children. Instead, the School Committee chose to trot out the same old, tired list of threatened cuts that every school committee has held over the heads of frightened parents for at least the past 40 years: “We’ll have to cut sports!, We’ll have to cut extra-curricular activities!, We’ll have to eliminate ROTC!, We’ll have to close a school!” - all the while feigning incredulity. Oh so predictable, oh so disingenuous.
There is no doubt that the Town of Coventry pays a premium to have its children educated. Asking the school department to absorb what amounts to only a 3% cut to its increased funding request (while the municipal side is being told to brace for what amounts to a 10% cut below the current level of funding) is, under the circumstances, getting off easy. To claim that “It can’t be done!” implies an admitted lack of creativity and/or laziness on the part of the School Committee and the administration. I choose to believe that isn’t the case. Rather, I believe that Superintendent Di Pietro is more than up to the challenge of meeting the goal set before him by the Town Council. No one can dispute that he’s a smart, savvy individual who knows his way around a budget dilemma. It’s now time for him to prove his worth and deliver the goods.
Please stop the hysteria! It is time that the taxpayers of Coventry demand that their elected School Committee representatives stop the bellyaching and do what is prudent and justifiable in light of the current financial challenges facing our town, state and nation. Furthermore, this can be accomplished without having to plead their case while groveling at the feet of the Coventry Teachers Alliance. Renegotiating that contract at this point is a bad idea, completely unnecessary and, in the long term, counter-productive. To do so now would be tantamount to merely “kicking the can down the road”. Past experience would indicate that every dollar in union “concessions” would likely yield two or more dollars in additional costs somewhere down the line - thus, shouldering the Coventry taxpayer with an even bigger burden in the future.
Enough is enough. No tax rate increase in Coventry is possible. Dedicated public officials can make it a reality if they choose to do so. Taxpayers should thank them for it.
Joel Johnson
Coventry, Rhode Island
Upcoming Meetings
Conservation Board 5/12:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4239/2009/73658.pdf
School Committee 5/12:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/73675.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 5/12:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/73742.pdf
Board of Canvassors 5/19:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/73207.pdf
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4239/2009/73658.pdf
School Committee 5/12:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/73675.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 5/12:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/73742.pdf
Board of Canvassors 5/19:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/73207.pdf
Monday, May 11, 2009
Clarification from Coumcil Member
Forwarding an e-mail from TC Vice Pres. Laura Flanagan that clarifies her previous memo on proposing a zero property tax increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Everyone,
I wanted to take a moment and provide clarity to a point raised in the below e-mail. My e-mail is not intended to imply, nor should it be construed to mean, that the Superintendent concurs with my opinion, but is to say that I have had the opportunity to ask questions of him in person, and have taken his views into account, as well as the views of many others, before formulating an opinion. I am convinced that we all share a common goal… the desire for an excellent educational system for our children, provided at the most cost effective/efficient manner.
That said, I remain convinced that a 3% reduction in the School Budget (level funding) could be accomplished with a minimal impact on children’s programs. As I mentioned, it would involve “sacrifice”. I arrive at that opinion, in large part, due to the knowledge that the increase in this year’s budget is primarily due to salaries and benefits. Despite all of the rumors and speculation you may hear, I do not believe that level funding will destroy Coventry’s educational system if we create efficiency and seek some amount of sacrifice!
I continue to be interested in the thoughts of all Coventry taxpayers as to an increase in our property tax levy, as we draw nearer to the adoption of a FY 09-10 Budget and I hope everyone has a fantastic weekend!
Warmest regards,
Laura
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Everyone,
I wanted to take a moment and provide clarity to a point raised in the below e-mail. My e-mail is not intended to imply, nor should it be construed to mean, that the Superintendent concurs with my opinion, but is to say that I have had the opportunity to ask questions of him in person, and have taken his views into account, as well as the views of many others, before formulating an opinion. I am convinced that we all share a common goal… the desire for an excellent educational system for our children, provided at the most cost effective/efficient manner.
That said, I remain convinced that a 3% reduction in the School Budget (level funding) could be accomplished with a minimal impact on children’s programs. As I mentioned, it would involve “sacrifice”. I arrive at that opinion, in large part, due to the knowledge that the increase in this year’s budget is primarily due to salaries and benefits. Despite all of the rumors and speculation you may hear, I do not believe that level funding will destroy Coventry’s educational system if we create efficiency and seek some amount of sacrifice!
I continue to be interested in the thoughts of all Coventry taxpayers as to an increase in our property tax levy, as we draw nearer to the adoption of a FY 09-10 Budget and I hope everyone has a fantastic weekend!
Warmest regards,
Laura
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Message Regarding Property Taxes
I received an e-mail from TC Vice President Laura Flanagan, see below. I could use a break on my property taxes and support a zero increase this year if it's at all possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want to pay more in property tax to protect the “status quo” and continue “business as usual”?
ANSWER: (please provide your thoughts with as much, or as little, detail as you are comfortable with)
Okay, so here’s the scoop. The Town Council is fairly close to closing in on a budget for 09-10 that calls for a ZERO tax increase for property owners! As you can imagine, achieving this result was very difficult and the UNIONS are lobbying hard against this proposal spreading gross exaggerations of the impact on “our children”. I have personally met with the Superintendent of Schools and I believe the schools can be level funded with minimal impact to children’s programs. There will be changes that create efficiency, and some sacrifice. We have already made proposals to reduce the Town budget by over 10%. We are only asking 3% from the schools.
I can assure you that our sons and daughters will not be jobless, homeless or unable to compete in our world in the future because the 2009 Town Council asked the school to reduce it’s budget by 3%! 3% of a $64 Million budget in the midst of the worst recession we have seen since the Great Depression is not an unreasonable reduction request.
SPREAD THE WORD.
Two points here.
1) As taxpayers, you have a VOICE. It’s time that the Town Council and School Committee heard directly from the voters who elected them! We have had ENOUGH of high taxes with no end in sight!
2) If ordinary taxpayers remain silent, the only voices being heard are those with a special interest….. and taxes WILL GO UP.
What can you do to support a ZERO tax increase this year?
1) Answer the question above and send this e-mail to at least 10 people you know in Coventry concerned about their tax bill. Please ask them to share their thoughts on this matter and send it along to 10 people they know, repeating the same process.
2) In your request, ensure that a cc: is sent to me at megsmile38@gmail.com
MARK YOUR CALENDARS AND ATTEND THE FINANCIAL TOWN MEETING ON JUNE 9TH TO BE HELD IN THE HIGH SCHOOL AUDITORIUM AND TELL YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS YOU WILL NOT BEAR ANOTHER TAX INCREASE! COVENTRY NEEDS TO MOVE IN A NEW DIRECTION.
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
District 2
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."- Margaret Mead
16 Knotty Oak Lane
Coventry, RI 02816
megsmile38@gmail.com
(401) 378-3566
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want to pay more in property tax to protect the “status quo” and continue “business as usual”?
ANSWER: (please provide your thoughts with as much, or as little, detail as you are comfortable with)
Okay, so here’s the scoop. The Town Council is fairly close to closing in on a budget for 09-10 that calls for a ZERO tax increase for property owners! As you can imagine, achieving this result was very difficult and the UNIONS are lobbying hard against this proposal spreading gross exaggerations of the impact on “our children”. I have personally met with the Superintendent of Schools and I believe the schools can be level funded with minimal impact to children’s programs. There will be changes that create efficiency, and some sacrifice. We have already made proposals to reduce the Town budget by over 10%. We are only asking 3% from the schools.
I can assure you that our sons and daughters will not be jobless, homeless or unable to compete in our world in the future because the 2009 Town Council asked the school to reduce it’s budget by 3%! 3% of a $64 Million budget in the midst of the worst recession we have seen since the Great Depression is not an unreasonable reduction request.
SPREAD THE WORD.
Two points here.
1) As taxpayers, you have a VOICE. It’s time that the Town Council and School Committee heard directly from the voters who elected them! We have had ENOUGH of high taxes with no end in sight!
2) If ordinary taxpayers remain silent, the only voices being heard are those with a special interest….. and taxes WILL GO UP.
What can you do to support a ZERO tax increase this year?
1) Answer the question above and send this e-mail to at least 10 people you know in Coventry concerned about their tax bill. Please ask them to share their thoughts on this matter and send it along to 10 people they know, repeating the same process.
2) In your request, ensure that a cc: is sent to me at megsmile38@gmail.com
MARK YOUR CALENDARS AND ATTEND THE FINANCIAL TOWN MEETING ON JUNE 9TH TO BE HELD IN THE HIGH SCHOOL AUDITORIUM AND TELL YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS YOU WILL NOT BEAR ANOTHER TAX INCREASE! COVENTRY NEEDS TO MOVE IN A NEW DIRECTION.
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
District 2
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."- Margaret Mead
16 Knotty Oak Lane
Coventry, RI 02816
megsmile38@gmail.com
(401) 378-3566
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Meetings this week
TC 04/27/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/73055.pdf
SC 04/28/09 - Executive Session:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/72958.pdf
Tax Assessment Review 04/28/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/73101.pdf
Next week - Zoning, May 6th:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/72770.pdf
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/73055.pdf
SC 04/28/09 - Executive Session:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/72958.pdf
Tax Assessment Review 04/28/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/73101.pdf
Next week - Zoning, May 6th:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/72770.pdf
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Proposed Board/Commission Appointment Procedure
Sorry, I do not favor this ordinance as proposed. It gives too much power/control to the chairs of the local Democrat and Republican parties. There is no provision for any resident, whether they are a D, R or unaffiliated to directly submit their name to the town for committee positions. If a resident is a member of a certain party and is not on good terms with that party's chair then the resident would have a slim chance of being nominated for a board position. The ordinance calls for representation on these boards by both major parties but is silent on how independents are to be represented. I fear that many qualified residents who are unaffiliated, who would like to serve or are presently serving on town committees will not want to go through the party chairs as part of this new application process. If the TC insists on passing this new ordinance, I hope they will at least include some provision for direct submission of applications from the public and also state the extent to which unaffiliated residents will be represented on boards.
Council revisits repealed dictate
Wednesday, 15 April 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — An ordinance to maintain bi-partisan membership on town-council appointed bodies provoked a lengthy discussion at the Monday night council meeting.
The ordinance, drafted by Town Solicitor Patrick Rogers at the request of the council, requires that minority parties in the town be represented on every town body over which the council has authority. The boards would not be repopulated upon the passage of the ordinance, it stipulates. Rather, as openings come up, the council will request a list of three names from the chair of the majority and minority parties in the town. One minority party would be required on a body with three members; two out of a membership of five; three out of a membership of seven; four out of a membership of nine; and so on, the draft of the ordinance reads.Residents interested in serving on one of these bodies would submit their applications to the chairpersons of the majority and minority committees, who would then provide the council with a list of three names for each open position.
This proposal would restore an ordinance that was repealed within the last decade, Rogers said at the meeting. The intent of the ordinance, Rogers said, “is to insure that there is representation of all views, especially the minority party,” and speaking to the current minority, he added, “The shoe could be on the other foot.”Whatever majority is on the council will be automatically reflected in the makeup of these bodies, if this ordinance is approved, according to Council Vice-President Raymond Spear. There was a reason that this ordinance was repealed in the past, Councilman Frank Hyde, said during council discussion, indicating that he did not think restoring this ordinance was necessary. This ordinance would make it very difficult for independent or unaffiliated residents to find a place on town committees, commented resident Wayne Asselin. He likes the easy access of the current process, Asselin said, where anyone in the community can submit an application to the council and be interviewed.
As the ordinance was written on Monday, the minority and majority party chairs would be the “funnel” through which all applicants would go, Rogers said. If the council so desired, he can rewrite it to represent a third-way for independents and unaffiliated applicants to get appointments without going to a party chair.The council voted 3-1 to pass the ordinance on its first reading; Hyde dissented.While they did pass the first reading, Rogers expects that the ordinance will be reworked before it reaches its second reading and will have to be advertised again.“The town council is committed to bi-partisanship and balance on all of the town of Coventry Boards and commissions and very much wants to include independents and all non affiliated voters on boards and commissions,” Rogers said. What the draft presented on Monday does not specifically provide is an easy mechanism for independents and non-affiliated to apply for these positions, Rogers said. “While they did a first passage on Monday, the council wants to see some substantial changes to accomplish the goals that I just outlined. We’re going to have to go back to the drawing board to accomplish that goal so when it comes before the council next time it will be a substantially new draft.”
There are currently 22 unfilled positions on town bodies, said Council Vice-Chair Raymond Spear on Monday night. Not all the bodies currently represent both majority and minority parties, he added.Coming up with 66 names each is a tall order, said Republican Committee Chair Charles Vacca and Democratic Party Chair Rick Kalunian, respectively. If the council wants to fill all those positions immediately after an ordinance is passed, Vacca and Kalunian will be responsible for coming up with 132 names.
Council revisits repealed dictate
Wednesday, 15 April 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — An ordinance to maintain bi-partisan membership on town-council appointed bodies provoked a lengthy discussion at the Monday night council meeting.
The ordinance, drafted by Town Solicitor Patrick Rogers at the request of the council, requires that minority parties in the town be represented on every town body over which the council has authority. The boards would not be repopulated upon the passage of the ordinance, it stipulates. Rather, as openings come up, the council will request a list of three names from the chair of the majority and minority parties in the town. One minority party would be required on a body with three members; two out of a membership of five; three out of a membership of seven; four out of a membership of nine; and so on, the draft of the ordinance reads.Residents interested in serving on one of these bodies would submit their applications to the chairpersons of the majority and minority committees, who would then provide the council with a list of three names for each open position.
This proposal would restore an ordinance that was repealed within the last decade, Rogers said at the meeting. The intent of the ordinance, Rogers said, “is to insure that there is representation of all views, especially the minority party,” and speaking to the current minority, he added, “The shoe could be on the other foot.”Whatever majority is on the council will be automatically reflected in the makeup of these bodies, if this ordinance is approved, according to Council Vice-President Raymond Spear. There was a reason that this ordinance was repealed in the past, Councilman Frank Hyde, said during council discussion, indicating that he did not think restoring this ordinance was necessary. This ordinance would make it very difficult for independent or unaffiliated residents to find a place on town committees, commented resident Wayne Asselin. He likes the easy access of the current process, Asselin said, where anyone in the community can submit an application to the council and be interviewed.
As the ordinance was written on Monday, the minority and majority party chairs would be the “funnel” through which all applicants would go, Rogers said. If the council so desired, he can rewrite it to represent a third-way for independents and unaffiliated applicants to get appointments without going to a party chair.The council voted 3-1 to pass the ordinance on its first reading; Hyde dissented.While they did pass the first reading, Rogers expects that the ordinance will be reworked before it reaches its second reading and will have to be advertised again.“The town council is committed to bi-partisanship and balance on all of the town of Coventry Boards and commissions and very much wants to include independents and all non affiliated voters on boards and commissions,” Rogers said. What the draft presented on Monday does not specifically provide is an easy mechanism for independents and non-affiliated to apply for these positions, Rogers said. “While they did a first passage on Monday, the council wants to see some substantial changes to accomplish the goals that I just outlined. We’re going to have to go back to the drawing board to accomplish that goal so when it comes before the council next time it will be a substantially new draft.”
There are currently 22 unfilled positions on town bodies, said Council Vice-Chair Raymond Spear on Monday night. Not all the bodies currently represent both majority and minority parties, he added.Coming up with 66 names each is a tall order, said Republican Committee Chair Charles Vacca and Democratic Party Chair Rick Kalunian, respectively. If the council wants to fill all those positions immediately after an ordinance is passed, Vacca and Kalunian will be responsible for coming up with 132 names.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Thoughts on the Town Budget
Here are some ideas on the town budget by Town Council member Laura Flanagan. If anyone has ideas on how the town can save $$ please attend the public hearings on the municipal budget Wednesday 4/15 and the school budget Thurs. 4/16 and share them.
It is important for the taxpayers of Coventry to be educated and informed as to the finances of their town. I have long felt that our tax burden was too high and the underlying reasons for this burden were not being discussed with or disclosed to the community. Year after year, we have borne large increases, bringing us to a crossroad, the place we are today. I would submit to you that our community can no longer sustain such increases. During my campaign, and today, I was and remain committed to addressing the tax burden with conservative, fiscally sound decisions. I believe that my fellow council members are committed to this end, as well. The newly elected members of the Council share a love of Coventry and a desire to advocate for the taxpayers of the community. Further, they possess the tools, breadth of background, wisdom and knowledge necessary to take on the task before us.
It goes without saying, our national economy is in the midst of a difficult, long lasting recession that we have yet to see a clear way out of. “Why?” and “How?” many ask, did this occur. I would like to offer a brief, yet poignant answer, to this large question. As individuals, and as a society, we have lived well beyond our means for far too long. Today, we are brought the reality that we can no longer do so. As Rhode Islanders, we are all very much aware of the added stress this recession places on our own State’s economy, with unemployment and foreclosure rates at a height most of us have not seen in our lifetimes, and a State deficit that is staggering.
Here in Coventry, we are in the midst of the 2009/2010 budget cycle. Taxpayers will hear many things from many different special interests groups who are struggling to maintain the “status quo”. Some will say that this new council is being “dramatic” or that we are “alarmists”. Some will say that we have misrepresented the revenues and expenditures of our town to the public. Many groups will say that their departments are too important or too essential to take one dime less than they received last year. Some will say that it just isn’t fair. The truth of the matter is simple…. We must change the way local government operates in Coventry. We cannot continue down the same path, because we can no longer afford “business as usual”. By human nature, people are generally afraid of change. Comfort is found in the normal routines we have grown accustomed to. Even still, it is true that hard times and drastic measures can bring folks together, to brainstorm and think outside the box, resulting in a positive plan to move forward. We, as a community, should embrace the financial position we find ourselves in and allow it to move us in a positive direction, creating efficiency and using our innovation to become a better, wiser and more thoughtful community. It is clearly time to move Coventry in a new direction.
Our financial problems will not go away by hiding from them, masking them, creating paper numbers that are more attractive or by any other tool of avoidance. Positive change only comes when we stand willing to face and address problems squarely.
So, here is the challenge….
As a council, we received a proposed budget that called for approximately $5,500,000 in new money. This figure is arrived at for a number of reasons.
1) Governor Carcieri, and our state representatives, have indicated that there will be no state aid to towns and cities in fiscal year 2009/2010. This results in $847,000 in lost State Aid and Grants for Coventry.
2) The phase-out of excise automobile tax resulted in an additional loss of revenue to Coventry of approximately $500,000.
3) There have been declines in general Town revenues in the approximate amount of $598,000. These declines relate, in large part, to local economic conditions, consisting of reductions in land evidence recordings, building permits, licensing fees, interest on investments, among other things.
4) An additional structural deficit was created by the prior council through its use of $653,606 from the Town’s reserve fund to meet expenses in the 2008/2009 fiscal year.
These items, when aggregated, represent an approximate $2,600,000 deficit before new requests from the school or other departments are considered. The school has requested approximately $1,900,000 and municipal departments have requested approximately $1,000,000. $2,600,000 (deficit) plus $1,900,000 (requested from schools) plus $1,000,000 (requested by municipal departments) equals $5,500,000.
Senate Bill 3050 places a cap on the amount a municipality can raise in revenue from taxes. This year, the limit is 4.75% of last year’s levy, or approximately $2,807,610. (For budgeting purposes, we estimate a 98% rate of collection during the fiscal year, or $2,751,457.) It is important to note that the auto excise tax loss of $500,000 is added back, bringing the total maximum allowable increase on taxpayers to approximately $3,307,610, or an average 6% increase to property owners.
In simple terms, if the Council were inclined to raise taxes to the maximum amount, it would still lack over $2,000,000. ($5,500,000 (need) minus $3,300,000 in new, collected taxes equals $2,200,000).
I submit to you that a full increase on the taxpayers of Coventry is unacceptable. Folks in our community are struggling, some out of work, some with reduced hours, some facing foreclosures. Businesses are struggling as well, with a number being forced to close their doors. Our real estate market is seeing very little movement or growth, and there is an approximate 91 pupil decline in enrollment in our schools.
I would also suggest that taking from our reserve account to plug this whole is not a wise, or responsible, option. Our $5,000,000 reserve account is more than offset by debt primarily loaned out to the Sewer Enterprise Fund of approximately $5,500,000 in the form of tax anticipation notes. As you will note, this liability is larger than our cash reserves! If we dip into this fund, we can be fairly certain of a number of negative consequences:
1) We could face a significant increase in the interest rate on our debt (it currently stands at 5% but could increase to the maximum amount allowed under state law);
2) We would decrease our credit worthiness (our bond rating). A decrease here would make it costly to bond necessary projects in the future, and may even preclude us from issuing bonds, when appropriate.
3) We would create an additional structural deficit for the FY 2010-2011, only pushing today’s problems off to tomorrow. We cannot go into the next fiscal year creating deficit of over $2,000,000 before we are even out of the gate.
If our desire is to create a local economy that attracts young families and businesses to move into our community, we must work diligently to lower our tax burden. Lower taxes stimulate growth. Lower taxes give residents more money to put into their local economy. Lower taxes attract businesses that can further stimulate growth.
We simply must decrease our expenses and live within our means. This is certainly a large challenge and this Council has given our department heads a tough, but attainable, job to do. With the right attitude and by coming together as a community, I believe we can accomplish this task. If we do so, Coventry will indeed be better for it in the future.
Laura A. Flanagan
Councilwoman – District 2
Coventry
It is important for the taxpayers of Coventry to be educated and informed as to the finances of their town. I have long felt that our tax burden was too high and the underlying reasons for this burden were not being discussed with or disclosed to the community. Year after year, we have borne large increases, bringing us to a crossroad, the place we are today. I would submit to you that our community can no longer sustain such increases. During my campaign, and today, I was and remain committed to addressing the tax burden with conservative, fiscally sound decisions. I believe that my fellow council members are committed to this end, as well. The newly elected members of the Council share a love of Coventry and a desire to advocate for the taxpayers of the community. Further, they possess the tools, breadth of background, wisdom and knowledge necessary to take on the task before us.
It goes without saying, our national economy is in the midst of a difficult, long lasting recession that we have yet to see a clear way out of. “Why?” and “How?” many ask, did this occur. I would like to offer a brief, yet poignant answer, to this large question. As individuals, and as a society, we have lived well beyond our means for far too long. Today, we are brought the reality that we can no longer do so. As Rhode Islanders, we are all very much aware of the added stress this recession places on our own State’s economy, with unemployment and foreclosure rates at a height most of us have not seen in our lifetimes, and a State deficit that is staggering.
Here in Coventry, we are in the midst of the 2009/2010 budget cycle. Taxpayers will hear many things from many different special interests groups who are struggling to maintain the “status quo”. Some will say that this new council is being “dramatic” or that we are “alarmists”. Some will say that we have misrepresented the revenues and expenditures of our town to the public. Many groups will say that their departments are too important or too essential to take one dime less than they received last year. Some will say that it just isn’t fair. The truth of the matter is simple…. We must change the way local government operates in Coventry. We cannot continue down the same path, because we can no longer afford “business as usual”. By human nature, people are generally afraid of change. Comfort is found in the normal routines we have grown accustomed to. Even still, it is true that hard times and drastic measures can bring folks together, to brainstorm and think outside the box, resulting in a positive plan to move forward. We, as a community, should embrace the financial position we find ourselves in and allow it to move us in a positive direction, creating efficiency and using our innovation to become a better, wiser and more thoughtful community. It is clearly time to move Coventry in a new direction.
Our financial problems will not go away by hiding from them, masking them, creating paper numbers that are more attractive or by any other tool of avoidance. Positive change only comes when we stand willing to face and address problems squarely.
So, here is the challenge….
As a council, we received a proposed budget that called for approximately $5,500,000 in new money. This figure is arrived at for a number of reasons.
1) Governor Carcieri, and our state representatives, have indicated that there will be no state aid to towns and cities in fiscal year 2009/2010. This results in $847,000 in lost State Aid and Grants for Coventry.
2) The phase-out of excise automobile tax resulted in an additional loss of revenue to Coventry of approximately $500,000.
3) There have been declines in general Town revenues in the approximate amount of $598,000. These declines relate, in large part, to local economic conditions, consisting of reductions in land evidence recordings, building permits, licensing fees, interest on investments, among other things.
4) An additional structural deficit was created by the prior council through its use of $653,606 from the Town’s reserve fund to meet expenses in the 2008/2009 fiscal year.
These items, when aggregated, represent an approximate $2,600,000 deficit before new requests from the school or other departments are considered. The school has requested approximately $1,900,000 and municipal departments have requested approximately $1,000,000. $2,600,000 (deficit) plus $1,900,000 (requested from schools) plus $1,000,000 (requested by municipal departments) equals $5,500,000.
Senate Bill 3050 places a cap on the amount a municipality can raise in revenue from taxes. This year, the limit is 4.75% of last year’s levy, or approximately $2,807,610. (For budgeting purposes, we estimate a 98% rate of collection during the fiscal year, or $2,751,457.) It is important to note that the auto excise tax loss of $500,000 is added back, bringing the total maximum allowable increase on taxpayers to approximately $3,307,610, or an average 6% increase to property owners.
In simple terms, if the Council were inclined to raise taxes to the maximum amount, it would still lack over $2,000,000. ($5,500,000 (need) minus $3,300,000 in new, collected taxes equals $2,200,000).
I submit to you that a full increase on the taxpayers of Coventry is unacceptable. Folks in our community are struggling, some out of work, some with reduced hours, some facing foreclosures. Businesses are struggling as well, with a number being forced to close their doors. Our real estate market is seeing very little movement or growth, and there is an approximate 91 pupil decline in enrollment in our schools.
I would also suggest that taking from our reserve account to plug this whole is not a wise, or responsible, option. Our $5,000,000 reserve account is more than offset by debt primarily loaned out to the Sewer Enterprise Fund of approximately $5,500,000 in the form of tax anticipation notes. As you will note, this liability is larger than our cash reserves! If we dip into this fund, we can be fairly certain of a number of negative consequences:
1) We could face a significant increase in the interest rate on our debt (it currently stands at 5% but could increase to the maximum amount allowed under state law);
2) We would decrease our credit worthiness (our bond rating). A decrease here would make it costly to bond necessary projects in the future, and may even preclude us from issuing bonds, when appropriate.
3) We would create an additional structural deficit for the FY 2010-2011, only pushing today’s problems off to tomorrow. We cannot go into the next fiscal year creating deficit of over $2,000,000 before we are even out of the gate.
If our desire is to create a local economy that attracts young families and businesses to move into our community, we must work diligently to lower our tax burden. Lower taxes stimulate growth. Lower taxes give residents more money to put into their local economy. Lower taxes attract businesses that can further stimulate growth.
We simply must decrease our expenses and live within our means. This is certainly a large challenge and this Council has given our department heads a tough, but attainable, job to do. With the right attitude and by coming together as a community, I believe we can accomplish this task. If we do so, Coventry will indeed be better for it in the future.
Laura A. Flanagan
Councilwoman – District 2
Coventry
Friday, April 10, 2009
Meetings next week
Town Council 4/13/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/72411.pdf
School Committee 4/14/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/72325.pdf
Conservation Commission 04/14/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4239/2009/72088.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 04/14/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/72441.pdf
Housing Authority 4/15/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4242/2009/72425.pdf
I think there are public budget hearings on 4/15 and 4/16 but need to confirm.
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/72411.pdf
School Committee 4/14/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/72325.pdf
Conservation Commission 04/14/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4239/2009/72088.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 04/14/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/72441.pdf
Housing Authority 4/15/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4242/2009/72425.pdf
I think there are public budget hearings on 4/15 and 4/16 but need to confirm.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Yes, Please Re-work the Budget
Cov. council must rework budget
Tuesday, 07 April 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
hclarkin@ricentral.com
COVENTRY — The Coventry Town Council called for a complete reworking of the budget prepared by acting Town Manager Paul Sprague at their first work session with department heads on Monday night.
The council was under the impression that Sprague’s municipal and school budget required $3 million in new money, Council Vice-President Raymond Spear said. Upon reviewing the budget in more detail they learned that the proposed budget would require a number closer to $5.5 million to accomplish everything Sprague outlined. Roughly $2.5 million will be required next year, Spear said, just to compensate for losses in state aid, fees and the automotive car tax, among other things. “So there’s $2.5 million that we were not aware of.”Every department head was asked to go back and re-evaluate their needs for the coming fiscal year, Spear said. “We told them that if we level-funded the budget for next year that at the level that they’re spending this year we would still need to have the full maximum levy just to meet the lost revenue to the town.”
In an effort to avoid raising taxes to the full amount, Spear asked department heads to come up with budgets that are 10 percent lower than this year’s levels, he said. Sprague’s budget was balanced by drawing money out of the reserve fund, Spear said. However, because of loans made to the Coventry Sewer Project, most of the $5 million reserve is still loaned out and has not been paid back. The council has asked for revised budgets from department heads within the week, Spear said. “We asked them to tell [Sprague] to what extent they can [work with] a 10 percent decrease and then give us all the rationale for the maximum amount that they need.”The position the town is in is “drastic,” Spear said. “It may mean some loss of jobs. I don’t know, we’d like to hope not.”
At $22,943,415 on the municipal side, Sprague’s budget anticipated a full 4.75 increase in the tax levy, which would equal a 6 percent raise in taxes for residents, Spear said. The council is committed to moving forward with no tax increase for the next fiscal year, Spear said. “We thought level-funding budgets would do it; we have now learned that it won’t; now we have to look at budget cutbacks as a way to get the budget down. We are still shooting for no tax increase but we’re not sure what we can get.”
The meeting with municipal department heads was only the first of several work sessions before the budget is presented at a public hearing for residents of the town Spear said.The council will be meeting again tonight with the school committee and Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro to discuss the school budget, Spear said. In Sprague’s budget the schools were allotted $64,870,966, but that amount is not likely to be feasible this year, Spear said. “I have talked to [DiPietro] and told him that we cannot allow any increase in the budgets for next year,” Spear said. Because of maintenance of effort, the council cannot allot any less to the school department then they did last fiscal year, Spear said, but town legal council will be researching the specifics of that requirement.
The work session with the school committee is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. in the town council chambers at the Coventry town hall, Spear said. The public is welcome to attend.
Tuesday, 07 April 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
hclarkin@ricentral.com
COVENTRY — The Coventry Town Council called for a complete reworking of the budget prepared by acting Town Manager Paul Sprague at their first work session with department heads on Monday night.
The council was under the impression that Sprague’s municipal and school budget required $3 million in new money, Council Vice-President Raymond Spear said. Upon reviewing the budget in more detail they learned that the proposed budget would require a number closer to $5.5 million to accomplish everything Sprague outlined. Roughly $2.5 million will be required next year, Spear said, just to compensate for losses in state aid, fees and the automotive car tax, among other things. “So there’s $2.5 million that we were not aware of.”Every department head was asked to go back and re-evaluate their needs for the coming fiscal year, Spear said. “We told them that if we level-funded the budget for next year that at the level that they’re spending this year we would still need to have the full maximum levy just to meet the lost revenue to the town.”
In an effort to avoid raising taxes to the full amount, Spear asked department heads to come up with budgets that are 10 percent lower than this year’s levels, he said. Sprague’s budget was balanced by drawing money out of the reserve fund, Spear said. However, because of loans made to the Coventry Sewer Project, most of the $5 million reserve is still loaned out and has not been paid back. The council has asked for revised budgets from department heads within the week, Spear said. “We asked them to tell [Sprague] to what extent they can [work with] a 10 percent decrease and then give us all the rationale for the maximum amount that they need.”The position the town is in is “drastic,” Spear said. “It may mean some loss of jobs. I don’t know, we’d like to hope not.”
At $22,943,415 on the municipal side, Sprague’s budget anticipated a full 4.75 increase in the tax levy, which would equal a 6 percent raise in taxes for residents, Spear said. The council is committed to moving forward with no tax increase for the next fiscal year, Spear said. “We thought level-funding budgets would do it; we have now learned that it won’t; now we have to look at budget cutbacks as a way to get the budget down. We are still shooting for no tax increase but we’re not sure what we can get.”
The meeting with municipal department heads was only the first of several work sessions before the budget is presented at a public hearing for residents of the town Spear said.The council will be meeting again tonight with the school committee and Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro to discuss the school budget, Spear said. In Sprague’s budget the schools were allotted $64,870,966, but that amount is not likely to be feasible this year, Spear said. “I have talked to [DiPietro] and told him that we cannot allow any increase in the budgets for next year,” Spear said. Because of maintenance of effort, the council cannot allot any less to the school department then they did last fiscal year, Spear said, but town legal council will be researching the specifics of that requirement.
The work session with the school committee is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. in the town council chambers at the Coventry town hall, Spear said. The public is welcome to attend.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Upcoming Meetings
Town Council 4/6. Work session on municipal budget:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71933.pdf
Board of Tax Assessment Review 4/7:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/72055.pdf
Town Council 4/8. Work session on school budget:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71934.pdf
Zoning Board 4/8 at Town Hall Annex:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/71532.pdf
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/71718.pdf
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71933.pdf
Board of Tax Assessment Review 4/7:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/72055.pdf
Town Council 4/8. Work session on school budget:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71934.pdf
Zoning Board 4/8 at Town Hall Annex:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/71532.pdf
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/71718.pdf
Friday, March 20, 2009
Upcoming Meetings
School Committee March 21 1:00 pm Executive Session:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/71303.pdf
Town Council March 23 4:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71386.pdf
Town Council March 23 6:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71387.pdf
School Committee March 24 6:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/71306.pdf
Town Council March 25 10:00 am:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71388.pdf
Planning Commission March 25 7:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/71345.pdf
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/71303.pdf
Town Council March 23 4:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71386.pdf
Town Council March 23 6:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71387.pdf
School Committee March 24 6:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/71306.pdf
Town Council March 25 10:00 am:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/71388.pdf
Planning Commission March 25 7:00 pm:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/71345.pdf
Thursday, March 12, 2009
In God We (Should) Trust First
Jeremiah 17:5-10
5
Thus says the LORD: Cursed is the man who trusts in human beings, who seeks his strength in flesh, whose heart turns away from the LORD.
6
He is like a barren bush in the desert that enjoys no change of season, But stands in a lava waste, a salt and empty earth.
7
Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD, whose hope is the LORD.
8
He is like a tree planted beside the waters that stretches out its roots to the stream: It fears not the heat when it comes, its leaves stay green; In the year of drought it shows no distress, but still bears fruit.
9
More tortuous than all else is the human heart, beyond remedy; who can understand it?
10
I, the LORD, alone probe the mind and test the heart, To reward everyone according to his ways, according to the merit of his deeds.
When you trust people, corporations and other institutions first, sometimes not-so-good things happen:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29651773?GT1=43001
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29535417
5
Thus says the LORD: Cursed is the man who trusts in human beings, who seeks his strength in flesh, whose heart turns away from the LORD.
6
He is like a barren bush in the desert that enjoys no change of season, But stands in a lava waste, a salt and empty earth.
7
Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD, whose hope is the LORD.
8
He is like a tree planted beside the waters that stretches out its roots to the stream: It fears not the heat when it comes, its leaves stay green; In the year of drought it shows no distress, but still bears fruit.
9
More tortuous than all else is the human heart, beyond remedy; who can understand it?
10
I, the LORD, alone probe the mind and test the heart, To reward everyone according to his ways, according to the merit of his deeds.
When you trust people, corporations and other institutions first, sometimes not-so-good things happen:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29651773?GT1=43001
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29535417
Friday, March 6, 2009
Upcoming Meetings
Town Council 3/9/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/70674.pdf
School Committee 3/10/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/70653.pdf
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/70674.pdf
School Committee 3/10/09:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/70653.pdf
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Meetings This Week
Town meetings for this week -
Town Council Feb. 23 -
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/69959.pdf
School Dept. Feb.24 -
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/69824.pdf
Planning Commission Feb. 25:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/69980.pdf
Two items of interest: CONE and CVS
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING –Request to be Continued to the
March 25th meeting
Amended Master Plan: “Centre of New England Phase 6”; Commerce
Park Realty, LLC
28 Additional Residential Condominium Units
AP 6, Lots 3.1; Zone BP
Centre of New England Blvd
Pre-Application for Development Plan Review: “CVS Pharmacy”; CVS
Realty Co.
Proposed New Store
AP 38, Lots 105, 106 & 107; Zone GB
Tiogue Avenue & Wood Street
Town Council Feb. 23 -
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/69959.pdf
School Dept. Feb.24 -
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/69824.pdf
Planning Commission Feb. 25:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/69980.pdf
Two items of interest: CONE and CVS
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING –Request to be Continued to the
March 25th meeting
Amended Master Plan: “Centre of New England Phase 6”; Commerce
Park Realty, LLC
28 Additional Residential Condominium Units
AP 6, Lots 3.1; Zone BP
Centre of New England Blvd
Pre-Application for Development Plan Review: “CVS Pharmacy”; CVS
Realty Co.
Proposed New Store
AP 38, Lots 105, 106 & 107; Zone GB
Tiogue Avenue & Wood Street
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)