If you read last week's Lakeville Journal, you could have the mistaken impression that the Falls Village Children's Theater (FVCT), which is working to transform the Emerson Building into the Falls Village Community & Cultural Center (FVCCC), is trying to steal money from the Falls Village Volunteer Fire Department which is planning to build a new headquarters on Route 7. This is an understandable misinterpretation. Rather, the FVCT and FVCCC were trying to make sure the Board of Selectmen gets the maximum amount of money from Hartford for our town.
Both organizations are eligible to receive STEAP (Small Town Economic Assistance Program) Grants from Hartford. In the past, the town has applied for and received STEAP grants for the Day Care center expansion, the new (unfinished) pool, and for exterior renovations to 107 Main Street (the old Town Hall), which will commence shortly. None of these grants were construed as taking money away from the Fire Department.
This year, as in years past, all the eligible small towns in Connecticut can apply for up to $500,000 in STEAP money, which is primarily a reimbursement grant that is for capital projects only. You have to spend the money before you get all but the first $50,000. Since, as I understand it, the Fire Department has not yet used the STEAP funds it was previously granted (and, in fact, has had to apply for an extension or will lose those funds entirely), the FVCT thought this might be a good time for the town to put all its muscle and enthusiasm behind the renovation of the FVCCC, which is conceived as a place that will revitalize Main Street and be used for events by groups in town such as the Fire Department, Historical Society, Rec Commission, Ladies Auxiliary, Girl Scouts, the Library and the Falls Village Children's Theater Company. Anyone who attended the jam-packed Christmas party at the Senior Center understands how much we need a community center. Anyone who has read the Town's 2002 Plan of Conservation and Development knows that "one of the strategies of the plan is to reinforce the [town] Center's role as the community focal point, create a destination for residents and visitors, and provide an important foundation for community character and spirit. This will also provide important benefits in terms of economic development."
The FVCT and the board of the FVCCC humbly and courageously approached the Board of Selectman in December to ask the state for the entire $500,000 on its behalf. This move was seen as expedient; it was not meant to show any disrespect to the Fire and Ambulance Departments. The FVCT and FVCCC believed that the renovation of 103 Main Street is the type of project the state likes to fund and that the fire department's project is apparently stalled and thus the state would be unlikely to give it more money until it spends what it has already been granted. The FVCT and FVCCC were merely trying to make sure the town gets all the money it is entitled to from Hartford in 2008.
You can be sure that when the FVCCC opens its doors it will be enthusiastically hosting dances, Bingo parties and other fundraisers for the Falls Village Volunteer Fire and Ambulance Departments. There are no men and women in Falls Village more altruistic, dedicated and courageous than our first responders.
Monday, December 31, 2007
False Alarm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
118 comments:
By the way, Old Guard selectman Pete Lawson told me that he was impressed by the FVCCC's presentation, and would like to see the town ask Hartford for STEAP grants of $250,000 for the FVCCC and $250,000 for the Fire Department in 2008.
Dan,
As the author of the Lakeville Journal story you refer to, I don' think there was any implication that the FVCT "was trying to steal money from" the fire department. Rather, the FVCT would like to receive the whole $500,000 of the possible STEAP grant the town might receive next year. No one group, including the fire department, is necessarily entitled to that money.
Bob Neimeth was aggressive in his request for the funds. It would have been helpful, however, if some of the background you cite in your post was provided at the BOS meeting. I recorded the proceedings, listened to it several times before writing and I can tell you what I wrote was an accurate reflection of the meeting. The FVCT people only hinted at the fire department's situation with the previous STEAP grant.
I never heard any suggestion that the FVCT and FVCCC were merely "trying to make sure the Board of Selectmen gets the maximum amount of money from Hartford for our town." Mr Neimeth made it very clear his organization wanted the whole thing.
The FVCT has solid support on the BOS. For the record, I think Peter Lawson's suggestion is a good one, as the Emerson building will be a great asset to the town once it is finished.
It's terriffic to see the FVCT present a well thought out, full and accurate presentation of their desire to apply for the STEAP grant on this blog from Dan Shaw. I had suggested this off-air to a FVCT member, a couple of weeks ago,after Terry Cowgill and I had spoken on-air about Terry's story on this meeting in the Lakeville Journal. This should have been the presentation put forth at the meeting coverd by the Lakeville Journal, and talked about on Terry Cowgill's weekly review of local news on WHDD. Great job Dan.
As the former Chairperson of the Falls Village Volunteer Fire Department (FVVFD) Building Committee, I want the community to be clear about the FVVFD’s 2004 STEAP grant. There seems to be some misinformation circulating in the community about the reason behind our extension request for our 2004 grant. The continued inaccurate perceptions disturb me greatly, especially as I am aware of numerous attempts, both public and private, to set this record straight. The most recent attempt to set the record straight occurred at the Board of Selectmen’s meeting when the FVCT and FVCCC came to request the STEAP grant money.
The FVVFD was awarded a STEAP grant in the fall of 2004. We had already spent a great deal of money on engineering and architectural work, and anxiously awaited the first distribution of the grant funding. (By the way, you DO have to spend money even to receive the first $50,000; this is a reimbursement grant, so your comment about not needing to spend money to get the first $50,000 is inaccurate.) We waited for the state to send us the money for TWO YEARS; we did not receive the first disbursement until November of 2006 after vigorous pursuit of the matter. This was through NO MISTAKE OR ERROR on the part of the FVVFD. Every time we contacted the state, we were assured our paperwork was fine and the money would be sent shortly. When it finally arrived, it came with the stipulation that Phase 1 of the project be finished in June 2007, yet items which were originally reimbursable when we received the grant in 2004 were no longer reimbursable. We had spent money that we were now being told we could not recoup through the grant, and we had not received any money for 2 whole years, but we were required to finish the project based on the original proposal. This is the reason the FVVFD has requested an extension from the state. By the way, this extension was formally requested in July 2007 (again, after much delaying from the state department handling our grant in providing the extension request paperwork) and we still do not have a response from the state in writing. Upon our repeated queries, we have been informed that it is in the hands of the Attorney-General.
To my knowledge, no one involved in the fire department has ever accused the FVCT of “trying to steal money from the Falls Village Volunteer Fire Department.” This was an unfortunate and inflammatory choice of words. In an effort to halt the harmful gossip, I’d like to offer to discuss this further with any community member who has questions or concerns about the FVVFD’s building project, including our unpleasant experiences with the State of Connecticut’s STEAP grant program. You can call me at 824.9882 or 671.1503.
Beckie,
Thank you so much for explaining the situation. I was at the BOS meeting a few weeks back and none of this was made clear--at least to me. I admit that I am a novice when it comes to understanding Connecticut governmental processeses which it seems can turn into the proverbial bureaucratic nightmare. Thank you for setting the record straight.
Hi Dan:
At the December 10th B of S meeting I made what I thought was a careful, thorough and comprehensive outline of the reasons which led to the needed extension of the STEAP grant for the FVVFD. I regret that you didn't feel that the information was clear.
I thought that it was especially important that I reviewed this information given the misimpression that some serving on the the Falls Village Community and Cultural Center Board of Directors had about the situation. I believe that the outline that I gave accurately represented the exact problems the Town has experienced over the last three years regarding this grant. I believe that I made it quite clear that there were numerous delays on the State level in receiving the first $50,000 reimbursement of the awarded STEAP grant, despite the fact that the Town had completed everything the State required for that reimbursement almost a full year before it actually received the funds. I also made it clear that the circumstances causing the prolonged delay had nothing to do with the execution of Phase One of the Department's project. I told those at the meeting that it was this lengthy delay that necessitated the request of the extension. At that time I also updated those in attendance regarding the extension process and where the Town found itself in regard to its application for the extension of the grant. The Town has long ago done its due diligence regarding this extension and many months later it is still mired in the State's bureaucracy, thus not only delaying progress on the project, but also delaying the reimbursement of the remaining funds of the grant.
I'm most grateful that Beckie Seney's post filled in whatever gaps you may have had regarding the facts of the situation. As always, I am available as well, should you or anyone else desire further information.
Hi Dan:
The previous comment was posted by me as I'm sure you have figured out. I'm not sure how the post came up as anonymous! Obviously i did something wrong!
Pat Mechare
The Community Center folks went to a selectmens meeting and asked to be considered for the whole amount of the STEP grant for this year – what is wrong with that? Makes good business sense to me. I would think anyone interested would ask for as much as possible. No matter who/what is to blame there is an apparent snag in the fire department’s STEP grant. Doesn’t matter why really, but it is there. Will it affect their chances of getting another STEP grant this year? Who knows ? Any one who lives in this tiny town knows the fire department is an organization we cherish, respect and depend on, they serve the community every day. We also know the theater group folks do nothing but support the community in many ways, on a daily basis too.
Too often in this tiny town offense is taken by miscommunication, whether it be via the newspaper, the radio or a repeated conversation. My suggestion would be for the people who are taken aback by an article in the paper or a radio blurb, contact someone involved in that issue and ask them what really happened. Does anyone really believe what they read in the paper or hear on the radio? What sells more advertising, a simple news story stating the facts or one that is turned in to an unnecessary controversy? We all know the answer to that but forget when we are intimately involved with an organization that gets falsely accused of something in the paper. Everyone takes it personal because how can you not?
All organizations/selectmen/committee members, etc., should be working together in every circumstance toward what is best for the town. So I say kudos to both the theatre folks and the fire dept for being the best they can be to support this town and make it an even better place to live. And kudos to both for going for the gold and asking for as much State grant money as possible – you both would be fools not to.
Dear Anonymous ...
First of all, your comments should
be taken with a grain of salt...only because you have not identified yourself..either intentionaly, or by mistake.
How easy it is to throw out false and misleading accusations from the cover of a hidden identity. Wow, you feel so strong about your comments that your not willing to put your name to them. Bravo, what a performance! Maybe for the second act you will identify yourself.
As to your comments...
1) My suggestion would be for the people who are taken aback by an article in the paper or a radio blurb, contact someone involved in that issue and ask them what really happened.
As far as I know, the Lakeville Journal, CATV 6 and WHDD REQUEST people to explain their side, or what they feel are the facts, thru letters to the editor, or call ins or appearing live on the radio or TV..
2) Does anyone really believe what they read in the paper or hear on the radio?
Well, I think they believe it more than a comment from an unknown source. Llocally, people on the radio or in the newspaper, or even on TV identify themselves, and ask for comments, opinions on what is said or written.
3) What sells more advertising, a simple news story stating the facts or one that is turned in to an unnecessary controversy? We all know the answer to that but forget when we are intimately involved with an organization that gets falsely accused of something in the paper. Everyone takes it personal because how can you not?
This point is not even woth responding to...who decides what is unnecessary? You, who won't even sign a post on the internet.
And who falsly accused anyone of anythinG?
When people tell me they like my show, I appreciate it, when people say to me that they don't like my show, I accept that fact, and don't try to convince people who like my show that that person is misguided, falsly reporting the events of my show, etc. I take the good and the bad, and accept both.
As far as I know, the Lakeville Journal,and the area radio stations, and local television stations run ALOT of terriffic publicity and positive stories about the FVCT. When stories are written, or comments are made that you feel are inaccurate...let us know by writing a letter or calling in...its your choice.
But please, don't sit behind a curtain and whine about the local press. Be careful, you might get what you wish for one day...NO LOCAL media, only media owned by some giant company with no ties to the area, and no commitment to bring both the positive stories, and yes, some negitive stories to light.
We do have a FREE LOCAL PRESS in our area...use it, but when you do, indentify yourself, you comments will then bear listening to, or reading.
Bravo, Marshall! I think you're a writer trapped in a radio host's body.
If you are curious as to what type of projects are supported by STEAP Grants, here is a list for the Fiscal Years 2002 -2007 (FY 02 - FY07) of how some towns( alphabetically from A to D) used the money. If you want the whole list, email me at dan.shaw@att.net and I will send it to you.
Andover FY 02 Pedestrian bridge carrying Hop River State Park Trail over Route 316 & utilities $283,500
Andover FY 05 Construction of new wing to Town Office to provide a Community Center $500,000
Ashford FY 02 Town Volunteer Fire Department's Main Station House project $500,000
Ashford FY 07 Renovations and updates to the transfer station $300,000
Avon FY 06 Acquisition and construction of handicap accessible playground on Buckingham Rd $150,000
Barkhamsted FY 02 Historic preservation of Squires' Tavern, circa 1775, to serve as home of the Barkhamsted Historical Society $176,000
Barkhamsted FY 05 Riverton Streetscape improvements $500,000
Berlin FY 02 Heritage Crossing senior apartment housing project. $500,000
Berlin FY 03 Town Green development project $500,000
Berlin FY 05 Town Center Improvements $500,000 Berlin FY 07 Berlin Commerical Corridor Streetscape project $400,000
Bethany FY 07 Improvements to Veterans Memorial Park $400,000
Bethel FY 02 Repair and reconstruct sidewalks in town center. $250,000
Bethel FY 03 Improvements to transfer station $50,000
Bethel FY 03 Meckauer Park improvements $175,000
Bethel FY 03 Bennett Park improvements $25,000 Bethel FY 05 Sidewalk replacement program $250,000
Bethel FY 06 Replace a waterline leading to and within Clarke industrial park $500,000
Bethlehem FY 02 Improvements to Town Line Road $149,915
Bethlehem FY 02 Improvements to Cabbage Lane $126,750
Bethlehem FY 02 Construct a pavilion at town beach $40,000
Bethlehem FY 02 Repairs to town tennis court $70,000
Bethlehem FY 03 Upgrades and improvements to fire house $211,000
Bethlehem FY 03 Long Meadow Pond draw down feasibility study & emergency operations plan $17,500
Bethlehem FY 03 Improvements to Munger Lane $133,500
Bethlehem FY 03 Water storage tank for firehouse $50,000
Bethlehem FY 03 Parking improvements at town recreation fields $66,000 Bethlehem FY 03 Replace oil separator system at fire department $22,000 Bethlehem FY 05 East Street Sidewalk $117,500 Bethlehem FY 05 Firehouse upgrade $222,500 Bethlehem FY 06 Emergency power supply for Memorial Hall and Town Hall $70,000
Bethlehem FY 06 Solid waste disposal project - cover structures for containers $50,000
Bethlehem FY 07 Fire protection - phase 3 firehouse expansion and upgrade $275,000
Bolton FY 06 Economic development/Transportation plan for the Route 44 corridor $150,000
Bolton FY 07 Bolton Lakes sewer capital project $200,000
Bozrah FY 02 Land purchase to develop elderly housing $175,000 Bozrah FY 02 Electric utilities extension to the industrial park $250,000 Branford FY 02 Playground equipment for Mary T. Murphy Elementary School $30,000
Bridgewater FY 07 Renovation and expansion of a town owned building for a senior center $75,000 Brookfield FY 05 Village Center improvements $500,000
Brookfield FY 06 Extension of a fire suppression water line south along Route 7/202 $500,000 Brookfield FY 07 Capital improvements in the downtown area $500,000
Year Brooklyn FY 02 Construct a solid waste transfer station $171,000
Brooklyn FY 02 Construction of storm runoff lines $80,000
Brooklyn FY 06 Acquisition of a compactor and container for town's transfer station $35,000 Brooklyn FY 06 Pedestrian safety and sidewalk improvements to Rte. 6 and Day Street $390,000 Brooklyn FY 07 Road and storm water run-off improvements on Day Street $465,000
Burlington FY 06 Replacement of the Prospect Street Bridge $120,000
Burlington FY 07 Lighting on soccer fields at Nassehegan Recreation Complex $70,000
Canaan FY 02 Expansion of town's non profit daycare $250,000
Canaan (Falls Village) FY 03 Replacement of town pool $250,000
Canaan FY 05 Construction of Volunteer Fire Dept. Services Center $250,000
Canaan FY 06 Exterior repair and restoration of 107 Main Street which houses the senior center $275,000
Canton FY 02 Facilities planning study for wastewater treatment facility $300,000
Canton FY 07 Improvements to the Canton Highway Garage $350,000
Chaplin FY 02 Construction of a new volunteer fire department station house $500,000
Chaplin FY 05 Construction of Chaplin Firehouse $485,000
Cheshire FY 05 Closure and remediation of solid waste disposal area $500,000
Cheshire FY 06 Streetscape improvements along West Main Street commercial area $500,000 Chester FY 02 Remediation of wastewater disposal problems with town-owned sewage treatment facility $500,000
Chester FY 06 Water main extension to manufacturing park $500,000
Clinton FY 02 Preparation of town-owned land for elderly housing $350,000
Clinton FY 07 Replacement of bulkhead structures throughout town $500,000
Colebrook FY 05 Handicap accessible restroom at Town Historic Society $17,000
Colebrook FY 07 Recreation improvements at Smith Hill Park $159,100
Columbia FY 06 Addition to Beckish Senior Center $500,000
Cornwall FY 02 Remediation of two sites at old Newold Co, which formerly manufactured lead blankets $250,000
Cornwall FY 02 Purchase of parcel adjacent to town athletic field for a safer, expanded parking lot $100,000
Cornwall FY 05 renovations to town library, installation of restrooms $200,000
Cornwall FY 07 Renovations to Historical Society $250,000
Coventry FY 02 Coventry Village economic development project $500,000 Coventry FY 03 Improvements to police department $500,000 Coventry FY 05 Access management in Coventry Village (rd improvements) $250,000
Coventry FY 07 Renovation and addition to North Coventry Volunteer Fire Station $400,000 Cromwell FY 03 Purchase option, CEPA and marketability studies for industrial park site $445,000
Cromwell FY 05 Sanitary sewer and utility improvements for commercial development center $500,000
Cromwell FY 07 Historic downtown and riverfront development $250,000
Darien FY 03 Town hall community center improvements $86,000
Darien FY 05 Pear Tree Point Beach and Boat Ramp $44,000
Darien FY 05 Tilly Pond $31,000
While I agree with much that marshall says I think his attack on someone because they wish to comment anonymously is wrong. Some people wish to express an opinion but fear (rightly or wrongly) retribution. It's the same reason people call for a paper ballot at town meetings and why we have secret balloting in regular elections.
Ultimately it's not important who says something, if it is a valid opinion or a good idea. Dan has created a great forum for the people of this town to get information and to debate the issues. It's his blog, he can delete any comments he feels are irresponsible or not to his liking. As they say, freedom of the press applies to everyone who owns a press (or a blog).
And just to yank Marshall's chain, I'm going to sign this:
anonymous
Dear anonymous number 2 – right on! The reaction caused by the anonymous post further explains why someone would want to be anonymous. It also proved how everyone takes it personal. The person wrote in their opinion but never addressed what or who they were referring to and never blamed or accused anyone or organization of anything but did suggest a way to deal with press that is either hard to believe, disturbing or confusing; just call someone involved and ask them. How in this world did that post get turned in to that reaction?
I'd like to why the proposed firehouse is going to cost $1.5 million?
An issue that I have not heard discussed that should be considered for some of the grant money (if allowed) is the replacement of the two town water storage tanks that supply 125 homes with water. These tanks are in serious need of replacement and should be a priority.
I do not think that figure is correct. Does the proposed firehouse really cost 1.5 million dollars? That can not be right. That would mean the cost per square foot is almost double of any commercial building in the area or that it was being built by the federal government neither of which is happening (or at least we hope not).
The problem is the anonymous commenter made an accusation against me and my employer and offered no facts to support it.
If you're going to do that, then you owe it to your target to identify yourself. To hide behind a cloak of anonymity is gutless -- plain and simple.
My reaction to the anonymous post is that he never once referred to the Journal or the reporter. I took it as speaking in general terms and he offered some pretty darn good advice. I read the article thanks to the link and could see why Dan posted his piece to clarify, but I see no accusations anywhere. Unfortunately the reaction to being anonymous, in my opinion, shows why you would want to remain anonymous.
The other questions raised by this post are certainly good ones and I appreciate them being asked and hopefully they will be answered.
As far as the accusations flying back and forth, lets leave that part and move on so we can keep this blog as harmonious and informational as it always has been, thanks to the brilliance, compassion and dedication of Daniel J Shaw - Thank you Dan!
Dear Fan of Dan's,
I, too, am a fan of this blog. Sure, the anonymous commenter did not mention me or my company by name, but I think we all know who his target is:
What sells more advertising, a simple news story stating the facts or one that is turned in to an unnecessary controversy? We all know the answer to that but forget when we are intimately involved with an organization that gets falsely accused of something in the paper.
If you don't see an accusation (implicit or otherwise) in that passage, then there's not much I can do to help you. The clear implication is that the story was rigged to "create unnecessary controversy," to "sell advertising" and to "falsely accuse" an organization of something (but what?). Failing to identify yourself in such a case is hardly a profile in courage.
For a comment not worth a "grain of salt" it sure has taken up a lot of blog space. Jiminy Cricket! let it go, everyone else has. I agree with Dan's fan (of which I am certain there are many) move on, up, down, over, across or sideways, just move passed this, its silly.
Ok, you're right, Jiminy Cricket. I shouldn't worry my little head if someone casts aspersions on my professional integrity.
BY GEORGE I THINK HE'S GOT IT!
Thanks Chris. Now how about that Murphy fella coming to town, any one going to see him?
IF the first comment you deleted was the one from "HLMeken" (sp?) which I read early yesterday morning, what was contained in that comment that was so offensive that you felt you had to remove it? I saw nothing that even remotely would require it to be removed. In fact, I thought it gave some good insights about how he/she, as a former reporter, reacted to criticisms of story/stories he had written. The removal of this comment, if that indeed was the first one in this list that you removed, is a mystery to me!
Dear Anonymous.
You are on the ball. In fact, I mistakenly deleted the HL Mencken entry in my rush to delete the other comment and there is no way to retrieve them. I found nothing offensive about the Mencken posting. Thanks for paying such close attention
Dan
As a neutral observer -- and a booster of Falls Village in general (my kids attended FVDC and we have many friends there0 -- I would like to suggest that answering a couple questions might help clear things up:
1 - Is the Fire Department eligible for a STEAP grant this year? I could imagine this would be complicated by the pending extension request, but it should be possible to make a determination. If the answer is yes, then...
2 - Is the Fire Department pursuing making a grant request this year?
On its face, it seems that the FVCCC asking for the maximum possible grant is a non-issue. It would be up to the Fire Department, or any other organization, to step forward on their own behalf and make a case if they were interested.
Fred Baumgarten
Sharon
Hi Fred,
To answer your questions,
(1) According to the state of CT, the Falls Village Volunteer Fire Department is eligible for 2008 STEAP grant funding. The open grant reportedly has no bearing on the application for a new one.
(2) The FVVFD indicated to the Board of Selectmen back in March (I believe) that we would be like to be considered for further grant opportunities. We have submitted a written request as well.
Someone asked in a previous response why the firehouse would cost so much. First, that figure is old enough now that it may no longer be accurate. We all know how much the cost of oil has increased costs all around in the last few years. Second, there are many reasons why the price tag is high, but primarily it is because of the specialized requirements for a firehouse/emergency shelter. Some of these requirements include: vehicle exhaust recovery systems, oil/water separators, emergency power requirements, a large enough septic system for an emergency shelter, etc.
Sincerely,
Beckie Seney
Beckie - are you saying that the new firehouse would now actually cost more than 1.5 million? Does the fire company have a plan to raise these funds? It appears you would need 1.5 million plus the STEAP funds - how are you going to accomplish this?
Thank you for responding. Karl
I thought the high school was going to be designated emergency shelter. It already has in place most of what is required for an emergency shelter facility. In most places schools are generally used in that capacity anyways.
As far as costs go even with the specialized requirements that are mentioned I still can't see the justification for $1.5 million. Standard metal truss commercial buildings should run about $500,000 to $750,000 for the size of the proposed firehouse. Where does the other $750,000 plus figure in?
I hope someone noticed that the firehouse site is all ledge, I suppose one could spend a few hundred thousand blasting rock and removing it.
Karl,
I'm saying the cost could be higher now. That estimate is now at least four years old, and costs for everything have gone up in the last four years. It's a logical assumption.
HVRHS is a designated shelter, but it has a generator only for a small portion of the building. This would not be adequate for extended time periods or large numbers of people needing shelter. The generator there does not cover the parts of the building with the cooking facilities and the larger shower rooms. There was exploration of the costs of installing an additional generator that would adequately supply the building. I was told the cost would be over $100,000.
In my last post, I indicated only a few of the specialized items required. This isn't really the place to provide an exhaustive list, but if anyone would like more detail, the plans are at the town hall and people from the fire department building committee would be glad to meet with you to review the plans. If you think our proposed firehouse is extraordinarily expensive, you should check out the costs of neighboring towns...Kent, Lakeville and Northfield to name a few. We are working very hard to build a facility adequate to the needs of the fire department now and in the forseeable future while keeping the costs controlled as much as possible. We have worked with grant writers (there are no "bricks-and-morter" grants right now unless you own a historic building) and we are exploring the feasibility of a capital campaign with a professional. Believe me, we want to keep the costs down as much as you do!
Beckie Seney
I just heard the Selectmen announced tonight that the split would be $300 thousand for the fire department and $200 thousand for the Community Center. I am told both groups seemed very pleased and grateful for the allocation.
It was also announced the STEAP funds would lower the burden to the taxpayers when the town bonds the new firehouse project which is also good. I had no idea the taxpayers were taking on the bill for the firehouse.
The end result is a good one. Both groups do a great deal for the town and both deserve some funds to complete their project. It was nice to see the issue put to rest in such an agreeable way. Good job by all.
It seems that $100,000 for a generator system is a good investment if the high school can be used as the dedicated emergency shelter. If one of the requirements for the firehouse is a septic system that needs to meet the specifications for this shelter the bill for that alone will be at least $50,000 to $75,000. Why spend that when the high school has so much more room and the facilities to handle at least 500+ people.
Furthermore how much is a professional fund raiser going to cost?
As far as comparing firehouses with other towns, there are different requirements that each town needed, maybe they spent too much? Northfield wasn't finished as of this summer and it was large facility, Kent has gone back and with the price tag, Lakeville is buying an existing building. All those towns have the population and tax base to support larger facilities. I hope everyone wants to keep the cost down but when I hear price tags starting at $1.5 million I have to wonder.
I too am very glad this is over. I have seen members of both organizations this morning and it is true, they are very grateful for the opportunity to apply for funds. It is also very apparent that both organizations respect each other and are working together to make the town better.
I would like to make a couple comments. Being anonymous is tricky, you face the derogatory comments of others for stating your opinion anonymously, but had you not been anonymous would the response comments have changed? Wouldn't they have become even more personal? I heard some very nasty and unnecessary comments made this morning on the radio about one of the anonymous posters and all I could think was thank goodness he/she didn't give their name. No one wants or deserves to have their character attacked by anyone. It is not nice and serves no real purpose. So my vote is YES let people post anonymously.
Now, until the taxpayers are paying for the firehouse it doesn't matter if they are putting in 14 karat gold toilet paper holders. It's their problem and they agreed to raise the money through fundraising and grants. If it becomes a taxpayer burden as suggested in a previous post, then yes, everyone has the right to weigh in on how that money is spent and everyone decides what is really needed in a firehouse.
An expenditure like this can not be approved without the taxpayers vote. That is the law. Anyone indicating it will go to the taxpayers prior to the taxayers agreeing to it is mistaken. and actually I am surprised this was indicated at a selectmen meeting before a town vote. I think the taxpayers would be very surprised at this announcement.
In my "anonymous" opinion putting this burden on the taxpayers is a mistake for the project. The delay in funding from the State will not compare to the delay this will face when every tax payer has a say in what will be built. Can't you just see it?
Did I move to Salisbury and no one told me? What is everyone talking about?
Was this meeting held a town meeting? We never saw the announcement.When did
all this happen? Granted we are not there as often as the fulltimers but I
would think everyone would have been notified of such a large expense being
put on the taxpayers.
I agree with the person before me. Not only will it be too much of a burden
for the taxpayers and lessen the chance of young families being able to move
there, it will also take ten years to build, or more, with everyone having
input in to what is built. If it takes 6 years to build a pool how long will
it take to build a one and a half million dollar firehouse?
Hopefully someone from the meeting will post a clarification on what
happened.
I agree with 'confused' someone from the town officials office needs to clarify what is going on here. Let's wait until we hear from someone there, this could be just a big mistake or worse, rumor. I doubt very much this is going to be a tax burden for the citizens of falls village, aren't we taxed enough? It would never pass a town vote. Confused - if you missed a town meeting so did everyone else in town.But before we all blow our stacks lets wait for information from town hall to clear it up. There are some fine people in office there and they wouldn't want the rumor mill to fly either.
The Board of Selectmen meeting will be on CATV 6 on the COMCAST Northwest CT Cable system Thursday and Friday at 9:01 AM.
Watch, listen, and get the TRUTH straight from the people at the meeting
And if you're not (physically) here, you can still watch on the internet at
http://catv6.com
hey ay ay ay mr tapeman. (sorry coudn't resist). is this the meeting where they voted for this project to be funded by the taxpayers? for all of us at work at 9:01 is there another way to see this? if you were there can you answer the question as to whether or not the rumor is true that the taxpayers will pay for this building project.
Hey, how about them New England Patriots?
How about Eli Manning and those New York Giants?
now here's something to talk about.
Go Patriots! Dan, the Giants? Brady with 50 tds and 5000 yds and the team is 16-0-0 and 75 tds . you have to go with the Pats.
but, are we really paying for the firehouse through increased taxes or is it a rumor? Does any one have a definitive answer to this? Someone should post the answer so we can move on and really talk football. Go Pats.
I was at the meeting. It was a regular Board of Selectmen meeting, not a town meeting to authorize funds for anything.
Fire department representatives have told me repeatedly (and I have reported repeatedly over the years) that the balance of unraised funds will likely come from taxpayers.
But of course those funds would have to be approved by taxpayers at a town meeting. They have also told me that if taxpayers fund the bulk of the project (through bonding or other means), then ownership of the new facility would likely revert to the town, rather than remain with the private FVVFD.
A sum of several hundred thousand taxpayer dollars could never be spent without authorization from those taxpayers at a town meeting, which would require sufficient notice.
But hey, beware! I might be reporting this to sell newspapers!
thank you for filling us in. I am relieved it was not a town meeting that we missed and there is still an opportunity for a town vote. Unfortunately based on the chitter chatter many taxpayers did not realize they would be paying for the firehouse, we certainly did not. I also think its unfortunate that any organization or selectmen assume this is what the taxpayers want or that this is what will happen, prior to a town vote. No one is against a firehouse but with all the other increases to our taxes coming up the last thing taxpayers especially families, need is a hefty increase. I hope someone is looking at the possibility of building a firehouse that costs what is raised rather than charge the difference to us. I don't know if it is even possible but it should be looked at as a possibility. It is simply a matter of economics.The taxes there are already too high, one of the highest mill rates in the state, and statistics show salaries do not compute to the same level. Continuing to increase taxes will simply push more and more people away because it will become unaffordable possibly to even those already there. Or worse the cost of the firehouse could mean cuts to other vital issues like education, social services, town maintenance, and other issues. If the taxes in Falls Village were not already through the tree tops then this would not be an issue but someone needs to step back and look at the real repercussions of this. Can the people who live in Falls Village afford to continue to pay the taxes plus an increase? They are already paying double oil prices, double electric, double groceries. When you lose the families and those are the ones who will be most affected, you lose the town. There won't be a need for a firehouse because you won't have the volunteers. I know this is just our opinion but has anyone stopped to think about this and look at the big picture before assuming they have a green light to put this on the taxpayers? Has anyone stopped to look at what is absolutely necessary for the fire dept? Do we have to have these plans or is there a cheaper version which addresses only what is needed? We don't know but we do know these are questions that have to be addressed. We are disappointed it has been assumed this will pass prior to a town vote.I hope that doesn't mean this is something else that will happen behind closed doors .
The Falls Village Children's Theater Company and the committee of the Falls Village Community and Cultural Center, would like to extend our sincere gratitude to the Selectmen for their faith in this project and trust in our stewardship. Our town is fortunate to have a core of dedicated people who can unite for a common vision of what will make a better community for all of us.
As the dream of the Community and Cultural Center is realized, we look forward to the continued support of the Selectmen and the people of Falls Village. We hope to prove that their confidence is not misplaced and anticipate the day when we will gather together to open the doors.
In my humble opinion, the next step is for the fire department or the selectmen whichever is proper, to show the taxpayers a needs assesment for this building to justify the expense to the taxpayers. If the plans are only what is needed for the firemen to do their volunteer job then what other answer is there? But if it can be cut to a minimum of only what is needed via state mandate and abililty to function as firemen, then that is what should happen. The town can not afford to have anything other than what is absolutely needed. Rather than guessing lets have a town meeting to discuss the future of this and our taxes. Look at the big picture including other expenses coming up, isn't there some kind of big education bill coming too? As taxpayers the door is now open for discussion but lets make sure the facts are accurate. The selectmen have not responded nor have the fire department so all of this is just a guess. Although it appears this has been planned for a while and most taxpayers were unaware of it (which is unfortunate),everyone needs to remember this can not happen unless the taxpayers vote to make it happen. You do have a say and its called a 'vote'.
The need for a town meeting is apparent. The lack of clarification from the town officials leaves no other option. To insure all taxpayers can attend a Saturday meeting would be preferable. It is important to include all taxpayers in these decisions.
Perhaps a final comment as I know this has been dragged on for what seems like forever, but.....why hasn't there been any posts from the selectmen or the fire dept since the news of the tax burden was posted? I see they posted prior posts on the grant issue but am confused as to why they have not confirmed or corrected this issue. There are so many posts and so much talking going on around town a clarification seems to me would go a long way in putting this issue to rest even if its only for a short time. As someone else mentioned, gossip and rumors fly in small towns and my guess is much of this is just that, gossip! As far as we can tell after asking a few of the old time firemen; even the fire dept isn't aware of this tax burden and because of that we think there is just a simple misunderstanding somewhere.I wasn't at the meeting nor do I read the local paper and I work at 9 in the morning as most of us do, so a response from whomever is in charge of this would be appreciated. Or post a time and place for a town meeting so we can all attend. I think the idea of a Saturday meeting is a good one, all taxpayers should be able to attend.
I am neither a town official or a fireman, nor am I "in the loop", but it is my understanding this project is at least a year or two from funding and could be several years from actual construction, which is when the money will be needed (though it will need to be secured before hand). A couple of points:
1) there is no rush, these things take time and there is no need to have a special town meeting (which costs money). It can be explained and dealt w/ at the proper time.
2) Usually capitol projects like this are funded by bonding, which spreads the cost out over many years, like 25-30. And it is done thru the state as part of a larger bond package, which gives up a better rate.
3) If we do a bond for $1 mil, over 25 years, that's $40k/per plus interest. We have a 1000 people, so that would be $40/per person per year. We would,of course, do it thru the property tax. I don't know how much one mil raises,(maybe someone can tell us), but the mil rate would go up to reach the $40k/ year (plus interest).
4) Another valid Q is, how much more will it cost to operate the new firehouse compared w/ the old one, and what energy efficiency methods are being planned for? And I'm not talking about compact flourescents for lights, but rather how about geothermal heat, esp. since the building is going to be unoccupied most of the time.
5) A while back, someone suggested buying a large generator for the high school was a better idea, and I second that thought. The school would be larger, more comforable. Also there may be a time when they lose power w/ the kids there and they can't leave, then they would have use of it. Also it could be a place of refuge for amesville, lime rock, parts of cornwall and sharon. For those reasons, the other towns should share in the cost.
Excellent post. you make some very valid points but remember the 1000 population includes children; there are only 400 households in town, which equates to $100 per household. Add to that the additional education increases we face in a couple years (over $100,000 per year I am told) and we are talking over $350 per year per household which many households just don't have. I do agree its a ways off but the big picture needs to be looked at now so planning can happen. This is not something that can be sprung on the taxpayers at a Board of Sel. meeting. This is a huge expense and one that needs to be examined thoroughly with all the other future expenses being considered as well. The taxpayers have no choice with the education increases, the fuel increases, the interest rate changes, etc., but they do have a choice with the firehouse. You bring up some very valid points with your other questions as well. I would like to know if they have been considered and what is the plan? Is there one? If its true the fire dept doesn't even know about this then who is making these decisions? I realize a town meeting costs money but with all these very valid and important questions being raised on the blog, shouldn't there be a meeting to explain it and maybe put some citizens at ease? Thanks
according to the mortgage calculator on msn.com, the yearly mortgage would be sixty five thousand (including interest) and the total cost over thirty years would be just shy of 2 million.
No opinion yet on if the tax payers should do this, just an FYI for the readers.
....if they borrowed a million dollars, that is.
Having the emergancy shelter at the high school sounds like a very good plan. $100,000 does not sound like a very high price tag considering the amount of people it could hold and the facilities already available.
Town meetings do take time and money so why not just spell it out right here? Where did the fire dept and the selectmen go? Its cheap and easy.This is all we heard about this past weekend - to the point of exhaustion.
As I have been dealing with some difficult family medical issues recently, checking the FV Blog has not been my top priority. I hope that what I say is not misinterpreted and misquoted or taken out of context, unfotunately, that seems to be par for the course on this topic.
The fire department has not requested town funding of our building project at this time. What the fire department DID say at the recent BoS meeting is that we are exploring funding, including the feasibility of a capital campaign. We recognize the fact that we MAY not be able to raise the entire amount ourselves, although we have raised more than 1/3 of the estimated total thus far, not counting the STEAP grants. As I mentioned previously, the plans are at town hall for anyone who wants to see them; this is no "Garage Mahal" as Kent's projects was once dubbed. We are attempting to meet the requirements put forth by state and federal regulations, including OSHA and the NFPA, for a functional firehouse. All we want to do is protect and serve the community.
I am not much on meetings but if there was ever a cause for one this would be it. I just read through 56 comments almost all of which conflict. I watched the meeting on the tv and even that conflicts with these. I thought the reason behind the vote was to lower the tax burden for the firehouse indicating there would be a 'burden'. Did not one of the men at the table say that was the reason for his vote? I forget the amounts but it was the higher one. I thought the girl at the meeting said there was 200 thousand dollars raised which would mean a price tag of 600 thousand if its one third, right? The only ones who know what the real plan is are the officials and the folks in charge of building the firehouse. A meeting with everyone attending that is interested, where questions can be asked and answered. Its unfair to the fire department and the tax payers to keep going on this way. As Ms Seney said, they are just trying to protect and serve the community and its very infortunate that such misinformation could be spread at a meeting which caused such havoc in town. Have a town meeting and end all this.
Yah, it does seem a little confusuing but perhaps I can help on at least one point.
All these calls for a "town meeting" seem misguided to me. I think you may have your terms wrong.
Like many New England states, Connecticut has a town meeting form of government. That means the taxpayers, in effect, act as the town's legislature. At town meetings, budget are accepted or rejected, special appropriations are made, ordinances passed and so forth.
Since there is no such action to be taken yet on the FVFD, I think what you are really calling for is an "informational forum" to which the public is invited. Clear enough?
GREAT idea - do it.
You can have a town meeting without acting on anything, calling it an informational forum is just a play on semantics. The point is to explain to the taxpayers of a potential tax liability that may exceed $2 million, this has to be done in the open, a town meeting would do that.
Any meeting should be held on a Saturday, so that weekenders can attend. A question: is it ethical for the town to apply for STEAP money for the proposed firehouse to 'lessen the impact on the taxpayers for the remainder of the construction budget' (more or less how it was presented at the meeting)? Reading over the many comments on this blog, it would seem that there is an extremely long road before the taxpayers approve anything regarding this proposal. We really do need that meeting, and soon.
as Mr. Shaw would say OH VEY! Rather than beat this poor horse to death, YES, have a meeting and explain what is happening with all this. The previous comments are correct, there are so many conflicting stories who knows what happened. I too watched the meeting on tv and I certainly left with the impression the taxpayers would foot the bill. That was the justification given for the vote on the grant funds and that was the reason they gave to ask for the funds. If that isn't the case then what is all this about? nothing? or a 2 million dollar debt?
Mr. Shaw would say "oy vey."
sorry Mr. Shaw - 'oy vey' indeed.
Dear Anonymous,
You really don't know what you're talking about. The purpose of a town meeting in Connecticut is to take action on something. It's not just a matter of semantics. If there is no action to take, then you call it something else. Or perhaps you would like to confuse people even further by using the wrong term?
Sorry dude, there is nothing the Statutes that specifies that something has to be voted on. You can have a non binding resolution, you can have a juggler if you want. The point I was making is a town meeting will make what ever was presented public record and make the particpants honest.
Let's not argue over a definition. It is important to have it public record and whatever term makes that happen is what should happen.
The issue here is the firehouse and the potential tax burden to he taxpayers as was indicated in the bd of sel. meeting. Lets go back to that......will there even be a meeting?
The Board of Selectmen's meeting will be broadcast again on channel 6 at 8pm tonight, 11pm Saturday and 3pm Sunday. I encourage everyone to watch it and see for yourselves what the discussion was on this tax burden.
We watched the meeting yesterday. Thank you to whomever taped it and put it on tv. Our conclusion was the fire department and the selectmen fully expect the taxpayers to pay the remaining bill on the firehouse. One of the selectmen clearly stated the reason for his vote was to lower the tax burden and Mrs. Mechare stated the same in her presentation for the fire department. If neither of these statements indicate there will be a tax burden then what was the vote based on? How do you base a vote on a lower tax burden if there isn't a tax burden?
We hope that all the concerned citizens watch the meeting and comment on it. Its possible we misunderstood the rationale for the votes, its possible we missed the articles where it was announced repeatedly this would happen, its also possible we came to the correct conclusion. We are anxious to read what others thought after watching the meeting. lets go for 100 posts!
We don't think the need for a meeting is based on what happened at this meeting so much as what is the plan for the taxpayers with this project and what other expenses are coming down the line. Face it the economy is in big trouble and any increases in taxes are going to be a burden for many. A meeting of any name is clearly warranted to straighten this out. I agree it is unfortunate that so much has been said without a clear answer from the powers that be but watch the meeting, we thought it was pretty clear.
does anyone know if there is a link to watch this meeting or is it only available at the times indicated on channel 6? We are now anxious to see this but don't have access to local cable stations. any suggestions?
go to
http://catv6.com
We stream programing on the web. Watch it on the internet at the scheduled times
Just click on the watch live link
Marshall, is there a way to watch it outside of the scheduled times or is that the only way? Thanks
Town meetings are more expensive than forums. They have to advertised (or "warned"). Certain town officials (such as the town clerk and/or recording secretary) have to be present and typically they are compensated for their time (don't know if they get paid extra for that in FV). But that's why towns don't waste taxpayer money calling a town meeting unless they have actual business to conduct rather than information to impart.
I, too, thank Marshall for taping the meeting. You have done a great service by that.
without comment from the selectmen its apparent we must watch the meeting. To me the confusion lies within these comments. Those who have already watched the meeting, were at the meeting or have written about this in the past, state that this will be a tax payer burden and has been looked at that way for quite a while. But then the firemen representative states they haven't asked for any funds from the town and hope to raise all of it on their own. But then you have a vote based on lowering the tax burden, a burden that doesn't even seem to be known. Too msny buts. Even the people who have watched the meeting can't figure out what is happening here. I do plan on watching the meeting but am not certain it will straighten this out. A meeting is required and if it costs the taxpayers money sobeit. I assume the taxpayers are the ones asking for it.
Right now, live on tv or on the internet feed are the only ways!
Sorry!
maybe we should rent the Colonial Theater and have popcorn and beer tonight at 8pm while we watch the meeting. Geez Louise, this is one hot topic. Can't wait to watch the meeting.
Can't the citizens of town call a meeting? Does anyone know if its possible and if so how to do it? I see all these calls for a meeting but with no response which makes you wonder if there will ever be one. I would hate to see this discussed only once taxpayer money is needed. That wouldn't help any one.
We watched and know why people don't attend these meetings. They are pretty boring. The fire department did mention that a grant award would lower the town's obligation for the project. Mrs. Mechare was the representative for the fire department. Chuck Lewis also stated his vote was to lower the town's obligation for the project. Peter Lawson wanted a 50:50 split. The selectmen compromised at 300:200 split. It would be difficult to come to any other conclusion from this meeting other than the fact that the fire department and the selectmen expect the balance of funds needed to complete the project will be paid for by the taxpayers. According to the fire department at this meeting, they have raised $225,000 to date for the project. The price tag is currently 1.5 million but is most likely more than that as this price is 4 years old, according to the fire dept.
That's our take on what happened - anyone else watch?
Thank you for the excellent summation. I watched too--well only until the STEAP discussion ended.
It does make you realize that Democracy is not easy to achieve and makes you wonder if this is the type of government we are exporting to Iraq...
I watched too. The comment two posts up got it right, that's what happened.
Dan, I hear you, lets hope thats not the case!
that is what happened and the previous poster was correct, it does seem pretty confusing. What town obligation is going to be reduced if the fire department doesn't plan on asking for help? And if they do how much are we talking about here? $225,000 is not one third of 1.5 million (or worse). What are their plans to raise more money? Why was the First Selectman representing the fire department? Wasn't Mr Allen introduced as the president of the fire dept? I am sure he and the other firemen could have spoken for themselves. Who's plan is this and is there a plan at all? There are way too many issues going on here and none of them are clear. I don't think anyone, not the selectmen, not the firemen and certainly not the taxpayers, have a plan, an idea, or a notion of what's just happened with this meeting. Have I missed anything?
Yes - that is what we saw too. The fire company and at least two of the selectmen clearly indicated there would be an obligation and gave that as the reason for their request and the vote. There are too many questions left after the meeting. If the vote was based on lowering the towns obligation than it seems obvious there will be an obligation. Right? You can't base a vote on nothing or at least you shouldn't. The questions are 1) what is the obligation, 2) what are the plans for raising the funds for the firehouse and 3)why was a vote based on an obligation that may not even happen? Those are our questions. Now will they be answered? when and how?
we watched too. We want to know how the rationale to apply for a grant can be based on an unknown obligation. Or is it really known and this has been the plan all along? Our conclusion based on how this was presented is - the selectmen and the fire department knew it would fall on the taxpayers to pay. You simply don't go and ask for state money to reduce an obligation if you don't even know what that obligation is, or that it may possibly not even occur. Let's be serious here, what do you tell the State? 'we want this money so the taxpayers don't have to foot the bill. A bill that is unknown? A tax burden that may or may not happen? And this was the reason for the vote? Something sure doesn't smell right about this. The taxpayers will pay it or at least that will be the plan at another town meeting that is "warned" 24 hours ahead of time, during the week when most of us can't attend. You'll see.
Oy Vey ! Jiminy Cricket! Geez Louise! someone call a meeting and get the facts out there.
I watched too. Although I understand the frustration and confusion, we seem to be missing the fact that this is a worthwhile project. The mistake made was in the presentation. There was no need to validate the request with a reduction in the town's obligation and no need to rationalize a vote with this either. Adding this did nothing but open a can of worms, one that may not even become reality. I agree that IF this project is going to become a tax payer debt than an explanation is necessary. I have had many conversations with firemen, new and old, and they have no intention of bringing the town in to this project. I can not imagine why the selectmen and the fire company felt the need to validate their request with this. It would seem to me the worthiness of the project alone was justification for the grant allocation. It is too bad the selectmen and the fire company didn't see that before Mrs. Mechare made her presentation for the department.
We should not forget the need for a firehouse and the extraordinary efforts put in to this project by the volunteers. Let us not condemn the project because of a bad presentation.
Perhaps the fire department could present the facts and then the community as a whole could work to raise the funds needed to pay for it. The fire department is needed by the entire community and the entire community should work together to complete the project.
It's ironic that you the previous Anonymous make so much sense and make me want to stop allowing Anonymous comments on this blog. You are right: the whole town needs to be engaged in the campaign to raise money for the new firehouse. We need a sense of inclusiveness and yet how do we do that with everyone hiding their identities, afraid to share their opinions (and frustrations) with their neighbors? We all know that this town is like a high school and that there are various "cliques," and we really need to be pull together for our collective good. I don't think that is possible just by wishing it so. It can only happen by making everyone feel like a stakeholder in the project, making it clear to every resident exactly what their moral (and financial) obligation is to the commonweal, especially the all-volunteer fire and ambulance squads.
When this town pulls together extraordinary things happen. Pull it together with this project and there will not be a town obligation. There is absolutely no need to separate groups and organizations, espcially when the goal is to make the town a better place to live.
Dan, I think you should continue with anonymous posts. Many people would not share their frustrations or beliefs if they had to post their name. The town is too small and repercussions do occur.
I think the anonymous posts have been worthwhile. I am certain the selectmen and the fire department have read them and learned from them, and I think the taxpayers have learned a pretty valuable lesson too - pay attention! Get involved! If you sit at home and complain about yur tax bill, the next question should be what are you doing to help.
Here's a way to make it inclusive. The fire department can hold a meeting for the public to come in and get informed. Invite everyone to see the plans, hear the plans and hear how everyone can help. This does not cost any money, just a little time. The end result of this could be a feast of ideas on how to raise the money needed.
You have to open the project up for it to be inclusive. I am not suggesting the public come in and determine what is and what is not needed in a firehouse, but certainly opinions should be listened to and questions should be answered. If you make it a community project, it will become a community project. If you make it a community project, the funds will come in.
The wisest words said at the meeting came from Mr. Lou Timolat. Listen again. There is no need for a division, no need for a battle, this is not a basketball game. Bring it together and all will achieve victory. THAT is how to play the game called community.
Hey wait a minute! Two thoughts from the peanut gallery!
To the issue of town meeting/town forum:
While there are no Roberts rules here, this blog IS a meeting, albiet informal and not all inclusive. In my opinion, FV can and should use this free forum to discuss funding and plans for the new firehouse, which apparently to everyone posting here, is an important community issue.
Several taxpayers have offered their views.
One BoS representative has chimed in by name with comments.
One FVVFD representative has tried to clear things up, using her name.
Two people representing the local media have offered as fair coverage as is possible, signing their names and providing access to their coverage beyond the blog.
In my eyes, the major reason this forum hasn't felt like a community forum or reached any consensus, possibly why we haven't heard more thorough responses from our elected officials and volunteer fire department, is that the blog posts have been dominated by 'Anonomice.' There are times when wearing masks is appropriate (I should know) but not here. Wearing masks to hide identities while participating in a public meeting means we can't know if in fact those participating are actually FV taxpayers, or even how many taxpayers their posts represent. Come now! This is FV.... do you think your tires will be slashed if you use your name?
Harks back to my mother teaching us as kids that if we weren't willing to be responsible for our words, then we ought to just keep our mouths closed.
To the issue of money for the firehouse:
Perhaps Ms Seney or Ms Mechare could clarify, but I think it was said 1/3 of the money has already been raised. Perhaps this statement reflects the assumption that most of the previous $500,000 STEAP grant that was awarded but lost to a snag will eventually be awarded through appeal, added to the $225,000 raised through other efforts .... adds up to about 1/3 the money needed for the $1.5 million (plus inflation) cost of the project. Add to that the $300,000 current STEAP grant recommendation, and FVVFD is even closer to the final price of a building for FV's essential first responders.
So if just a few of these issues were clarified here (Ms Seney? Ms Mechare?), then all this blog energy could be turned towards our common goal of providing the best infrastructure FV can afford, and we could stand shoulder to shoulder and start digging for ideas to raise the rest of the money and reducing possible tax hikes. Lets stop wasting time hiding behind masks doing stab and run.
Mark, I agree with much of your post but not the piece about the anonymous posts. I have seen first hand what can and does happen when you speak out on an issue that is not favorable to some. No tires are not slashed but relationships are broken, friends are lost and it takes too long, if at all, to repair. The comments left here have caused no harm and nothing has been taken personal. And a great deal has been learned from these 90+ posts. That would not have happened if everyone had left their name. The comments would have been looked at by the person leaving them rather than by the content of the post.
I guess its not a surprise Anonomice would nibble on the peanut gallery.
It really isn't the firehouse that has so many people up in arms, it is the way it was presented.
Springing this on the taxpayers at a Bd of Sel meeting was a mistake for many reasons but mostly because it is so unclear as to what the burden really is if anything.
Bringing the community together on this would certainly go a long way in mending some fences and create a better understanding of the needs of the volunteer fire department.
I have no problem with the anonymous posts. If it gets people involved then it is OK. No harm done.
Dan, what people say is what is important, not who they are, that's why voting is anonymous. I know that I would not have posted anything if my name was attached. Falls Village is a small town, the northwest corner is a small town, reputations have been sullied by just this kind of discourse in the past. This is your blog; if a post is objectionable you can delete it. You do us all a service by having a forum where opinions can be expressed without fear of retributiuon.
Thankyou.
It's preposterous to equate voting and commenting. Voting is a sacred privilege that does not include shooting your mouth off for or against something anonymously.
Commenting, on the other hand, is a right that carries with it the responsibility to stand by your words and let the chips fall where they may.
There's a reason, for example, why we do not accept anonymous letters to the editor at The Lakeville Journal. Unsigned letters are typically not even worth the paper they're written on.
If you fear "retribution," perhaps you'd better get out of the kitchen. Trust me, putting your name to your words isn't hard to do if someone like me can do it every day.
sounds like there needs to be a meeting on this to get the story right so the everyone can understand and the fighting can stop
I have commented here anonymously (not in this particular discussion, though) because I am not just me... I am also on the FVCT board and what I say shouldn't necessarily be construed as being the position or opinion of anyone else on that board. I am a member of the high school faculty and I speak for no other employee of Reg. 1.
Terry is correct, of course, that no newspaper (to my knowledge) prints material from anonymous sources. But I contend that blogs can and should be different... thay are a more free and informal forum than a newspaper.
I think anonymity is fine. When I have written in to Dan's blog, I consider carefully whether I want to be known or not... and generally I prefer to be known for what I say. But there have been times when I have felt that I could not voice my opinion without negatively impacting the people I work with, my children, or local organizations with whom I'm affiliated. I have never requested nor supported a secret ballot at town meetings, but here... what the hey!
Terry it's not your kitchen.
Mr Cowgill appears to be very angry at the idea of anonymous responses on this blog. That is his right, but I take exception to his statement that "It's preposterous to equate voting and commenting." He goes on to say "voting is a scared privilege that does not include shooting your mouth off..." In fact, both concepts are v. similar. Both are examples of freedom of expression for or against something or someone.
I have no knowledge of what kinds of anonymous letters the LJ gets, whether they are worthy or unworthy, but I can say I have found several of the anonymous comments on this blog quite good and interesting, and in several cases, could see why they would want to remain anonymous. They have added to the discussion and are at least as good as anything I've read in LJ. Mr Shaw has done an admirable job of monitoring this site and I feel this blog has been a real plus for the town as a whole.
Also regarding his comment: "if you fear "retribution," perhaps you'd better get out of the kitchen." This only serves to stifle discussion. Perhaps Mr. Cowgill should spend a little less time worrying about the messenger, and more on the content.
This is not about anonymous posts. Its about a firehouse project and a potential tax burden.
It is irrelevant who said what and it does not matter whether it was posted anonymously or not. Every post has had something to add to this discussion. Citizens have learned from this forum. That is the point.
Mr. Cowgill seems to be missing the point that there are times when being anonymous protects family, organizations and friends, and YES, in this town, that is important. And quite frankly, if anyone is opposed to anonymous posts, don't log and read them.
Now go back to the firehouse project. I would like to hear what the plan is to involve the community, inform the community, and get it built. We certainly don't need a timeline like the pool!
not to keep going on the anonymous posts but must add that the 4 posts above hit the nail on the head - couldn't have said it any better.
Having been away for a few days I had to scroll through some great ideas. Informing, involving and seeking out the community members for this project is the best idea I have heard yet.
I have been in this town a long time (too long some might say) and I know that when the community jumps behind a project, the project gets done.
Now when is that meeting with the fire company? Perhas popcorn and beer at the firehouse (oops, strike that..:0)
No, I am not angry at anonymous posts. I discourage them on my blog, but allow them (reluctantly) only if they do not take potshots at others in the community.
The last commenter proved my point. Implying that the preferred activities at the firehouse are drinking beer and munching popcorn is something no honest person would do under the cloak of anonymity.
As for "the kitchen," I'm in it, like or not.
I repeat myself, it's not your ''kitchen''. The point is that the ideas and what is said is what is important not the individual. You can sit in an ivory tower and knock the people who have to make a living by their reputations and talk about the heat of the ''kitchen'' when in fact you can leave that ''kitchen'' we can't. This firehouse project is important and has to be accomplished, it would be better without public recriminations and character assasinations. This blog is an avenue that seems to have accomphlished that.
oh Terry - the beer comment was meant as light hearted humor and if you can't see that well... I dunno. But there is no need for a response to that, let's move on, please.
Can we go back to the firehouse? The anonymous posts are here and they serve a good purpose, which most agree with based on the posts. Again, move on.
I would like to know what the community can do to help with the firehouse. How can we get involved? I understand the plans are at town hall but that wouldn't help too many of us very much without a sit down explanation. Why not invite everyone to gather and learn?
Anonymous or not, this blog has shown to be a very important means of communication. Its a valuable resource and we are lucky to have it. There are some very valid reasons to stay anonymous. What if one of these frustrated posts was written by a fireman? (and I am making this up so don't assume one was)You don't think he would face a battle with the other firemen? What if one of the posts was by a town official? Do you think he wouldn't face a battle? What if one of the posts was by someone who's income depends upon their local reputation, don't you think this would hurt his income? If he was against the firehouse how many firemen would call him to work at their house? It happens whether you want to be in denial and not believe it or not, it happens, we see it every day. If you don't understand this you haven't lived here long enough.
No one thinks the preferred activities of the firemen are to drink beer and eat popcorn. That is ridiculous and an unfortunate as well as unnecessary comment. But its there and now we truly should move past this.
I too would like to hear more about the community coming together to make this project a reality.
Well, I was going to leave this alone, but I just thought of another reason one may wish to remain anonymous. I was told that Marshall and Mike used my post and my name for fodder for their morning show, with their characteristic brand of snide innuendo. Of course, I didn't hear it and I was not there to comment. I notice that Marshall did not state that he was not speaking for CATV6 or Robinhood Radio when he said "Go Giants!" elsewhere on Dan's blog, and that Terry does not state that his opinions are not those of the Journal on his blog, which certainly takes controversial positions.
And the whole question is absurd anyway, because I am Vance, not Fidel.
snide (derogatory in a nasty, insinuating manner)
innuendo(an indirect intimation about a person or thing, esp. of a disparaging or a derogatory nature)
Fidel (Vance)
What I said this morning about you was not nasty or derogatory, nor was it said in an indirect manner.
But I guess, if you get information second hand from an
anonymous source, one could have the perception of it being that way:).
Now, I think someone could say that is was snide innuendo I used in refering to the Anarchistic Anonymous posts! I thought of it as humor, that, because it was aimed at anonymous posts, was aimed at no one in particular..a general sarcasstic comment on anonymous posts.
If my comments offended anyone, I apologize.....anonymously!
This subject has now been on here for 30 days. There are 108 comments. The only conclusion you can draw are:
~The Selectmen will not call a meeting to explain the tax burden.
~The fire department will not call a meeting to inform the public and invite them to help.
(both of which seem like mistakes to me, it makes it appear as if there is something to hide)and
~You will never change Mr. Cowgill's or Mr. Miles's mind about the anonymous posts (I think they were very helpful)
And we will walk away from this as confused as we were when it started.
I would suggest we all take the advice of a couple of the anonymous posts - move on.
If there is ever a meeting, Dan will let us know. We can only hope the first meeting on this is not when the tax increases occur.
True, the lack of comment from Town Hall is quite astounding. But I do wonder whether the Town can ethically apply for STEAP money for the FVVFD building in the current situation and have any kind of hope of getting it. It would be a real shame to thow away 300K when there are many projects that could use it...besides the FVCT. Somebody mentioned replacing water towers, downtown could use a plan for a sewer system, I'm sure there are many other excellent uses for the money. Where's the vision? And the leadership?
just when you think you can walk away from this subject someone has to go and ask even more intelligent and important questions. But answers will not come, that has been proven.
They deserve answers, all of them do.
Forever the optomist, now I will have to keep checking this post to see if any answers came.
I just want to point out that I have no secret way to know who is reading the blog, so you cannot assume that any members of the Board of Selectmen are paying attention to all of these comments.
I encourage anyone who wants the selectmen to hold some sort of informational meeting on the firehouse to email Pat Mechare at:
canaan021selectmen@comcast.net
In my experience, Pat is very responsive when you ask her a direct question. Alternatively, the Board of Selectmen meetings on the second Monday of the month always have a public comment portion.
I am more interested in the firehouse project. I assume from past posts Pat Mechare is not the representative for the firehouse, at least not technically. I see Beckie Seney is the former Chair, Is there still a committee for the new firehouse project and if so who is on it that we could contact? I would think those people could or should, be able to tell us the project cost, the potential tax burden, the ways in which the community can help, the reality of the project coming to fruition, the validity of potential grant applications and appropriations, etc. To me, they are the ones to get the information from, not Pat Mechare.I would like to hear it straight from the ones in charge of the project. How do we do that?
Here is the link to the Fire Department's website (which is listed on this blog under "Hometown Heroes")
http://www.fallsvillagevolunteerfiredept.org
It has a "contact us" button and lists the department's officers.
And back on January 1, the Fire Department's Beckie Seney gave out her phone numbers on this blog and invited residents with questions to call her. Here are her numbers again: 824.9882 or 671.1503.
As much as I appreciate their willingness to speak, I believe and informational from the fire department would be more beneficial. At a meeting where anyone can attend, all questions can be asked and answered, rather than only those of a few people contacting one person. Let us all hear it at the same time - it also eliminates miscommunicatin.
I meant informational meeting. and forgive the typos.
we think so too. An informal meeting with the fire department would answer so many questions. The thought of someone calling and sharing the answers with peers is a little scarey because the answer can change so many times by the time it hits the 3rd and 4th person. Tell everyone the same thing at the same time. It eliminates confusion. It also eliminates all these complaints of no word from the project committee, whomever they may be.
We are happy to see this back on the blog. Not to continue the dialogue, for sure, but as you said, it is a wonderful history lesson. Thanks for putting it back up.
Post a Comment