Today's Republican-American finally reported what many of us in political circles have known for several months now, the Independents main goal in the 2008 legislative elections was to line their own pockets. ("Independents Shared Wealth" - Penelope Overton)
I first reported on this issue back on 12/3, laying out how much money Larry DePillo and Mike Telesca received from Alderman Frank Burgio's campaign. (True Colors Of Independents - Green) But today's newspaper article shows that the self-serving goes much further then originally realized.
Mr. DePillo alone received a total $11,000 from the campaigns of Aldermen Burgio, Booker, and Denze. This is almost 10% of the $125,000 that the state provided for the three campaigns. Mr. Telesca also received a total of $6,000 from the three campaigns. That is a grand total of $17,000 out of $125,000 that went directly into the pockets of the men who founded the Independent party.
If this wasn't galling enough it was reported that the campaigns in question paid their poll standing crew for their efforts on election. Although none of this is illegal, the fact that most of these poll workers were family members of the candidates stinks worse then the sewage plant in the South End.
The men of the Independent Party try to tell us time and time again that they are looking out for the interests of the taxpayers of Waterbury, but all I see is the Independents looking out for the Independents.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
WAR OF WORDS
For the past month now there has been a rather heated exchange in the “Letter To The Editor” section of the Republican-American regarding the “accomplishments” of the Independent Party of Waterbury.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2008/12/14/letters/385931.txt
City's Independents are 'petty people' who pretend to lead. – Jason Van Stone
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2008/12/29/letters/388568.txt
Critic overlooked many achievements of Independents. – Frank A. Burgio Sr.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/03/letters/389291.txt
City's Independents unable to show any accomplishments. – Jason Van Stone
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/08/letters/390281.txt
Alderman's personal attacks on critic were untoward. – Allyson Modica
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/14/letters/391317.txt
Hypocrisy manifest in Republican's political critique. – Frank M. DePaola
Of the two responses from supporters of the Independents, Mr. DePaola’s in the most informed, providing examples of the Independent Party’s so-called “accomplishments”.
Unfortunately these “accomplishments” are also riddled with numerous inaccuracies that need to be addressed. Many of the projects listed in Mr. DePaola’s letter are mis-represented, mis-priced, or both. If the Independent Party wishes to serve the citizens of Waterbury, then it needs to make sure that everyone has the correct facts. Here are the facts, in no particular order.
First, with regards to the school-bonding project, there are several things that need correcting. There was no time where the city was considering spending $1 Billion dollars in one bonding package. The $1 Billion price tag that Mr. DePaola holds up was actually the proposed price of twelve phases of work, to be bonded in individual sections, over a decade or more, IF the city needed all of those projects. Some of these twelve phases have been scrapped, others have moved forward since the initial referendum of 2004. There was no $900 Million in savings, because there was never a single $1 Billion dollar bonding package.
In fact, the package that was approved by the Board of Aldermen in June of 2004, and by the citizens of Waterbury in that November’s referendum, was only slightly different from the package that was originally approved by the Board of Education. Mr. Theriault may have saved the city some money with his ideas, but those savings were negated by the Independent Party creating a delay in the construction process by forcing a referendum, and were nowhere near the $900 Million that Mr. DePaola suggests.
Secondly, there are numerous inaccuracies with respect to City Hall. Once again, there was never a time when the city of Waterbury was proposing a $60 million budget for City Hall alone. In fact, the closest that the city came to a $60 million price tag for any project that involved City Hall was a combined package that included City Hall, and a new firehouse, AND a training center. If these proposals had been adopted, the results would have been a long-term benefit to the city, as our ISO rating would have been reduced from a 2 to a 1, saving us all money on our homeowners insurance. It also could have saved the city money in the long run, by allowing the city to move several of its offices out of space that it is currently leasing.
In his letter, Mr. DePaola also tries to take two bites of the apple when he mentions the $17 Million firehouse on East Main Street and the so-called $60 Million City Hall project. The firehouse was part of the City Hall project that Mr. DePaola mentions, NOT a separate expenditure. Furthermore, the $5 Million firehouse on West Main Street was a proposal by the city in an attempt to compromise with the Independents.
Finally, with respect to First Light and the Mixmaster, Representative Noujaim (a Republican) was involved in the discussions regarding First Light, before Mr. DePillo tried to rally the citizens of Waterbury around the issue. Also, the Mixmaster is a project being run by the State of Connecticut DOT, not the City of Waterbury. Furthermore, there are members of the Republican Party on the steering committee.
Mr. DePaola is welcome to tout the accomplishments of the Independents. After all he was paid by the Independent Party to stand at the polls for them this past November. However, with the number of errors in his letter, most of them perpetuated by Mr. DePillo and Mr. Telesca of the Independent party, the “accomplishments” he mentions seem to be nothing more than hype.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2008/12/14/letters/385931.txt
City's Independents are 'petty people' who pretend to lead. – Jason Van Stone
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2008/12/29/letters/388568.txt
Critic overlooked many achievements of Independents. – Frank A. Burgio Sr.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/03/letters/389291.txt
City's Independents unable to show any accomplishments. – Jason Van Stone
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/08/letters/390281.txt
Alderman's personal attacks on critic were untoward. – Allyson Modica
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/14/letters/391317.txt
Hypocrisy manifest in Republican's political critique. – Frank M. DePaola
Of the two responses from supporters of the Independents, Mr. DePaola’s in the most informed, providing examples of the Independent Party’s so-called “accomplishments”.
Unfortunately these “accomplishments” are also riddled with numerous inaccuracies that need to be addressed. Many of the projects listed in Mr. DePaola’s letter are mis-represented, mis-priced, or both. If the Independent Party wishes to serve the citizens of Waterbury, then it needs to make sure that everyone has the correct facts. Here are the facts, in no particular order.
First, with regards to the school-bonding project, there are several things that need correcting. There was no time where the city was considering spending $1 Billion dollars in one bonding package. The $1 Billion price tag that Mr. DePaola holds up was actually the proposed price of twelve phases of work, to be bonded in individual sections, over a decade or more, IF the city needed all of those projects. Some of these twelve phases have been scrapped, others have moved forward since the initial referendum of 2004. There was no $900 Million in savings, because there was never a single $1 Billion dollar bonding package.
In fact, the package that was approved by the Board of Aldermen in June of 2004, and by the citizens of Waterbury in that November’s referendum, was only slightly different from the package that was originally approved by the Board of Education. Mr. Theriault may have saved the city some money with his ideas, but those savings were negated by the Independent Party creating a delay in the construction process by forcing a referendum, and were nowhere near the $900 Million that Mr. DePaola suggests.
Secondly, there are numerous inaccuracies with respect to City Hall. Once again, there was never a time when the city of Waterbury was proposing a $60 million budget for City Hall alone. In fact, the closest that the city came to a $60 million price tag for any project that involved City Hall was a combined package that included City Hall, and a new firehouse, AND a training center. If these proposals had been adopted, the results would have been a long-term benefit to the city, as our ISO rating would have been reduced from a 2 to a 1, saving us all money on our homeowners insurance. It also could have saved the city money in the long run, by allowing the city to move several of its offices out of space that it is currently leasing.
In his letter, Mr. DePaola also tries to take two bites of the apple when he mentions the $17 Million firehouse on East Main Street and the so-called $60 Million City Hall project. The firehouse was part of the City Hall project that Mr. DePaola mentions, NOT a separate expenditure. Furthermore, the $5 Million firehouse on West Main Street was a proposal by the city in an attempt to compromise with the Independents.
Finally, with respect to First Light and the Mixmaster, Representative Noujaim (a Republican) was involved in the discussions regarding First Light, before Mr. DePillo tried to rally the citizens of Waterbury around the issue. Also, the Mixmaster is a project being run by the State of Connecticut DOT, not the City of Waterbury. Furthermore, there are members of the Republican Party on the steering committee.
Mr. DePaola is welcome to tout the accomplishments of the Independents. After all he was paid by the Independent Party to stand at the polls for them this past November. However, with the number of errors in his letter, most of them perpetuated by Mr. DePillo and Mr. Telesca of the Independent party, the “accomplishments” he mentions seem to be nothing more than hype.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Disgusting Editorial
In today's Republican-American there was an editorial regarding the Board of Alderman's recent 12-2 approval of a new contract for the Waterbury Fire Department.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/08/opinion/390286.txt
As I read, and reread this editorial, I couldn't help but feel hurt and angry at the treatment my "local" paper gives to "Waterbury's Bravest". While I can understand the editorials concerns about the cost of the contract, and their opinions about whether or not the contract was in the best interests of the city, I couldn't help but feeling that this particular piece was nothing more then a pathetic cheap shot.
What disgusted me the most about this editorial was the newspaper's opinion of the Waterbury Firefighters work conditions. Through their repeated use of quotes around the word work [...a longer "work" week...this "work" schedule...they "worked" 24 hours], the editorial board of the newspaper makes it very clear that they consider the Waterbury Firefighters nothing more then a bunch of lazy slobs who waste the taxpayers money.
"In fact, firefighters serve 24-hour shifts during which they prepare meals, play cards, sleep, gripe about their pay (average: $57,000) and working conditions, and yes, answer an average of one call a day."
While I cannot argue the validity of the newspapers claims regarding the activities that take place during a normal day in the Waterbury Fire Department, the tone of this article is one of unbridled arrogance and ignorance.
Firefighters, are by their very nature a unique breed. They rush into the buildings that everyone else is rushing out of. They put their lives on the line for the citizens of Waterbury, and while they may only answer one cal a day on average, during that one call they could encounter any number of situations, from a simple kitchen fire, to a fully engulfed three-story apartment building. As the city of Waterbury was sadly reminded in May of 2007, any call has the potential to be a firefighters last.
Regardless of what you think of unions, binding arbitration, the state oversight board that ran the city of Waterbury from 2001-2006, or the Board of Aldermen in Waterbury, our Firefighters, and Firefighters around the world, deserve a lot more respect. They do a job that I know full well I could not.
I'm pretty sure the members of the Republican-American's editorial board could not do their job either. Therefore, unless the editors of the Republican-American are ready to put on the gear and risk their necks pulling someone out of a burning building, they have no right to treat Waterbury's Bravest in such a crass and disgusting manner.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/08/opinion/390286.txt
As I read, and reread this editorial, I couldn't help but feel hurt and angry at the treatment my "local" paper gives to "Waterbury's Bravest". While I can understand the editorials concerns about the cost of the contract, and their opinions about whether or not the contract was in the best interests of the city, I couldn't help but feeling that this particular piece was nothing more then a pathetic cheap shot.
What disgusted me the most about this editorial was the newspaper's opinion of the Waterbury Firefighters work conditions. Through their repeated use of quotes around the word work [...a longer "work" week...this "work" schedule...they "worked" 24 hours], the editorial board of the newspaper makes it very clear that they consider the Waterbury Firefighters nothing more then a bunch of lazy slobs who waste the taxpayers money.
"In fact, firefighters serve 24-hour shifts during which they prepare meals, play cards, sleep, gripe about their pay (average: $57,000) and working conditions, and yes, answer an average of one call a day."
While I cannot argue the validity of the newspapers claims regarding the activities that take place during a normal day in the Waterbury Fire Department, the tone of this article is one of unbridled arrogance and ignorance.
Firefighters, are by their very nature a unique breed. They rush into the buildings that everyone else is rushing out of. They put their lives on the line for the citizens of Waterbury, and while they may only answer one cal a day on average, during that one call they could encounter any number of situations, from a simple kitchen fire, to a fully engulfed three-story apartment building. As the city of Waterbury was sadly reminded in May of 2007, any call has the potential to be a firefighters last.
Regardless of what you think of unions, binding arbitration, the state oversight board that ran the city of Waterbury from 2001-2006, or the Board of Aldermen in Waterbury, our Firefighters, and Firefighters around the world, deserve a lot more respect. They do a job that I know full well I could not.
I'm pretty sure the members of the Republican-American's editorial board could not do their job either. Therefore, unless the editors of the Republican-American are ready to put on the gear and risk their necks pulling someone out of a burning building, they have no right to treat Waterbury's Bravest in such a crass and disgusting manner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)