Today's hot topic, on everyone's mind and keyboards, is the latest coverage of the Chestnut Hill Biofuel proposed plant. I came into this backwards today, reading the responses on Facebook before reading the article in today's Republican American, so I'm entering the discussion a little late in the game.
For me, what stood out most is the quote by Michael Maynard of Chestnut Hill, “I feel this was the tyranny of the few, a small handful of people decided to do whatever they needed to do to make sure this wouldn’t see light of day.”
Up until this point, I had been willing to consider that a better-suited location in Waterbury would be appropriate for Chestnut Hill, a location not in the densely-populated center of town (seriously, why would you put a garbage plant in the middle of town?). After reading that quote, however, I feel very strongly that I do not want to see Chestnut Hill in Waterbury. They clearly have no respect for the concerns of the community they would be moving into, already demonstrating an arrogance that will almost certainly cause trouble down the road, especially considering what happened in New Jersey.
Waterbury's residents have every right to be concerned about Chestnut Hill. Their facility in New Jersey was shut down by the DEP following complaints about the stench and citations for polluting the air and the water. We're trying to get rid of pollution in Waterbury, not increase it.
I wonder what exactly Maynard thinks is the "tyranny of the few" that has, presumably unfairly in his mind, derailed the proposed biofuel plant. Chestnut Hill has been given ample opportunity to present their side of the story. While there certainly may have been one or two people who were automatically opposed to the plan without having examined the facts, I think that the vast majority have carefully weighed the situation before coming out in opposition.
The former Anamet factory on South Main Street is a terrible location for anything that has the potential to produce air and water pollution, and it is a terrible location for added truck traffic. To my knowledge, Chestnut Hill has not yet given us any reason to believe that the problems in New Jersey won't be repeated here. How, then, can they dare to be offended when the city's residents and political leaders choose to oppose them? That's not the tyranny of the few, that's the voice of the people.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Waterbury Branch Line Feasibility Study
Last night I attended the public information meeting held by the Connecticut Department of Transportation concerning the Waterbury train line. Within five minutes, I was outraged and spent the next half hour forcing myself to calm down enough to ask civilized, intelligent questions, rather than launching into a tirade. I wonder if the DOT and their consultants had any idea what to expect from this meeting. I suspect they didn't, since they surely would have been better prepared to deal with the issues that were making all of us so angry. I was particularly pleased with the eloquent expressions of anger and frustration from State Senator Joan Hartley and Reginald Beamon.
For those of you who weren't able to attend the meeting, the Feasibility Study information and documents are available online at www.waterbury-newcanaanrail.org. They are accepting comments from the public if they are mailed before July 20 to:
Waterbury and New Canaan Branch Lines Needs and Feasibility Study
Andrew H. Davis, Transportation Planner II
Connecticut Department of Transportation
2800 Berlin Turnpike
Newington, CT 06131-7456
You can also email your comments, presumably to Mr. Davis (there's a comment form on the website, but also his email address) at andrew.h.davis@po.state.ct.us.
Okay, time for my comments.
I use the train to commute to NYC, but not on a daily basis. Much of the time I work from home. When I do commute, it's intense, every day for several weeks at a time and frequently very long days. In order to arrive at the office at 9:30, I need to take the 6:40 a.m. train from Waterbury. At the end of the day, if I can get out of the office quickly enough and then race to the station, I can catch the 6:42 p.m. train and get home at 9:30 p.m. If I miss the 6:42, which often is the case, I have to wait for the 9:07 and don't get home until 11:30 p.m. Sometimes the train to Waterbury isn't running (which will happen for at least a month this summer), so at the end of a very long day, when I would like to be napping, I'm packed in like a sardine onto a city bus with no room to move, no toilets, not enough seats for everyone, and no ability to relax or rest.
When the Waterbury train is taken offline this summer, I might very well drive to Bridgeport, rather than take that awful bus. The downside is that I'll have to drive home late at night when I am tired, which I am not happy about, but I'll have more flexibility for getting home early.
The Meeting Last Night
First of all, I think part of the anger and frustration last night stemmed from the information being poorly presented. At some point later in the meeting, it was implied that the long list of options was created to satisfy funding requirements--if the DOT requests funds to expand the train line, they need to prove that they have examined all of the alternatives, even if some of those alternatives are absolutely terrible. On the other hand, if they are seriously considering building a roadway alongside the train tracks to be used by buses, they are insane.
The rest of the anger and frustration stems from the way Waterbury has been shafted by the DOT for decades. The tiny little bit of barely-acceptable service we have has come from the persistent efforts of individual representatives (Beamon) who demanded that we have things like a platform, and individual train riders (I didn't catch her name) who call repeatedly to complain about cars being broken into, the train toilets being broken or lacking toilet paper, and so on. As Sen. Hartley pointed out, we have been trying to get the train line improved for decades, and so far all we've gotten are more studies and no action.
At the meeting, I was a little concerned by the fact that the consultants suggesting improvements to the train line are not working in conjunction with the consultants planning the improvements to the station, just as those consultants don't know for certain what will be happening with the rebuilding of the mixmaster, and none of those consultants seems to be aware of plans to construct a greenway along much of the train and highway routes, just as whoever is responsible for the selection of South Main Street as a likely location for the Chestnut Hill Bioenergy clearly has no clue about development plans for improving that neighborhood which would be derailed by sticking a garbage facility there. This level of chaos is a terrible way to go about planning anything.
Back to my comments on the Feasibility Study:
Do It Now!
This latest study has identified things that can and should be done right now. The primary improvement, in my mind, is the installation of signals along the line. The Waterbury line is used by passenger and freight trains without a signal system, which is why the passenger train schedule is so terrible--there is only one track and it is not safe to have more than one train on the track at the same time, even if they are going in the same direction. Without signals, there would be a collision. My understanding from last night's meeting is that if we install the signals, we can add more trains to the passenger schedule.
If we had a decent freight yard in Waterbury (in other words, if all those rusting tracks to the west of the track that gets used were reactivated), they could store passenger trains in Waterbury and thereby run more trains every day. This is how they were able to add the early-morning commuter train. When the 5:57 from Waterbury arrives at Bridgeport, the 6:40 from Waterbury is ready to depart.
I'd also like to see some upgrades to the trains themselves. Some are in good condition, but all of the toilets are terrifying, to be used only in desperation. I've noticed recently that some of the passenger seats are being randomly recovered in fabric--bad idea! The NJ Transit trains have fabric seats, which absorb all of the sweat and grime from people sitting in them. It's disgusting.
Safety at the Waterbury station could be improved right now. Tear down the abandoned building blocking the view from the street, reducing the likelihood of car being broken into. Patrol the lot regularly, not just when we complain. Keep the lot clean! The broken glass gets swept up once or twice a year. Why not contract with the city to have the street sweeper come through on a regular basis?
Improve signage for the parking lot. First time train riders can never figure out how to get to the parking lot, even if someone has explained it to them. The entrance is hidden between the little white bank building and the non-usable mini-lot.
Spend some money marketing the train. Make the quick and easy improvements to the trains and parking lot, then promote the trains. Make sure people know they exist. Make sure people know how much cheaper it is to take the train. Make sure people realize that time spent on the train is time you can spend reading, working, watching a DVD and relaxing (as opposed to driving, which is time spent driving and getting stressed out by traffic).
Do It SOON!
Electrify the Waterbury line. It boggles the mind that we have to rely on a diesel engine to go back and forth on those 27 miles of track.
Add a second track. The presenters last night seemed to think this was impossible, as there are too many bridges involved, but they also think they can build a two-lane bus road alongside the tracks for the full length, so maybe it's not that impossible after all. At the very least, add a second track along enough of the line for trains to pass one another. We need more trains.
Don't Do These At All
My outrage last night stemmed largely from the proposals to replace the train with buses. This is a terrible idea for several reasons.
Buses that use the regular highway system offer no improvements for riders. We'd still get stuck in traffic during rush hour, thereby missing our connecting train in Bridgeport, making us late for work or, worse, late for our flight at JFK or LaGuardia. (I've taken the train from Waterbury when I have a flight leaving from JFK. It's the best way to get there. You take the train to Grand Central, then hop on either a shuttle bus or the subway to the airport. No stress, no parking fees, and it can take less time than driving.)
Constructing a special roadway just for the buses seems incredibly wasteful. It will take up more space than adding a second track to the train line and adds more cost, both financial and environmental, in the long run. How many bus tires will be added to dumps when they wear out? Will the buses be electric or diesel? What type of buses will they be? (I asked this question and was told that they hadn't gotten that far yet). You can't beat the train for passenger comfort, even with a coach bus. Buses are always cramped and claustrophobic. I have a tendency to get motion sickness on buses, but never have that problem with trains.
Come to think of it, if I enjoyed taking the bus, I'd already be doing that. In fact, replacing the train with an express bus is pointless for anyone going to NYC. We already have buses (and nice ones at that) which go there from Waterbury.
Public Feedback
Try a little harder to get public feedback. At the meeting last night, we were told that the consultants surveyed passengers between 6 and 8 a.m. on one day last fall. I guess that must have been one of the days when I wasn't commuting, because I was not surveyed (or did they miss me because I was on the 5:57 and they didn't start until after that?). Ridership to/from Waterbury is highest on weekends (when there are fewer trains), and the survey missed all of those people.
They also did a phone survey, trying to find people who don't take the train. Again, I think they missed a few demographics. I know a lot of people in the Waterbury area who drive to White Plains and take the train from there because it is a nicer train experience. I know a lot of other people who don't take the train from Waterbury because the last train home is at 9:07 p.m., which means you can't take the train if you want to go to NYC for the evening. I'm not sure those concerns were reflected in their phone survey results.
Why not do a survey that is published in the newspaper and on the train and buses for a month? Then you'd really get a good result.
Final Thoughts
We need improved train service. Trains, not buses.
The DOT needs to treat Waterbury with more respect. Every time Waterbury residents demand improved public transportation, we hear the same basic illogical response. The city buses don't run past 6 p.m. because no one takes the bus after 6 p.m. (even though we keep requesting that the buses run past 6 p.m.). Not enough people take the train to justify spending money on making the train worth taking. Completely illogical. Make the train worth taking, promote the train, then a ton more people will take the train.
Don't keep us waiting. As someone said at the meeting last night, we needed these improvements yesterday.
For those of you who weren't able to attend the meeting, the Feasibility Study information and documents are available online at www.waterbury-newcanaanrail.org. They are accepting comments from the public if they are mailed before July 20 to:
Waterbury and New Canaan Branch Lines Needs and Feasibility Study
Andrew H. Davis, Transportation Planner II
Connecticut Department of Transportation
2800 Berlin Turnpike
Newington, CT 06131-7456
You can also email your comments, presumably to Mr. Davis (there's a comment form on the website, but also his email address) at andrew.h.davis@po.state.ct.us.
Okay, time for my comments.
I use the train to commute to NYC, but not on a daily basis. Much of the time I work from home. When I do commute, it's intense, every day for several weeks at a time and frequently very long days. In order to arrive at the office at 9:30, I need to take the 6:40 a.m. train from Waterbury. At the end of the day, if I can get out of the office quickly enough and then race to the station, I can catch the 6:42 p.m. train and get home at 9:30 p.m. If I miss the 6:42, which often is the case, I have to wait for the 9:07 and don't get home until 11:30 p.m. Sometimes the train to Waterbury isn't running (which will happen for at least a month this summer), so at the end of a very long day, when I would like to be napping, I'm packed in like a sardine onto a city bus with no room to move, no toilets, not enough seats for everyone, and no ability to relax or rest.
When the Waterbury train is taken offline this summer, I might very well drive to Bridgeport, rather than take that awful bus. The downside is that I'll have to drive home late at night when I am tired, which I am not happy about, but I'll have more flexibility for getting home early.
The Meeting Last Night
First of all, I think part of the anger and frustration last night stemmed from the information being poorly presented. At some point later in the meeting, it was implied that the long list of options was created to satisfy funding requirements--if the DOT requests funds to expand the train line, they need to prove that they have examined all of the alternatives, even if some of those alternatives are absolutely terrible. On the other hand, if they are seriously considering building a roadway alongside the train tracks to be used by buses, they are insane.
The rest of the anger and frustration stems from the way Waterbury has been shafted by the DOT for decades. The tiny little bit of barely-acceptable service we have has come from the persistent efforts of individual representatives (Beamon) who demanded that we have things like a platform, and individual train riders (I didn't catch her name) who call repeatedly to complain about cars being broken into, the train toilets being broken or lacking toilet paper, and so on. As Sen. Hartley pointed out, we have been trying to get the train line improved for decades, and so far all we've gotten are more studies and no action.
At the meeting, I was a little concerned by the fact that the consultants suggesting improvements to the train line are not working in conjunction with the consultants planning the improvements to the station, just as those consultants don't know for certain what will be happening with the rebuilding of the mixmaster, and none of those consultants seems to be aware of plans to construct a greenway along much of the train and highway routes, just as whoever is responsible for the selection of South Main Street as a likely location for the Chestnut Hill Bioenergy clearly has no clue about development plans for improving that neighborhood which would be derailed by sticking a garbage facility there. This level of chaos is a terrible way to go about planning anything.
Back to my comments on the Feasibility Study:
Do It Now!
This latest study has identified things that can and should be done right now. The primary improvement, in my mind, is the installation of signals along the line. The Waterbury line is used by passenger and freight trains without a signal system, which is why the passenger train schedule is so terrible--there is only one track and it is not safe to have more than one train on the track at the same time, even if they are going in the same direction. Without signals, there would be a collision. My understanding from last night's meeting is that if we install the signals, we can add more trains to the passenger schedule.
If we had a decent freight yard in Waterbury (in other words, if all those rusting tracks to the west of the track that gets used were reactivated), they could store passenger trains in Waterbury and thereby run more trains every day. This is how they were able to add the early-morning commuter train. When the 5:57 from Waterbury arrives at Bridgeport, the 6:40 from Waterbury is ready to depart.
I'd also like to see some upgrades to the trains themselves. Some are in good condition, but all of the toilets are terrifying, to be used only in desperation. I've noticed recently that some of the passenger seats are being randomly recovered in fabric--bad idea! The NJ Transit trains have fabric seats, which absorb all of the sweat and grime from people sitting in them. It's disgusting.
Safety at the Waterbury station could be improved right now. Tear down the abandoned building blocking the view from the street, reducing the likelihood of car being broken into. Patrol the lot regularly, not just when we complain. Keep the lot clean! The broken glass gets swept up once or twice a year. Why not contract with the city to have the street sweeper come through on a regular basis?
Improve signage for the parking lot. First time train riders can never figure out how to get to the parking lot, even if someone has explained it to them. The entrance is hidden between the little white bank building and the non-usable mini-lot.
Spend some money marketing the train. Make the quick and easy improvements to the trains and parking lot, then promote the trains. Make sure people know they exist. Make sure people know how much cheaper it is to take the train. Make sure people realize that time spent on the train is time you can spend reading, working, watching a DVD and relaxing (as opposed to driving, which is time spent driving and getting stressed out by traffic).
Do It SOON!
Electrify the Waterbury line. It boggles the mind that we have to rely on a diesel engine to go back and forth on those 27 miles of track.
Add a second track. The presenters last night seemed to think this was impossible, as there are too many bridges involved, but they also think they can build a two-lane bus road alongside the tracks for the full length, so maybe it's not that impossible after all. At the very least, add a second track along enough of the line for trains to pass one another. We need more trains.
Don't Do These At All
My outrage last night stemmed largely from the proposals to replace the train with buses. This is a terrible idea for several reasons.
Buses that use the regular highway system offer no improvements for riders. We'd still get stuck in traffic during rush hour, thereby missing our connecting train in Bridgeport, making us late for work or, worse, late for our flight at JFK or LaGuardia. (I've taken the train from Waterbury when I have a flight leaving from JFK. It's the best way to get there. You take the train to Grand Central, then hop on either a shuttle bus or the subway to the airport. No stress, no parking fees, and it can take less time than driving.)
Constructing a special roadway just for the buses seems incredibly wasteful. It will take up more space than adding a second track to the train line and adds more cost, both financial and environmental, in the long run. How many bus tires will be added to dumps when they wear out? Will the buses be electric or diesel? What type of buses will they be? (I asked this question and was told that they hadn't gotten that far yet). You can't beat the train for passenger comfort, even with a coach bus. Buses are always cramped and claustrophobic. I have a tendency to get motion sickness on buses, but never have that problem with trains.
Come to think of it, if I enjoyed taking the bus, I'd already be doing that. In fact, replacing the train with an express bus is pointless for anyone going to NYC. We already have buses (and nice ones at that) which go there from Waterbury.
Public Feedback
Try a little harder to get public feedback. At the meeting last night, we were told that the consultants surveyed passengers between 6 and 8 a.m. on one day last fall. I guess that must have been one of the days when I wasn't commuting, because I was not surveyed (or did they miss me because I was on the 5:57 and they didn't start until after that?). Ridership to/from Waterbury is highest on weekends (when there are fewer trains), and the survey missed all of those people.
They also did a phone survey, trying to find people who don't take the train. Again, I think they missed a few demographics. I know a lot of people in the Waterbury area who drive to White Plains and take the train from there because it is a nicer train experience. I know a lot of other people who don't take the train from Waterbury because the last train home is at 9:07 p.m., which means you can't take the train if you want to go to NYC for the evening. I'm not sure those concerns were reflected in their phone survey results.
Why not do a survey that is published in the newspaper and on the train and buses for a month? Then you'd really get a good result.
Final Thoughts
We need improved train service. Trains, not buses.
The DOT needs to treat Waterbury with more respect. Every time Waterbury residents demand improved public transportation, we hear the same basic illogical response. The city buses don't run past 6 p.m. because no one takes the bus after 6 p.m. (even though we keep requesting that the buses run past 6 p.m.). Not enough people take the train to justify spending money on making the train worth taking. Completely illogical. Make the train worth taking, promote the train, then a ton more people will take the train.
Don't keep us waiting. As someone said at the meeting last night, we needed these improvements yesterday.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Twelfth Night
It's that time again! The Fifth Annual Shakespeare in Library Park performances will be held on six nights, Thursday through Saturday, June 18-20 and June 25-27. Performances begin at 7 p.m., picnicking starts at 6:30. It's always a great event, so don't miss out!
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Death Row
Some disturbing statistics: Connecticut is tied with Texas(!) for the highest percentage (70%) of death row inmates who are minorities, and half of Connecticut's death row inmates come from Waterbury, even though we have only 3% of the state's population (see http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/48753351-naacp-decries-connecticut-governor-jodi-rell-for-veto-of-anti-death-penalty-legi# for that stats and story).
Considering that a good portion of the rest of the state loves to hate Waterbury, is someone from Waterbury more likely to receive a death sentence because he or she is from Waterbury?
Considering that a good portion of the rest of the state loves to hate Waterbury, is someone from Waterbury more likely to receive a death sentence because he or she is from Waterbury?
Monday, June 08, 2009
Garden Days
The weather this weekend was beautiful, and I've been too busy to keep up with my yard work until now, so I brought the weed whacker, rake, clippers and gloves up from the basement and did what I could to bring some order to my yard. I am not a gardening expert by any stretch of the imagination, but for the most part I can tell the difference between weeds and things I planted last year.
Weeds are amazing. They sprout up everywhere and grow SO fast! Does anyone know what this yellow flower is? It "bleeds" orange dye.
The downside to pulling up the weeds: the trash that blows into my side yard from the neighboring corner store becomes very visible.
Rogozhin carefully supervised all my activities by lying down wherever I was working. When I took a break and put my gloves on the ground, he stretched himself out on top of them almost immediately.
Here's the post-weeding, pre-litter pick up view alongside the garage. Fortunately, this part of the yard is hidden by a privacy fence--it would have been very funny if the blight patrol had cited me for overgrown weeds potentially harboring rats, considering that the weeds were mostly harboring cats (my cats, the neighbors' cats, stray cats....).
The fern growing wild in the side yard is still going strong. It was one of several pleasant surprises when I bought the house two years ago. After I cleared out the weeds back then, and picked up all the garbage, I found that I had a fern, some trillium, and wisteria vines snaking everywhere. This is one of the things I like about Waterbury--it's a city, but it's still full of Nature.
A bonus for this year: one of the carrots I planted last year is growing this year! Amazing! (Honestly, if anything I put in the ground fails to shrivel up and die, I'm amazed.)
Next weekend, assuming the weather is nice, I need to dig up the side yard and put down some sort of drainage system to cut back on the amount of fungus growing on the basement wall. I might even get really ambitious and try planting a vegetable garden again.
Weeds are amazing. They sprout up everywhere and grow SO fast! Does anyone know what this yellow flower is? It "bleeds" orange dye.
The downside to pulling up the weeds: the trash that blows into my side yard from the neighboring corner store becomes very visible.
Rogozhin carefully supervised all my activities by lying down wherever I was working. When I took a break and put my gloves on the ground, he stretched himself out on top of them almost immediately.
Here's the post-weeding, pre-litter pick up view alongside the garage. Fortunately, this part of the yard is hidden by a privacy fence--it would have been very funny if the blight patrol had cited me for overgrown weeds potentially harboring rats, considering that the weeds were mostly harboring cats (my cats, the neighbors' cats, stray cats....).
The fern growing wild in the side yard is still going strong. It was one of several pleasant surprises when I bought the house two years ago. After I cleared out the weeds back then, and picked up all the garbage, I found that I had a fern, some trillium, and wisteria vines snaking everywhere. This is one of the things I like about Waterbury--it's a city, but it's still full of Nature.
A bonus for this year: one of the carrots I planted last year is growing this year! Amazing! (Honestly, if anything I put in the ground fails to shrivel up and die, I'm amazed.)
Next weekend, assuming the weather is nice, I need to dig up the side yard and put down some sort of drainage system to cut back on the amount of fungus growing on the basement wall. I might even get really ambitious and try planting a vegetable garden again.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Waterbury, the new Wild West
After much consideration, I think I know what I think about the recent incidents in my neighborhood involving guns, fights and insufficient police presence (at the time--loads of police presence since then; my complaints brought an immediate strong and good response from the Mayor's office and from the Police Department). I had a lot of responses from the police, city officials, and private citizens in Waterbury and outside Waterbury, and I have had ample time to calm down and think things through rationally.
A response from J. Paul Vance, Jr. sums things up very well: "There are some areas of Waterbury that sometimes I wonder if we have just ceded to lawlessness and it is not acceptable." I think Vance is on to something with this idea.
Several people responded to my story with the insistence that police in suburban towns would have responded to the report of gunshots and to the report of groups of people fighting in the street with extreme presence: immediate convergence of five or six police cars, lights flashing and sirens wailing, followed by the police not leaving the neighborhood until they had figured out who to arrest or until everyone had gone inside for the night and order was firmly restored.
I'm still not sure what I think about that, since it sounds a little too much like a police state. But there's no denying the pervasive lawlessness that exists in Waterbury. There is an expectation that the Waterbury police won't do anything unless someone gets killed. There is an attitude, which seems to be widely-held, that there is no real law enforcement here. If you want the law enforced, you have to demand it.
For example, there is no enforcement of road laws and everyone knows it, which contributes to a Wild West feel in Waterbury. There have been fatal collisions caused by excessive speeding and by running of red lights. Speed limits and stop signs are in place for good reasons, and should not be ignored. But in Waterbury, there is no law, it's the Wild West, and if you have the audacity (for example) to obey the 25 mph speed limit while driving past Fulton Park on Cooke Street, which is typically narrow, lined with cars, and prone to small children running across the road, the chances are good that you'll end up with an infuriated driver behind you. If you're lucky, all that driver will do is pass you on the other side of the road (despite the fact that it's not a passing zone) while shouting insults at you. Imagine that: being punished for obeying the law.
There was a snippet article in today's Republican-American noting that the Board of Aldermen have voted to amend the city's noise control ordinance allowing police officers to use their discretion to determine if a noise is too loud, rather than relying on a decibel meter. While this sounds like a lovely thing, I wonder if it will have any effect. There is no neighborhood in Waterbury that isn't plagued by car stereos with the bass jacked up so much that your house's wall vibrate when they go by, but I have never seen any sign of the police doing anything about it. The snippet article (in the "Daily Digest") also noted that the updated ordinance gives residents a new way to complain to the police. Wild West again--the law is sitting back waiting to be told to do their jobs by outraged townfolk.
One person told me a story about a friend of his who phoned the police to report an incident on Congress Ave. (I think I'm remembering the street correctly) involving a violent fight between a couple. According to the story, it took the police 20 minutes to arrive. I can't vouch for any of the details of this story (let alone my memory of how it was related to me!), but the conclusion was that this never would have happened in a "nice" neighborhood or town.
This led me down another avenue of thought. What defines a "nice" neighborhood? Generally speaking, the "nice" neighborhoods have well-kept houses with no boards over windows, sidewalks that are in good condition and wide enough to use (WHY do so many sidewalks in Waterbury have telephone poles in the middle, making them unusable?), streets that are free from potholes, streets with fresh, easy-to-see, painted markings, and well-maintained landscaping.
In my neighborhood, there is a large number of boarded up, abandoned, decaying buildings. The sidewalks are mostly unusable, with sink holes in a number of places. The owner-occupied homes have decent landscaping, as do some of the tenant-occupied homes (although other tenant-occupied homes are in a terrible condition).
Last summer, the small children in my neighborhood (which, I should add, has no park; there is a very small playground at the WOW Center, but it is locked behind a gate) found most of their entertainment in destructive behavior. On one of the occasions when I scolded them, I asked them why they would try to tear down their own street. Their answer? "It's already trashed."
I can see their point. Eight years old, all they see is the decay and neglect. If the city doesn't care enough to take care of the neighborhood, why should they?
Litter is a huge problem in Waterbury, more than in other cities. As I understand it, the psychology is that people are more likely to litter if trash is already present. Like the eight-year-olds, are other people littering in Waterbury because they figure the city is already in such a state of decay, a little more trash won't hurt any?
My attitude is that I love this city, I love my neighborhood, I love my street, I love my home. I feel that I have a responsibility to make my house and yard look good because other people have to look at it. I do what I can to improve the city, because I think it's the right thing to do. I draw inspiration from the civic leaders of the past who made the city a better place. And I recognize that not everyone shares my viewpoint.
I think that Waterbury's future will be bright if we demand it. One of the many components of this is to get rid of the Wild West lawlessness. We need to demand a higher standard of behavior, and we need to expect that the laws will be enforced throughout the city, even in neighborhoods where the residents are afraid to complain.
Most of all, we need a public awareness campaign. We need to change the public sentiment in this city from "who cares?" to "I care, and I know I can make a difference." The city needs to do everything it can to get rid of the blight, but until a large majority of the residents understand the power of civic pride, progress will continue to move at a snail's pace.
A response from J. Paul Vance, Jr. sums things up very well: "There are some areas of Waterbury that sometimes I wonder if we have just ceded to lawlessness and it is not acceptable." I think Vance is on to something with this idea.
Several people responded to my story with the insistence that police in suburban towns would have responded to the report of gunshots and to the report of groups of people fighting in the street with extreme presence: immediate convergence of five or six police cars, lights flashing and sirens wailing, followed by the police not leaving the neighborhood until they had figured out who to arrest or until everyone had gone inside for the night and order was firmly restored.
I'm still not sure what I think about that, since it sounds a little too much like a police state. But there's no denying the pervasive lawlessness that exists in Waterbury. There is an expectation that the Waterbury police won't do anything unless someone gets killed. There is an attitude, which seems to be widely-held, that there is no real law enforcement here. If you want the law enforced, you have to demand it.
For example, there is no enforcement of road laws and everyone knows it, which contributes to a Wild West feel in Waterbury. There have been fatal collisions caused by excessive speeding and by running of red lights. Speed limits and stop signs are in place for good reasons, and should not be ignored. But in Waterbury, there is no law, it's the Wild West, and if you have the audacity (for example) to obey the 25 mph speed limit while driving past Fulton Park on Cooke Street, which is typically narrow, lined with cars, and prone to small children running across the road, the chances are good that you'll end up with an infuriated driver behind you. If you're lucky, all that driver will do is pass you on the other side of the road (despite the fact that it's not a passing zone) while shouting insults at you. Imagine that: being punished for obeying the law.
There was a snippet article in today's Republican-American noting that the Board of Aldermen have voted to amend the city's noise control ordinance allowing police officers to use their discretion to determine if a noise is too loud, rather than relying on a decibel meter. While this sounds like a lovely thing, I wonder if it will have any effect. There is no neighborhood in Waterbury that isn't plagued by car stereos with the bass jacked up so much that your house's wall vibrate when they go by, but I have never seen any sign of the police doing anything about it. The snippet article (in the "Daily Digest") also noted that the updated ordinance gives residents a new way to complain to the police. Wild West again--the law is sitting back waiting to be told to do their jobs by outraged townfolk.
One person told me a story about a friend of his who phoned the police to report an incident on Congress Ave. (I think I'm remembering the street correctly) involving a violent fight between a couple. According to the story, it took the police 20 minutes to arrive. I can't vouch for any of the details of this story (let alone my memory of how it was related to me!), but the conclusion was that this never would have happened in a "nice" neighborhood or town.
This led me down another avenue of thought. What defines a "nice" neighborhood? Generally speaking, the "nice" neighborhoods have well-kept houses with no boards over windows, sidewalks that are in good condition and wide enough to use (WHY do so many sidewalks in Waterbury have telephone poles in the middle, making them unusable?), streets that are free from potholes, streets with fresh, easy-to-see, painted markings, and well-maintained landscaping.
In my neighborhood, there is a large number of boarded up, abandoned, decaying buildings. The sidewalks are mostly unusable, with sink holes in a number of places. The owner-occupied homes have decent landscaping, as do some of the tenant-occupied homes (although other tenant-occupied homes are in a terrible condition).
Last summer, the small children in my neighborhood (which, I should add, has no park; there is a very small playground at the WOW Center, but it is locked behind a gate) found most of their entertainment in destructive behavior. On one of the occasions when I scolded them, I asked them why they would try to tear down their own street. Their answer? "It's already trashed."
I can see their point. Eight years old, all they see is the decay and neglect. If the city doesn't care enough to take care of the neighborhood, why should they?
Litter is a huge problem in Waterbury, more than in other cities. As I understand it, the psychology is that people are more likely to litter if trash is already present. Like the eight-year-olds, are other people littering in Waterbury because they figure the city is already in such a state of decay, a little more trash won't hurt any?
My attitude is that I love this city, I love my neighborhood, I love my street, I love my home. I feel that I have a responsibility to make my house and yard look good because other people have to look at it. I do what I can to improve the city, because I think it's the right thing to do. I draw inspiration from the civic leaders of the past who made the city a better place. And I recognize that not everyone shares my viewpoint.
I think that Waterbury's future will be bright if we demand it. One of the many components of this is to get rid of the Wild West lawlessness. We need to demand a higher standard of behavior, and we need to expect that the laws will be enforced throughout the city, even in neighborhoods where the residents are afraid to complain.
Most of all, we need a public awareness campaign. We need to change the public sentiment in this city from "who cares?" to "I care, and I know I can make a difference." The city needs to do everything it can to get rid of the blight, but until a large majority of the residents understand the power of civic pride, progress will continue to move at a snail's pace.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
More on Chestnut Hill
The more I learn about the proposed biofuel plant, the less I like about it. Turns out the company, Chestnut Hill, has a long, long list of environmental violations, not just the smell problem that was publicized.
One of the comments added to my blog post on the topic made a very good point: "If the local waste water treatment facility is not involved in the discussions, this plant could bring the existing WWTP to its knees. Smell is obviously a big issue, as is the compost on the back end. Folks love to call it organic but typically the compost is full of material that wouldn't digest, like plastics, glass, etc."
After all the things I've learned about Chestnut Hill and the logistics of the intended location on South Main Street, I have to say that I am firmly against the plan as it currently stands.
For more (and more informed) reading on the topic, visit the Waterbury Observer blog for an article from May 14 by John Murray. Also visit the blog of Bryan P. Baker, who is a member of Waterbury's Environmental Commission, has been following the topic very closely and has posted several times regarding his thoughts on the matter.
One of the comments added to my blog post on the topic made a very good point: "If the local waste water treatment facility is not involved in the discussions, this plant could bring the existing WWTP to its knees. Smell is obviously a big issue, as is the compost on the back end. Folks love to call it organic but typically the compost is full of material that wouldn't digest, like plastics, glass, etc."
After all the things I've learned about Chestnut Hill and the logistics of the intended location on South Main Street, I have to say that I am firmly against the plan as it currently stands.
For more (and more informed) reading on the topic, visit the Waterbury Observer blog for an article from May 14 by John Murray. Also visit the blog of Bryan P. Baker, who is a member of Waterbury's Environmental Commission, has been following the topic very closely and has posted several times regarding his thoughts on the matter.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Buckingham Ramparage
The next time you're downtown, be sure to check out the new mural installed on the side of the Buckingham parking garage last week. The mural was painted recently as part of an after-school arts program in collaboration with Main Street Waterbury, which targeted improvements to downtown parking for their Ultimate Workplan last year.
Also installed recently as part of the improvement project is a public toilet in the garage; and recently launched is the website Downtown Waterbury Parking.
Also installed recently as part of the improvement project is a public toilet in the garage; and recently launched is the website Downtown Waterbury Parking.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Bank Street Open House
Merchants on Bank and Grand Streets will be hosting an Open House on Thursday, May 28, 5-8 p.m. There will be a lot of great things to do and see. Bank Street will be closed to vehicle traffic for the event.
Friday, May 15, 2009
WTF?!?!
Tonight I'm sitting on the couch watching television with my dad who is visiting from Texas. An extremely loud gunshot goes off, shaking the house and making us duck for cover. My dad, who knows what he's talking about, verifies that it was in fact a gunshot. I call 911 and give them the location, that someone fired a gun on Wood Street near the corner of Oak Street. Five minutes later, a cop car drives down the street without stopping, without sirens, nothing. The street "party" is continuing as it did before the gunshot and before the cop.
My dad, needless to say, is very unhappy that I live in Waterbury. In any of the places he's lived, the police would have swarmed on the scene instantly. In Waterbury, where people are killed by guns, the police stroll by and effectively ignore what's going on.
I've heard a lot of people say they will support the chief of police, Neil O'Leary, if he runs for mayor. Yes, the PAL program is good. Everything else I've seen is absolutely inadequate.
My dad, needless to say, is very unhappy that I live in Waterbury. In any of the places he's lived, the police would have swarmed on the scene instantly. In Waterbury, where people are killed by guns, the police stroll by and effectively ignore what's going on.
I've heard a lot of people say they will support the chief of police, Neil O'Leary, if he runs for mayor. Yes, the PAL program is good. Everything else I've seen is absolutely inadequate.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
So Where Are They?
There was a big ruckus on my street tonight. Maybe half a dozen people shouting and yelling, trying to get a fight going, right in the middle of the road, blocking traffic. I called the police, but they don't seem to have shown up. Half an hour after I called, the noise finally settled down by itself (although it sounds like it still might start back up). If the police did come by, I don't think they got out of the vehicle.
What bothers me the most is that there is some very obvious drug dealing that's been going on for the past six months or more. Where are the police? At least one of my neighbors has numerous visitors every day who pull up to the curb, get out of the car, go inside, come back out five minutes later and leave. (There's some shady stuff going on in one of the houses further down the street as well.) If that many people are coming here to buy drugs, shouldn't the police have figured it out by now and done something about it?
The Waterbury police department certainly deserves praise for the big city-wide busts they do a couple times a year, but where are they the rest of the time?
What bothers me the most is that there is some very obvious drug dealing that's been going on for the past six months or more. Where are the police? At least one of my neighbors has numerous visitors every day who pull up to the curb, get out of the car, go inside, come back out five minutes later and leave. (There's some shady stuff going on in one of the houses further down the street as well.) If that many people are coming here to buy drugs, shouldn't the police have figured it out by now and done something about it?
The Waterbury police department certainly deserves praise for the big city-wide busts they do a couple times a year, but where are they the rest of the time?
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Greenway Meeting
There was a great meeting about the planned Naugatuck River Greenway at Kennedy HS tonight. A huge crowd turned out, and everyone seemed very enthusiastic. We broke into different groups and brainstormed ideas about what we'd like to see happen with the Greenway. There were a lot of good ideas, and we were encouraged to think as broadly as possible. As much as I like the Cheshire linear park, the possibilities for the Waterbury greenway are a million times better.
I think what I liked best was seeing so many Waterbury people come together and work together to achieve a common goal.
If you weren't at the meeting but would like to provide your input (or if you were at the meeting and have some more ideas), there is a survey to fill out on the new official website of the Waterbury Naugatuck River Greenway: www.waterburygreenway.org.
Also be sure to check out the next issue of The Observer--John Murray will be publishing a full write-up about tonight's meeting.
I think what I liked best was seeing so many Waterbury people come together and work together to achieve a common goal.
If you weren't at the meeting but would like to provide your input (or if you were at the meeting and have some more ideas), there is a survey to fill out on the new official website of the Waterbury Naugatuck River Greenway: www.waterburygreenway.org.
Also be sure to check out the next issue of The Observer--John Murray will be publishing a full write-up about tonight's meeting.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Stumped
On the train ride home tonight, I was chatting with a Dominican guy coming up from Long Island to visit friends in the Waterbury area. He asked me what there is to do during the day.
First question: any historic sites? No problem there, I told him to start at the Mattatuck Museum, knowing they can direct him to all the best old history stuff, and then told him to swing by the Timex Museum as well.
Second question: are there any zoos or aquariums or biking or anything like that? Ummm..... well, there's a river, and it's got a few birds and maybe some fish.... and there's some nice parks, but they're small and you kind of have to make your own fun....
First question: any historic sites? No problem there, I told him to start at the Mattatuck Museum, knowing they can direct him to all the best old history stuff, and then told him to swing by the Timex Museum as well.
Second question: are there any zoos or aquariums or biking or anything like that? Ummm..... well, there's a river, and it's got a few birds and maybe some fish.... and there's some nice parks, but they're small and you kind of have to make your own fun....
Monday, April 20, 2009
Bill No. 899
Preface: I hate lies. I don't think anything makes me angrier than someone deliberately being deceitful in order to get what they want.
Over the course of the past week or so, I've been feeling that I'm oblivious to SOMETHING BIG & BAD about to happen. It started with a phone call from "FRNKCMPN" on April 15. FRNKCMPN turned out to be a robot working for the National Organization for Marriage (well, not really; Googling suggests that FRNKCMPN is a telemarketing company located in Washington, D.C. which contracts out to organizations wanting to skirt around the Do Not Call lists by masking their agendas as "surveys").
The FRNKCMPN robot, on behalf of NOM, asked me a somewhat convoluted question about marriage between one man and one woman, and spoke the question so quickly that I barely had time to understand it. The question was phrased in such a way that I instinctively knew the correct answer was "yes" and instinctively felt inclined to give the "correct" answer. [I've spent 10 years writing test questions--I know very well that questions can be phrased in such a way.] I answered "no" even though I wasn't 100% sure that's what I meant. Anyone who is conducting a survey with questions designed to elicit only one response will never gain my support. Their dishonesty and deviousness instantly discredits them.
The phone call from FRNKCMPN left me feeling slightly unsettled. Why was someone conducting a survey with a political agenda that seemed almost guaranteed to get their desired results? I dismissed it, but the unsettled feeling re-emerged days later when I spotted this full-page advertisement in the Republican-American:
It's a very clever ad. My first response was to think it was for something pleasant. Then I read the second line and became instantly concerned that there was indeed something very bad about to happen. Which of my rights was about to be taken away and how?? According to the ad's text, a bill I've never heard of before will deny my religious rights, force the schools to teach gay marriage, force parents to teach gay marriage, punish church groups and shut down businesses. Boy is that scary! SOMETHING BIG & BAD is about to happen!
Fortunately, I've spent most of my life developing and exercising critical-thinking skills (something they don't seem to teach in the schools anymore). The lavish advertisement is clearly a fear-mongering variety, providing very few facts while preying on emotions. So I dismissed it. When it appeared again the next day, I dismissed it again, although briefly wondered if I should write something in opposition to it. On Monday, a new full-page ad started. I stopped to read it, because it looked like it might be challenging the "truthiness" of the previous ad:
This ad has the same agenda as the first, but appears to be present a sound argument: "Bill 899 provides no significant protection for First Amendment religious freedoms. It does not recognize the fundamental right--found in both the U.S. and Connecticut Constitutions--of churches, religious groups, and individuals to act in accordance with their sincerely held religious beliefs." Like the first ad, this one urges the reader to tell state senators and representatives to vote NO on Bill 899. Both ads offer the general 800 numbers for state senators and representatives and also direct the reader to a "convenient" form to fill out at ActNowCT.org.
This is when I decided to do research. My primary questions: is Bill 899 really unConstitutional? what exactly does Bill 899 say?
I had a few other questions as well: if they're worried about gay marriage being taught in the schools, does that mean straight marriage is currently being taught and, if so, what course is it taught in? Home Ec? Legal stuff everyone should know about before they are legally an adult? Is there even a course for Legal Stuff?
I don't like the idea of any type of marriage being "taught" in the schools. I can just imagine some chauvinist instructor telling all the little girls that they should focus on developing the right skills to be good wives, barefoot & pregnant in the kitchen, while telling the little boys that they have a duty and an obligation to work high-paying jobs no matter how unhappy they are, and that they should expect women to serve them in all things. I know I'm being overly dramatic and extreme, but there really are people who would teach this version of marriage. Come to think of it, how would a school decide on a curriculum for a course on marriage? No two marriages are the same, and it's up to the married couple to sort out how their marriage works.
I visited ActNowCT.org to see what they had to say. Mostly they seem to think that Bill 899 is going to force everyone in Connecticut to be gay, or that gays will become more powerful than straights. They provide easy access to a page that very easily lets you protest the bill via a pre-written message. You can "customize" the message by adding four optional reasons to be against the bill. You are not allowed to make any changes to the pre-written text (darn!).
While ActNowCT.org presents you with many reasons to be afraid of Bill 899, nowhere does it include any portion of the actual bill [CORRECTION (4/22): There is a link to the bill, in small print. Was it there before and I just didn't see it?]. They do provide a link to the Connecticut General Assembly website, but they do not provide a link to the bill itself, which is available online. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that ActNowCT is campaigning against the bill without quoting or referencing any actual text from the bill destroys any credibility they might have had. How can anyone be opposed to something when they don't know what it is? I hope that any state senator or representative receiving an email through the ActNowCT website will immediately dismiss it, since the odds are good that the sender has no idea what is actually in Bill 899.
Thanks to Google, I was able to find a copy of Bill 899 in less than 20 seconds. It is available online for anyone to review at http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/TOB/S/2009SB-00899-R00-SB.htm.
My reading of the bill shows nothing that I would consider unConstitutional. I also see nothing about forcing schools or parents to teach gay marriage. It looks like they're just changing the language of existing marriage legislation so as to no longer exclude same-sex couples. Despite ActNowCT's claims, this does not make gays a privileged class. It extends to them a legal right that they have been excluded from. That's a far cry from taking away religious rights. This is a legal right, not a religious right. There's a huge difference.
As far as religious rights are concerned, they look pretty well-protected to me:
I guess that SOMETHING BIG & BAD really does exist, but it's not Bill 899. It's the fear-mongering propagandists who use devious, underhanded tricks to get what they want. I wish I could tell you who those propagandists are, but on the ActNowCT website, they simply call themselves "concerned Connecticut citizens", with no way to figure out who exactly they are, which makes them seem even less credible. (Yes, I know I write under a pseudonym, but follow the links and you can figure out who I am in two clicks or less.)
Thanks to the magic of the internet, we all have access to factual information. Unfortunately, many of us never think to look for the facts. Think of all the emails floating around that have been discredited by Snopes, but still get forwarded and are trusted by their recipients. As Barnum's competitor David Hannum said "there's a sucker born every minute" (unless, of course, the internet is lying and Barnum really was the one who said it... in which case I just got suckered again.)
Over the course of the past week or so, I've been feeling that I'm oblivious to SOMETHING BIG & BAD about to happen. It started with a phone call from "FRNKCMPN" on April 15. FRNKCMPN turned out to be a robot working for the National Organization for Marriage (well, not really; Googling suggests that FRNKCMPN is a telemarketing company located in Washington, D.C. which contracts out to organizations wanting to skirt around the Do Not Call lists by masking their agendas as "surveys").
The FRNKCMPN robot, on behalf of NOM, asked me a somewhat convoluted question about marriage between one man and one woman, and spoke the question so quickly that I barely had time to understand it. The question was phrased in such a way that I instinctively knew the correct answer was "yes" and instinctively felt inclined to give the "correct" answer. [I've spent 10 years writing test questions--I know very well that questions can be phrased in such a way.] I answered "no" even though I wasn't 100% sure that's what I meant. Anyone who is conducting a survey with questions designed to elicit only one response will never gain my support. Their dishonesty and deviousness instantly discredits them.
The phone call from FRNKCMPN left me feeling slightly unsettled. Why was someone conducting a survey with a political agenda that seemed almost guaranteed to get their desired results? I dismissed it, but the unsettled feeling re-emerged days later when I spotted this full-page advertisement in the Republican-American:
It's a very clever ad. My first response was to think it was for something pleasant. Then I read the second line and became instantly concerned that there was indeed something very bad about to happen. Which of my rights was about to be taken away and how?? According to the ad's text, a bill I've never heard of before will deny my religious rights, force the schools to teach gay marriage, force parents to teach gay marriage, punish church groups and shut down businesses. Boy is that scary! SOMETHING BIG & BAD is about to happen!
Fortunately, I've spent most of my life developing and exercising critical-thinking skills (something they don't seem to teach in the schools anymore). The lavish advertisement is clearly a fear-mongering variety, providing very few facts while preying on emotions. So I dismissed it. When it appeared again the next day, I dismissed it again, although briefly wondered if I should write something in opposition to it. On Monday, a new full-page ad started. I stopped to read it, because it looked like it might be challenging the "truthiness" of the previous ad:
This ad has the same agenda as the first, but appears to be present a sound argument: "Bill 899 provides no significant protection for First Amendment religious freedoms. It does not recognize the fundamental right--found in both the U.S. and Connecticut Constitutions--of churches, religious groups, and individuals to act in accordance with their sincerely held religious beliefs." Like the first ad, this one urges the reader to tell state senators and representatives to vote NO on Bill 899. Both ads offer the general 800 numbers for state senators and representatives and also direct the reader to a "convenient" form to fill out at ActNowCT.org.
This is when I decided to do research. My primary questions: is Bill 899 really unConstitutional? what exactly does Bill 899 say?
I had a few other questions as well: if they're worried about gay marriage being taught in the schools, does that mean straight marriage is currently being taught and, if so, what course is it taught in? Home Ec? Legal stuff everyone should know about before they are legally an adult? Is there even a course for Legal Stuff?
I don't like the idea of any type of marriage being "taught" in the schools. I can just imagine some chauvinist instructor telling all the little girls that they should focus on developing the right skills to be good wives, barefoot & pregnant in the kitchen, while telling the little boys that they have a duty and an obligation to work high-paying jobs no matter how unhappy they are, and that they should expect women to serve them in all things. I know I'm being overly dramatic and extreme, but there really are people who would teach this version of marriage. Come to think of it, how would a school decide on a curriculum for a course on marriage? No two marriages are the same, and it's up to the married couple to sort out how their marriage works.
I visited ActNowCT.org to see what they had to say. Mostly they seem to think that Bill 899 is going to force everyone in Connecticut to be gay, or that gays will become more powerful than straights. They provide easy access to a page that very easily lets you protest the bill via a pre-written message. You can "customize" the message by adding four optional reasons to be against the bill. You are not allowed to make any changes to the pre-written text (darn!).
While ActNowCT.org presents you with many reasons to be afraid of Bill 899, nowhere does it include any portion of the actual bill [CORRECTION (4/22): There is a link to the bill, in small print. Was it there before and I just didn't see it?]. They do provide a link to the Connecticut General Assembly website, but they do not provide a link to the bill itself, which is available online. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that ActNowCT is campaigning against the bill without quoting or referencing any actual text from the bill destroys any credibility they might have had. How can anyone be opposed to something when they don't know what it is? I hope that any state senator or representative receiving an email through the ActNowCT website will immediately dismiss it, since the odds are good that the sender has no idea what is actually in Bill 899.
Thanks to Google, I was able to find a copy of Bill 899 in less than 20 seconds. It is available online for anyone to review at http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/TOB/S/2009SB-00899-R00-SB.htm.
My reading of the bill shows nothing that I would consider unConstitutional. I also see nothing about forcing schools or parents to teach gay marriage. It looks like they're just changing the language of existing marriage legislation so as to no longer exclude same-sex couples. Despite ActNowCT's claims, this does not make gays a privileged class. It extends to them a legal right that they have been excluded from. That's a far cry from taking away religious rights. This is a legal right, not a religious right. There's a huge difference.
As far as religious rights are concerned, they look pretty well-protected to me:
Sec. 7. (NEW) (Effective from passage) No member of the clergy authorized to join persons in marriage pursuant to section 46b-22 of the general statutes shall be required to solemnize any marriage in violation of his or her right to the free exercise of religion guaranteed by the first amendment to the United States Constitution or section 3 of article first of the Constitution of the state.
I guess that SOMETHING BIG & BAD really does exist, but it's not Bill 899. It's the fear-mongering propagandists who use devious, underhanded tricks to get what they want. I wish I could tell you who those propagandists are, but on the ActNowCT website, they simply call themselves "concerned Connecticut citizens", with no way to figure out who exactly they are, which makes them seem even less credible. (Yes, I know I write under a pseudonym, but follow the links and you can figure out who I am in two clicks or less.)
Thanks to the magic of the internet, we all have access to factual information. Unfortunately, many of us never think to look for the facts. Think of all the emails floating around that have been discredited by Snopes, but still get forwarded and are trusted by their recipients. As Barnum's competitor David Hannum said "there's a sucker born every minute" (unless, of course, the internet is lying and Barnum really was the one who said it... in which case I just got suckered again.)
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Naugatuck River Greenway Kick-Off
Waterbury Naugatuck River Greenway Public Kick-Off and Visioning Meeting
Thursday, April 30, 6-8 p.m. at Kennedy High School
This is something I am very excited about. For years I've been driving all the way over to Cheshire in order to go for a good, safe-from-cars, bicycle ride or to attempt to use my rollerblades. It would be fantastic if we could build a greenway here in Waterbury. Potentially, it could eventually run from Torrington to Derby.
The Farmington Canal Linear Park in Cheshire has been open for several years and keeps getting longer. It's currently a little over 10 miles in length, most of which is flat, and has mile markers set up at regular intervals, making it perfect for cyclists, bladers and joggers. It's also good for families, the elderly, and dog walkers--anyone who wants to get outside and enjoy nature.
The greenway in Cheshire--the proposed Waterbury greenway would have the advantage of the Naugatuck River for kayakers and canoers.
Here in Waterbury, a study is underway to determine a feasible route for the greenway and receive public input on the route and the vision of the public for the greenway. The citizen-based Greenway Advisory Committee has been working on the plans, and there is funding to perform a study that will evaluate the riverfront and choose a route for the greenway. There is also a $4 million federal grant to be used for greenway design and construction (so it's not a pipe dream, this will happen!).
The meeting on April 30 is an opportunity for all of us to provide our input and ideas about the greenway, as well as to learn more about the project.
From the promotional flyer:
Some related links:
Alta Planning & Design -- the company that has been chosen to assist with the project
Cheshire Greenway -- where I currently go when I want a good bicycle ride
Derby Greenway -- what the Waterbury greenway could eventually connect to
Officially Designated Connecticut Greenways
Waterbury Development Corporation
Thursday, April 30, 6-8 p.m. at Kennedy High School
This is something I am very excited about. For years I've been driving all the way over to Cheshire in order to go for a good, safe-from-cars, bicycle ride or to attempt to use my rollerblades. It would be fantastic if we could build a greenway here in Waterbury. Potentially, it could eventually run from Torrington to Derby.
The Farmington Canal Linear Park in Cheshire has been open for several years and keeps getting longer. It's currently a little over 10 miles in length, most of which is flat, and has mile markers set up at regular intervals, making it perfect for cyclists, bladers and joggers. It's also good for families, the elderly, and dog walkers--anyone who wants to get outside and enjoy nature.
The greenway in Cheshire--the proposed Waterbury greenway would have the advantage of the Naugatuck River for kayakers and canoers.
Here in Waterbury, a study is underway to determine a feasible route for the greenway and receive public input on the route and the vision of the public for the greenway. The citizen-based Greenway Advisory Committee has been working on the plans, and there is funding to perform a study that will evaluate the riverfront and choose a route for the greenway. There is also a $4 million federal grant to be used for greenway design and construction (so it's not a pipe dream, this will happen!).
The meeting on April 30 is an opportunity for all of us to provide our input and ideas about the greenway, as well as to learn more about the project.
From the promotional flyer:
What is a Greenway?
Greenways are designed to create connected networks of open space that also include more traditional parks and natural areas. This combination of greenways, parks and open spaces offer a powerful strategy for a majestic, scenic route along the river. In addition, greenways fulfill a vital need as links to places where there are no sidewalks for pedestrians or streets safe for cycling. Greenways add to our transportation choices, create places for pedestrians, cyclists, bladers, etc., provide recreation opportunities, link neighborhoods, and open up access to the river for sporting and enjoyment.
Why should we have a greenway along the Naugatuck River?
The Naugatuck River is Waterbury's primary natural resource. The Naugatuck River has been overlooked - especially when one considers the uniqueness and value of this resource in the heart of our city. Waterbury's Plan of Conservation and Development recognizes the Greenway as the principal component of an inter-connected open space plan with a multi-use recreational path that will run through Waterbury and connect to the greenways of other Valley cities and towns. The Greenway will serve as alternative "green" transportation, provide recreation opportunities for residents and visitors, improve the quality of life, increase property values adjoining the river, and retain and attract new businesses and residents.
Some related links:
Alta Planning & Design -- the company that has been chosen to assist with the project
Cheshire Greenway -- where I currently go when I want a good bicycle ride
Derby Greenway -- what the Waterbury greenway could eventually connect to
Officially Designated Connecticut Greenways
Waterbury Development Corporation
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Sounds of the Season
It's an incredibly warm day today, somewhere around 73 degrees. Yesterday was almost as warm (but much dryer, it's a little muggy today), and last night I slept with the windows open for the first time this year. During the winter and during A/C season, I rarely hear any sounds outside my house, so I find them somewhat fascinating when I do hear them.
Late at night, the dull roar of the highway is very audible--depending on atmospheric conditions, it can be extremely loud. The train whistle is also fairly loud; on a quiet night, I can hear it even with the storm windows in place.
The first thing I heard this morning, around 5am, was the cat. He had been out partying all night and was ready for breakfast and a long day's sleep in his favorite chair, so he had climbed up to the second-floor bedroom window and was talking to me through the screen.
Soon after the cat came inside, the birds all launched into their morning chorus. This is one of the first things I discovered after moving into my house almost two years ago: during the early morning hours, there is no sound except the bird song.
Once the sun is fully up, the birds quiet down. On a typical warm Saturday like today, the neighborhood is almost silent for several hours in the morning. Around 10:30 am, people start venturing out onto their porches to enjoy the warm weather and chat with friends and family (and to keep an eye on the kids at play). The street traffic starts to increase at about this same time, with the occasional stereo blasting music through open car windows mixing with the roar of motor bikes.
A little after 1pm today, the neighborhood kids who had been fishing in Fulton Park with PAL came back, sharing their excitement and enthusiasm for their morning adventure.
Later in the afternoon, someone with a great love for Slim Shady shared the album with the neighborhood, but around 3pm was drowned out by the music from the ice cream truck, which set up shop for about half an hour.
Now there's the distant buzzing of a power tool (such a summer sound!) and church bells mixing in with the sounds of cars and the buzzing of a bee outside my window.
There's always a little bit of mystery with warm weather sounds. The bells are still ringing, louder now, playing a tune I don't recognize. I have no idea which church it is. Oh well.
Late at night, the dull roar of the highway is very audible--depending on atmospheric conditions, it can be extremely loud. The train whistle is also fairly loud; on a quiet night, I can hear it even with the storm windows in place.
The first thing I heard this morning, around 5am, was the cat. He had been out partying all night and was ready for breakfast and a long day's sleep in his favorite chair, so he had climbed up to the second-floor bedroom window and was talking to me through the screen.
Soon after the cat came inside, the birds all launched into their morning chorus. This is one of the first things I discovered after moving into my house almost two years ago: during the early morning hours, there is no sound except the bird song.
Once the sun is fully up, the birds quiet down. On a typical warm Saturday like today, the neighborhood is almost silent for several hours in the morning. Around 10:30 am, people start venturing out onto their porches to enjoy the warm weather and chat with friends and family (and to keep an eye on the kids at play). The street traffic starts to increase at about this same time, with the occasional stereo blasting music through open car windows mixing with the roar of motor bikes.
A little after 1pm today, the neighborhood kids who had been fishing in Fulton Park with PAL came back, sharing their excitement and enthusiasm for their morning adventure.
Later in the afternoon, someone with a great love for Slim Shady shared the album with the neighborhood, but around 3pm was drowned out by the music from the ice cream truck, which set up shop for about half an hour.
Now there's the distant buzzing of a power tool (such a summer sound!) and church bells mixing in with the sounds of cars and the buzzing of a bee outside my window.
There's always a little bit of mystery with warm weather sounds. The bells are still ringing, louder now, playing a tune I don't recognize. I have no idea which church it is. Oh well.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Transportation Center Public Hearing
The Connecticut Department of Transportation is in the process of making some important and very consequential decisions about public transportation in Waterbury. On Tuesday, April 21 there will be a public hearing regarding a proposed Transportation Center on Meadow Street. The hearing will be held at WDC, 2nd floor, Leavenworth Street, beginning at 6:30.
The state is also considering upgrades to the Waterbury train line. Judging by the primitive features of the line, I wonder if any changes have been made since the repairs following the 1955 flood. It's still a diesel engine, with only one train able to run at a time.
I now make frequent trips to NYC and have thus become very dependent upon the MetroNorth trains. There's no way I could survive driving there and back so frequently. Every so often, because there are so few trains to and from Waterbury, I drive down to Bridgeport to get on the train there. The morning drive is fine, but the return drive at night is rough, because I am so very tired. (Taking the bus is not an option for me--I get motion sickness and, besides which, they just aren't as nice as the train.)
This morning, I was very pleased to read a short news article about Obama calling for a massive upgrade of our passenger rail network. While our President is urging high-speed rail lines, the Waterbury line is still diesel. Boy are we behind the times!
Sunday, April 12, 2009
The Biofuel Debate
The Republican-American and The Observer have been covering a proposal for a biofuel company (Chestnut Hill BioEnergy) to open in the former Anamet factory building in the South End. The Independents, led by Larry DePillo, have been loudly protesting the plan. My initial, uneducated, response was "biofuel is bad." Over the past several years, I have read news articles insisting that biofuel is full of hidden hazards, that it ultimately costs more than it saves, that it is bad, bad, bad. I have driven through small towns plastered with signs protesting proposed biofuel factories. But before writing this blog post, I decided I had better do some research first. Here's what I learned:
First, there is more than just one type of biofuel. The really bad kind wastes land and crops to grow corn which is converted to fuel. This is a very dangerous form of biofuel which has the potential to destroy world economies and increase the rate of destruction of vital forests. The biofuel company planning to move to Waterbury is not this type of factory. They will use food garbage from grocery stores and other large-scale producers of formerly-edible waste. This is good. This is fantastic. Instead of piling up garbage in a landfill where it does nothing but stink, we convert it into energy and thereby reduce our dependency on the non-renewable energy sources. This is the future of energy, and we have the opportunity to participate in it. There might still be some issues relating to the energy needed to power the biofuel plant, but I think that is a larger issue that doesn't really impact Waterbury.
Second, while Chestnut Hill Biofuel has a past record of operating a stinky factory (in New Jersey, if I'm remembering correctly), a biofuel factory does not need to produce any odors whatsoever. In fact, I found a website (http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor.html) that gives advice on how to build your own biodiesel processor, odor/fume free, in your own garage. This is an amazing concept: take your food scraps and whatever dies in the fridge, and make your own fuel. It also speaks to the potential for a biofuel factory to be a very good neighbor. If it is operating correctly, there should be no smells and no more hazard than a gas station.
Now, granted, I am not a biofuel industry expert, but I think Chestnut Hill BioEnergy is potentially a very good addition to Waterbury. They have received a $500,000 grant from the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund, which suggests that they have been carefully examined and will be inspected throughout their installation/set-up process. Careful oversight should ensure that the facility will be safe and odor-free.
There are still a few other issues that have been raised. One is the selected site within Waterbury. The former Anamet factory is on South Main Street, with access from Route 8 via Washington Avenue and from I-84 going down South Main Street. These are both fairly narrow, crowded streets, not really ideal for large trucks going to and from the factory (back in the old days, the factories all had their own railroad spurs for this purpose). The future of this area of the South End is currently in limbo: it is in desperate need of revitalization. The Loyola group has a plan to dramatically improve the quality of life for this neighborhood, but the Board of Aldermen are inexplicably reluctant to help move that plan forward, despite having already funded the earliest phase of the project. I don't know if a biofuel plant is beneficial to this neighborhood. I would like to know why this specific site within Waterbury was chosen--it is in a location that has become primarily residential, while there are other areas of the city, close by, that are primarily industrial. It would be a tremendously good thing if the city had a clear plan of improvement in place for this neighborhood, but it seems like the majority of the city leaders don't care about this neighborhood (okay, now I'm wandering off on a less-informed rant).
Another issue is "why Waterbury?" Waterbury suffers from severely low self-esteem. We're like an insecure teenager who gets invited to a party by the cool kids, but assumes that it's going to end in disaster and doesn't go (or leaves early under the mistaken belief that he/she has done something embarrassing). The state is supporting the establishment of a biofuel plant in Waterbury, and many of us automatically assume that this must be a bad thing, that the state is picking on us because they don't like us. We view our industrial facilities as liabilities, not as assets. This is a mistake. The toxic pollutants left by the past manufacturers are definite liabilities, but the facilities themselves are assets. A properly operated biofuel plant could very well prove to be a tremendous asset for Waterbury.
I think the only real questions are whether or not the former Anamet factory is the best location within Waterbury for Chestnut Hill BioEnergy, and what supervision and safeguards will be in place to ensure that the facility operates properly.
First, there is more than just one type of biofuel. The really bad kind wastes land and crops to grow corn which is converted to fuel. This is a very dangerous form of biofuel which has the potential to destroy world economies and increase the rate of destruction of vital forests. The biofuel company planning to move to Waterbury is not this type of factory. They will use food garbage from grocery stores and other large-scale producers of formerly-edible waste. This is good. This is fantastic. Instead of piling up garbage in a landfill where it does nothing but stink, we convert it into energy and thereby reduce our dependency on the non-renewable energy sources. This is the future of energy, and we have the opportunity to participate in it. There might still be some issues relating to the energy needed to power the biofuel plant, but I think that is a larger issue that doesn't really impact Waterbury.
Second, while Chestnut Hill Biofuel has a past record of operating a stinky factory (in New Jersey, if I'm remembering correctly), a biofuel factory does not need to produce any odors whatsoever. In fact, I found a website (http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor.html) that gives advice on how to build your own biodiesel processor, odor/fume free, in your own garage. This is an amazing concept: take your food scraps and whatever dies in the fridge, and make your own fuel. It also speaks to the potential for a biofuel factory to be a very good neighbor. If it is operating correctly, there should be no smells and no more hazard than a gas station.
Now, granted, I am not a biofuel industry expert, but I think Chestnut Hill BioEnergy is potentially a very good addition to Waterbury. They have received a $500,000 grant from the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund, which suggests that they have been carefully examined and will be inspected throughout their installation/set-up process. Careful oversight should ensure that the facility will be safe and odor-free.
There are still a few other issues that have been raised. One is the selected site within Waterbury. The former Anamet factory is on South Main Street, with access from Route 8 via Washington Avenue and from I-84 going down South Main Street. These are both fairly narrow, crowded streets, not really ideal for large trucks going to and from the factory (back in the old days, the factories all had their own railroad spurs for this purpose). The future of this area of the South End is currently in limbo: it is in desperate need of revitalization. The Loyola group has a plan to dramatically improve the quality of life for this neighborhood, but the Board of Aldermen are inexplicably reluctant to help move that plan forward, despite having already funded the earliest phase of the project. I don't know if a biofuel plant is beneficial to this neighborhood. I would like to know why this specific site within Waterbury was chosen--it is in a location that has become primarily residential, while there are other areas of the city, close by, that are primarily industrial. It would be a tremendously good thing if the city had a clear plan of improvement in place for this neighborhood, but it seems like the majority of the city leaders don't care about this neighborhood (okay, now I'm wandering off on a less-informed rant).
Another issue is "why Waterbury?" Waterbury suffers from severely low self-esteem. We're like an insecure teenager who gets invited to a party by the cool kids, but assumes that it's going to end in disaster and doesn't go (or leaves early under the mistaken belief that he/she has done something embarrassing). The state is supporting the establishment of a biofuel plant in Waterbury, and many of us automatically assume that this must be a bad thing, that the state is picking on us because they don't like us. We view our industrial facilities as liabilities, not as assets. This is a mistake. The toxic pollutants left by the past manufacturers are definite liabilities, but the facilities themselves are assets. A properly operated biofuel plant could very well prove to be a tremendous asset for Waterbury.
I think the only real questions are whether or not the former Anamet factory is the best location within Waterbury for Chestnut Hill BioEnergy, and what supervision and safeguards will be in place to ensure that the facility operates properly.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Monday, April 06, 2009
Waterbury Sportsmen's Club
Honoring Jimmy Arline, Carmen Cocchiola, Robert Dorr, Mary Mascolo
Paul Gugliotti, Humanitarian of The Year
Joseph McGrath & Paul Vance Sr, Special Recognition
Nick Coscia, Community Service
Lady Of Lourdes / Father Ferraro, Organization of The Year
Monday Evening, April 13th, 2009
6:00 P.M.
At the Aqua Turf
Donation $40:00
For tickets call E.J.Fenwick
203-573-1259
Paul Gugliotti, Humanitarian of The Year
Joseph McGrath & Paul Vance Sr, Special Recognition
Nick Coscia, Community Service
Lady Of Lourdes / Father Ferraro, Organization of The Year
Monday Evening, April 13th, 2009
6:00 P.M.
At the Aqua Turf
Donation $40:00
For tickets call E.J.Fenwick
203-573-1259
Sportstalk
There was a great column by Howard Fielding in yesterday's paper, addressing Sports as a second language for most Americans. Like Mr. Fielding, I am not at all fluent in Sports and am relieved that March Madness is finally over, so that my ability to understand what everyone is saying returns.
The most useful part of the column was "I had no idea who he was talking about, so I could answer only in monosyllabic grunts and mumbles. (Fortunately, we're both guys and he took that as real communication.)" Despite being a girl, I put this to use later in the day, when my neighbor (a guy) once again engaged me in a Basketball conversation. Granted, I've never been able to do much more than grunt, nod and mumble during these conversations, but this time I felt confident that these were acceptable responses. I even managed to toss in a "you can't win them all" -- an entire five-word phrase that was appropriate to the conversation!
It reminded me of a momentous occasion when I was in kindergarten and was told to sit with the first graders. They were all talking about a movie they had watched on television the night before (I believe it was King Kong). Since I wasn't allowed to watch television, I had no idea what they were talking about. Since I wanted to impress the oh-so-cool first graders, I pretended that I had watched the movie. This almost backfired when one of them asked me which part I liked best, but I repeated a description that one of them had already shared, and they were all pleased with my response.
This is essentially how I survive March Madness. I have to give a lot of credit to Facebook updates--if I read those before I leave the house, I can do a much better job of pretending to understand my neighbor's Sportstalk. All I have to do is add key words and phrases to my grunting, nodding and mumbling, and everyone is pleased with my response!
The most useful part of the column was "I had no idea who he was talking about, so I could answer only in monosyllabic grunts and mumbles. (Fortunately, we're both guys and he took that as real communication.)" Despite being a girl, I put this to use later in the day, when my neighbor (a guy) once again engaged me in a Basketball conversation. Granted, I've never been able to do much more than grunt, nod and mumble during these conversations, but this time I felt confident that these were acceptable responses. I even managed to toss in a "you can't win them all" -- an entire five-word phrase that was appropriate to the conversation!
It reminded me of a momentous occasion when I was in kindergarten and was told to sit with the first graders. They were all talking about a movie they had watched on television the night before (I believe it was King Kong). Since I wasn't allowed to watch television, I had no idea what they were talking about. Since I wanted to impress the oh-so-cool first graders, I pretended that I had watched the movie. This almost backfired when one of them asked me which part I liked best, but I repeated a description that one of them had already shared, and they were all pleased with my response.
This is essentially how I survive March Madness. I have to give a lot of credit to Facebook updates--if I read those before I leave the house, I can do a much better job of pretending to understand my neighbor's Sportstalk. All I have to do is add key words and phrases to my grunting, nodding and mumbling, and everyone is pleased with my response!
Sunday, April 05, 2009
Signs of the Season
Just as Easter is heralded by the appearance of cream eggs, the change of the seasons has its own herald. Winter is officially over and it's nearly summer. How do I know? The ice cream truck is making the rounds of the neighborhood, filling the air with its melodious music!
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Crocuses!
Here comes Spring!
If it's warm enough this weekend, I think I'll drag my bicycle out of the basement and over to the linear park in Cheshire.
If it's warm enough this weekend, I think I'll drag my bicycle out of the basement and over to the linear park in Cheshire.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Counting the Donuts
Here's the newest (I think!) Dunkin Donuts in Waterbury, on Wolcott Street. How many does that make? Using Google Maps, I count 18 Dunkin Donuts in Waterbury. Using the phonebook, only 16.
I estimate approximately one Dunkin Donuts for every six or seven thousand people in Waterbury. I guess we like their coffee & donuts!
I suppose it's the drive-through and on-the-go advertising that are the key to their success. I prefer local, real coffee shops, like John Bale, Barci's and the long-gone Brass City Buzz, but those are places to relax, hang out, socialize. Dunkin Donuts is for when you're in a hurry and need an infusion of caffeine and/or sugar, which seems ironically uncivilized.
I estimate approximately one Dunkin Donuts for every six or seven thousand people in Waterbury. I guess we like their coffee & donuts!
I suppose it's the drive-through and on-the-go advertising that are the key to their success. I prefer local, real coffee shops, like John Bale, Barci's and the long-gone Brass City Buzz, but those are places to relax, hang out, socialize. Dunkin Donuts is for when you're in a hurry and need an infusion of caffeine and/or sugar, which seems ironically uncivilized.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Kicking Her When She's Down [revised]
[Sorry for the revision of this post--as a general rule, I don't make significant changes to my posts, but this issue inspired me to write something longer and more complex as a letter to the editor later in the day, and I think it makes sense to post that here. The content of the original post is still here.]
I have noticed with dismay that the Board of Aldermen is frequently sidetracked by petty bickering. When we elect the Aldermen, we do so with the assumption (or perhaps just the hope) that we are electing mature, responsible adults who will behave in a professional manner. Instead, what we have been “treated” to on countless occasions over the past year is the unsightly spectacle of Aldermen behaving like spoiled adolescents who have tantrums and hold grudges that interfere with the business of government. How many times did the Independent Aldermen refuse to participate in subcommittee meetings because Alderman Arthur J. Denze, Sr. was cranky about having been reprimanded off-camera? Was the televising of the publicly-held subcommittee meetings really more important than participating in those meetings, which is what we taxpayers pay them to do?
Most recently, Alderman Frank A. Burgio, Sr., as reported in the Republican-American (March 11, Alderman pleads misfortune), has behaved at a new low. From what I can put together, he took it upon himself to inform the newspaper that Alderman Laurie Singer Russo is late paying her taxes. The amount she owes ($362) is not very significant, and, as Alderman Burgio surely must have known, she has been going through very difficult times lately. As quoted in the article, she has no job and her ex had stopped sending her money before his recent death. When someone is enduring a time of great hardship, the decent and honorable thing to do is to express sympathy and be supportive. Adding to their woes is, at the very least, inappropriate. If Burgio was genuinely concerned that Russo, as an Alderman, has a public responsibility to keep up with her taxes, the correct thing to do was to speak to her and the President of the Board of Alderman in private.
I question the validity of his decision to expose her delinquent tax bill when, at the same time, he and his fellow Independent Aldermen proposed and voted in favor of the city no longer shutting off the water of delinquent bill payers. If Alderman Burgio is comfortable with being extremely lenient towards landlords who each owe the city many hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars for their rental properties’ water bills, how can he attack one Alderman who is late with her relatively small tax bill?
The situation as reported in the article is made worse by one sentence: "He said Democrats had roasted him for an overlooked tax bill in the past." In other words, Burgio is bitter about getting into trouble for not paying his taxes and is getting back at the Democrats by attacking Russo. This is the sort of behavior I expect from an adolescent, not from an elected official. It's immature, petty and cruel. If Burgio wants to help the city, he should spend his energy going after the people and businesses who owe thousands of dollars' worth of taxes going back years. Instead, he focused on a personal vendetta and created yet another situation in which the Board of Alderman was sidetracked from good government by squabbling over personal issues.
Waterbury will never achieve its potential greatness if our leaders continue to behave like children.
I have noticed with dismay that the Board of Aldermen is frequently sidetracked by petty bickering. When we elect the Aldermen, we do so with the assumption (or perhaps just the hope) that we are electing mature, responsible adults who will behave in a professional manner. Instead, what we have been “treated” to on countless occasions over the past year is the unsightly spectacle of Aldermen behaving like spoiled adolescents who have tantrums and hold grudges that interfere with the business of government. How many times did the Independent Aldermen refuse to participate in subcommittee meetings because Alderman Arthur J. Denze, Sr. was cranky about having been reprimanded off-camera? Was the televising of the publicly-held subcommittee meetings really more important than participating in those meetings, which is what we taxpayers pay them to do?
Most recently, Alderman Frank A. Burgio, Sr., as reported in the Republican-American (March 11, Alderman pleads misfortune), has behaved at a new low. From what I can put together, he took it upon himself to inform the newspaper that Alderman Laurie Singer Russo is late paying her taxes. The amount she owes ($362) is not very significant, and, as Alderman Burgio surely must have known, she has been going through very difficult times lately. As quoted in the article, she has no job and her ex had stopped sending her money before his recent death. When someone is enduring a time of great hardship, the decent and honorable thing to do is to express sympathy and be supportive. Adding to their woes is, at the very least, inappropriate. If Burgio was genuinely concerned that Russo, as an Alderman, has a public responsibility to keep up with her taxes, the correct thing to do was to speak to her and the President of the Board of Alderman in private.
I question the validity of his decision to expose her delinquent tax bill when, at the same time, he and his fellow Independent Aldermen proposed and voted in favor of the city no longer shutting off the water of delinquent bill payers. If Alderman Burgio is comfortable with being extremely lenient towards landlords who each owe the city many hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars for their rental properties’ water bills, how can he attack one Alderman who is late with her relatively small tax bill?
The situation as reported in the article is made worse by one sentence: "He said Democrats had roasted him for an overlooked tax bill in the past." In other words, Burgio is bitter about getting into trouble for not paying his taxes and is getting back at the Democrats by attacking Russo. This is the sort of behavior I expect from an adolescent, not from an elected official. It's immature, petty and cruel. If Burgio wants to help the city, he should spend his energy going after the people and businesses who owe thousands of dollars' worth of taxes going back years. Instead, he focused on a personal vendetta and created yet another situation in which the Board of Alderman was sidetracked from good government by squabbling over personal issues.
Waterbury will never achieve its potential greatness if our leaders continue to behave like children.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Spring is getting closer!
The silver lining to picking up the litter that blows into my yard from next door is that I get to see the early flowerings. More snow drops and now the emergence of what I think are daffodils.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Icy Roads
I'm guessing that the city is all out of salt and sand, and that the plows are defective. I don't know how else to explain what I saw today.
I drove up to UConn-Storrs this morning, first carefully navigating Waterbury's roads. My street was a long stretch of packed-down snow. Not too terrible, considering that it's a one-way street sloping downwards. Walnut Street, a steep downhill, was (thankfully!) clear. Welton Street looked like it had been plowed once and then sanded once. For the most part, it was a sandy slush. The rest of my route to 84-East was pretty much a mix of those three streets.
I was amazed when I got up to UConn. Every street was clear and dry. Every sidewalk had been plowed/shoveled. It was an absolute delight!
On the return trip to Waterbury, the roads were all fine until I got into the city. I nearly crashed my car twice, at intersections where the roads were sheets of ice. It's very difficult to stop your car, even when you're going only 20 mph, when you're driving on a sheet of ice.
These weren't minor side roads. The first icy intersection was at the end of the off-ramp for exit 24 (Plank and Harper's Ferry Roads). The second one was on East Main Street at Route 69. The second one was worse than the first. I did a little bit of fishtailing in addition to sliding forward, even though I had been going maybe 22 when I started to break. It was a little scary.
On the plus side (if you can call it that), when I got home one of my neighbors told me that the city never used to plow our street. So at least they sort of plow it now. The problem, I guess, has to do with the size of the plow trucks. Earlier this winter, the plow driver told me that the city plows are really too large for my street. They can barely squeeze between the cars, and the drivers have zero visibility for any fine-tuned maneuvering.
So why is that UConn, which is so strapped for cash their president wants to shut down their museums, is able to do a good job of snow removal while Waterbury, which is supposedly doing okay financially, has icy streets that are a serious safety hazard?
I drove up to UConn-Storrs this morning, first carefully navigating Waterbury's roads. My street was a long stretch of packed-down snow. Not too terrible, considering that it's a one-way street sloping downwards. Walnut Street, a steep downhill, was (thankfully!) clear. Welton Street looked like it had been plowed once and then sanded once. For the most part, it was a sandy slush. The rest of my route to 84-East was pretty much a mix of those three streets.
I was amazed when I got up to UConn. Every street was clear and dry. Every sidewalk had been plowed/shoveled. It was an absolute delight!
On the return trip to Waterbury, the roads were all fine until I got into the city. I nearly crashed my car twice, at intersections where the roads were sheets of ice. It's very difficult to stop your car, even when you're going only 20 mph, when you're driving on a sheet of ice.
These weren't minor side roads. The first icy intersection was at the end of the off-ramp for exit 24 (Plank and Harper's Ferry Roads). The second one was on East Main Street at Route 69. The second one was worse than the first. I did a little bit of fishtailing in addition to sliding forward, even though I had been going maybe 22 when I started to break. It was a little scary.
On the plus side (if you can call it that), when I got home one of my neighbors told me that the city never used to plow our street. So at least they sort of plow it now. The problem, I guess, has to do with the size of the plow trucks. Earlier this winter, the plow driver told me that the city plows are really too large for my street. They can barely squeeze between the cars, and the drivers have zero visibility for any fine-tuned maneuvering.
So why is that UConn, which is so strapped for cash their president wants to shut down their museums, is able to do a good job of snow removal while Waterbury, which is supposedly doing okay financially, has icy streets that are a serious safety hazard?
Monday, February 23, 2009
Acrobatics
The Golden Dragon Acrobats will be performing at the Palace Theater on Saturday. I saw them (or their twin...) at the Palace a couple years ago, and it was an amazing show. If you don't already have plans for Saturday, and you can spare $25 for a ticket, you should absolutely go see the show.
It's family-friendly, although I'm not sure every parent wants their children to be inspired to try some of the acrobatics they perform!
It's family-friendly, although I'm not sure every parent wants their children to be inspired to try some of the acrobatics they perform!
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Bad Bus Stop
This, sadly, is a very busy school bus stop on Walnut Street at the intersection of Wood Street. A few weeks ago, I watched a school bus unload maybe three dozen young children. In the mornings, I see the kids waiting here for the bus. I can't imagine what they and their parents think of it.
If the city can't get the building demolished (the brick building on the right is probably worth salvaging, but taking down the wood apartment building would be a big improvement), then the school department should at least move the bus stop half a block north to the WOW/NRZ neighborhood center. Why do the kid have to stand in front of a building like that every day?
The situation is even worse when you realize what a dangerous intersection this is. There have been two fatal accidents there in the past two years. There are stop signs on Wood Street, but not on Walnut Street. The visibility for eastbound traffic on Wood Street is terrible, and Walnut becomes extremely narrow when there are cars parked on it. And this is where the kids wait for the bus every day.
This intersection could become really nice. There's an empty lot diagonally opposite the empty buildings that would make a great parklet, just the right size for a basketball court and gardens. The corner building could be replaced with some much-needed off-street parking. There have been a few improvements made to Walnut Street, but nowhere near enough.
If the city can't get the building demolished (the brick building on the right is probably worth salvaging, but taking down the wood apartment building would be a big improvement), then the school department should at least move the bus stop half a block north to the WOW/NRZ neighborhood center. Why do the kid have to stand in front of a building like that every day?
The situation is even worse when you realize what a dangerous intersection this is. There have been two fatal accidents there in the past two years. There are stop signs on Wood Street, but not on Walnut Street. The visibility for eastbound traffic on Wood Street is terrible, and Walnut becomes extremely narrow when there are cars parked on it. And this is where the kids wait for the bus every day.
This intersection could become really nice. There's an empty lot diagonally opposite the empty buildings that would make a great parklet, just the right size for a basketball court and gardens. The corner building could be replaced with some much-needed off-street parking. There have been a few improvements made to Walnut Street, but nowhere near enough.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Golden Opportunity
Yesterday's Republican-American ran this short little piece about the China Shop closing its location at the Mall because the owner doesn't like the mall's hours:
For everyone involved with downtown Waterbury, this little news article should be a giant beacon. I think the China Shop was originally on Bank Street before it was lured away to the mall. It would be a tremendous symbolic victory for downtown if the current owner could be persuaded to move there. You could even get some good publicity about it--are malls dying? does this move signal the rebirth of downtown retail districts? With the right targeted press release, if any of the stores in the mall relocated to downtown, we could even get some minor national interest going.
I can think of half a dozen economic developers and downtown building owners who should be jumping all over this one. Now, granted, the business owner seems to have other concerns besides the mall's hours, but the article clearly states that he's interested in a new location. Why not downtown?
For everyone involved with downtown Waterbury, this little news article should be a giant beacon. I think the China Shop was originally on Bank Street before it was lured away to the mall. It would be a tremendous symbolic victory for downtown if the current owner could be persuaded to move there. You could even get some good publicity about it--are malls dying? does this move signal the rebirth of downtown retail districts? With the right targeted press release, if any of the stores in the mall relocated to downtown, we could even get some minor national interest going.
I can think of half a dozen economic developers and downtown building owners who should be jumping all over this one. Now, granted, the business owner seems to have other concerns besides the mall's hours, but the article clearly states that he's interested in a new location. Why not downtown?
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Snowdrop
This afternoon I was picking up the litter that blew into my yard from the corner store next door, and was thrilled to find the first flower of spring!
Okay, not spring really, but when the snowdrops appear, spring is not too far away.
Okay, not spring really, but when the snowdrops appear, spring is not too far away.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Staying Warm Without Spending Too Much Money
It's bill-paying time again, and I've been reviewing my bills from YankeeGas and CL&P in an effort to reduce my heating costs. At the top of the list of ideas is to replace my furnace with something more fuel efficient, but that's not really an immediate solution (taking the radiators off-line in the middle of winter seems like a bad idea to me).
Here's my unsightly furnace:
My house has two floors, 544 sq. ft. each, and one side of the house is protected from the cold, as it is attached to another house. The gas furnace sends steam heat to six radiators. I'm frugal and prefer to wear extra clothing layers, so I don't turn the thermostat past 65 during the day, 60 at night. It's really a little too cold, and I end up shivering by mid-afternoon when I've been sitting at my desk all day. But even with that effort, the latest gas bill was still $330.
About a month ago, I remembered that I have a tiny little electric "heat furnace" left over from the days when I lived in an apartment in Naugatuck that didn't have heat in every room (there was a blast furnace in the side of the stove and a weird vertical heater in the hallway that did a great job of heating the ceiling). The electric heater is great for keeping me warm at my desk (no more shivering!), and I've got another heater I use in the living room. So now I keep the thermostat at 60 during the day and 56 at night.
CL&P and YankeeGas both keep well over a year's worth of meter readings available on their websites, so I can chart just how well I'm doing with keeping my bills down. I'm looking forward to seeing if the electric heaters make a big difference in my costs. CL&P is a little tricky, though. At first glance today, I thought I was doing great with keeping my electric bill down. Then I look closer at the usage chart. For every other month, the chart shows one actual meter reading for the month. The two most recent readings, however, are for two weeks each and are estimated readings. And they are for a much higher usage per day than for any other month on the chart. I wonder if that has anything to do with CL&P losing track of many customers' bill payments last month.
Here's my unsightly furnace:
My house has two floors, 544 sq. ft. each, and one side of the house is protected from the cold, as it is attached to another house. The gas furnace sends steam heat to six radiators. I'm frugal and prefer to wear extra clothing layers, so I don't turn the thermostat past 65 during the day, 60 at night. It's really a little too cold, and I end up shivering by mid-afternoon when I've been sitting at my desk all day. But even with that effort, the latest gas bill was still $330.
About a month ago, I remembered that I have a tiny little electric "heat furnace" left over from the days when I lived in an apartment in Naugatuck that didn't have heat in every room (there was a blast furnace in the side of the stove and a weird vertical heater in the hallway that did a great job of heating the ceiling). The electric heater is great for keeping me warm at my desk (no more shivering!), and I've got another heater I use in the living room. So now I keep the thermostat at 60 during the day and 56 at night.
CL&P and YankeeGas both keep well over a year's worth of meter readings available on their websites, so I can chart just how well I'm doing with keeping my bills down. I'm looking forward to seeing if the electric heaters make a big difference in my costs. CL&P is a little tricky, though. At first glance today, I thought I was doing great with keeping my electric bill down. Then I look closer at the usage chart. For every other month, the chart shows one actual meter reading for the month. The two most recent readings, however, are for two weeks each and are estimated readings. And they are for a much higher usage per day than for any other month on the chart. I wonder if that has anything to do with CL&P losing track of many customers' bill payments last month.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Wicked Book Signing
The newest must-have Waterbury item was released recently. Wicked Waterbury: Madmen & Mayhem in the Brass City, researched and written by Edith Reynolds and John Murray, reveals some of the more titillating events in the city's history (prior to 1980--I'm sure they could get another volume out of events from 1980 to the present!).
John Murray is the publisher of The Observer monthly newspaper. Ede Reynolds owns The John Bale Book Company and JoBa Cafe on Grand Street. On Thursday, February 12, from noon until 2 p.m., Ede will be signing copies of the book and sharing a "wicked dessert" for each book purchase, at John Bale. If you can't make it to the book signing, you can still purchase copies of the book through the John Bale website.
John Murray is the publisher of The Observer monthly newspaper. Ede Reynolds owns The John Bale Book Company and JoBa Cafe on Grand Street. On Thursday, February 12, from noon until 2 p.m., Ede will be signing copies of the book and sharing a "wicked dessert" for each book purchase, at John Bale. If you can't make it to the book signing, you can still purchase copies of the book through the John Bale website.
Monday, February 09, 2009
Albanian Demographics
There was a very good article by Jonathan Shugarts in Sunday's Republican American, but there was one little detail in the article that raised a red flag in the back of my mind. Fourteen hours later, that little red flag moved to the front of my mind.
In his article ("Search for killer extends to Albania"), he writes that "Waterbury has about 14,000 Albanians." I know there are a lot of Albanians in Waterbury, but 14,000 seems a little too many. This is the sort of arithmetic problem that I don't normally pay close attention to, but I know that number just can't be right. Just after midnight, it suddenly started bothering me.
Waterbury's total population is supposed to be around 107,000. If there are 14,000 Albanians, they represent 13% of the population. For comparison, the US Census estimates that in 2000 there were 19,400 African-Americans, 23,354 Hispanics, 24,476 Italians, and 12,514 Irish in Waterbury.
Being the research geek that I am, I naturally did some research on the topic. According to the census, there were 2,174 Albanians living in Waterbury nine years ago. That's just slightly more than two percent of the population. I can't believe that there's been an influx of 12,000 Albanians in the past nine years--that's a huge number of people.
So how many Albanians are there now in Waterbury, and where did Shugarts get his data? The way the article is written, it seems like the number is coming from Police Chief O'Leary as justification for spending $5,000 to send some of our police officers to Albania.
In his article ("Search for killer extends to Albania"), he writes that "Waterbury has about 14,000 Albanians." I know there are a lot of Albanians in Waterbury, but 14,000 seems a little too many. This is the sort of arithmetic problem that I don't normally pay close attention to, but I know that number just can't be right. Just after midnight, it suddenly started bothering me.
Waterbury's total population is supposed to be around 107,000. If there are 14,000 Albanians, they represent 13% of the population. For comparison, the US Census estimates that in 2000 there were 19,400 African-Americans, 23,354 Hispanics, 24,476 Italians, and 12,514 Irish in Waterbury.
Being the research geek that I am, I naturally did some research on the topic. According to the census, there were 2,174 Albanians living in Waterbury nine years ago. That's just slightly more than two percent of the population. I can't believe that there's been an influx of 12,000 Albanians in the past nine years--that's a huge number of people.
So how many Albanians are there now in Waterbury, and where did Shugarts get his data? The way the article is written, it seems like the number is coming from Police Chief O'Leary as justification for spending $5,000 to send some of our police officers to Albania.
Sunday, February 08, 2009
Waiting for Spring
Today's warm weather (50 degrees!) made me realize just how much winter has been getting me down. I had the windows open for an hour or two and felt very invigorated. The downside, however, is that the warmth is melting the snow cover, which means that everything is brown and drab and bleak, and we've got weeks to go before the first hints of spring will start to show.
To counter-act the bleak drab browns, here's a photo from last summer: sunny, warm, green and lovely!
To counter-act the bleak drab browns, here's a photo from last summer: sunny, warm, green and lovely!
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Ice Climbers
This one falls into the category of Things I Would Never Think To Do.
Last weekend, I was driving north along the river into Thomaston, when I suddenly spotted three or four dozen people swarming all over the side of an icy cliff wall. My jaw dropped, I slowed down to look closer, wishing I had my camera, then kept going. Today I went back, with my camera, but not until the end of the day, when the sun was getting low in the sky and there were only six climbers doing their thing.
To get there, you take Thomaston Avenue north. It turns into Waterbury Road, and eventually you reach Jackson Street, which is where the climbing happens (at a small and fairly old former quarry). There's a little bit of off-street parking, then you follow a short and very lovely path through the snowy woods.
If you look closely (click on the image to enlarge), you'll see one of the climbers up high to the right:
Here's a closer view of the climber:
And another view. Here you can see that he's using a safety line, so if he falls, he won't fall far (assuming the two guys standing on the ground holding the other end of the rope do their job!).
Here are the guys holding the safety line. Ice climbing looks like a fairly slow process. The guy on the wall (see him way up there?) didn't get very far while I was there. At one point, he stopped to rest on a ledge and chatted with his friends about how there were a couple times he thought the ice was going to break off.
There were three other climbers present, but they weren't actually climbing. Two of them were being taught how to climb ice by the third one. Given how low the sun was, it seemed a little late in the day for a lesson, but I suppose they might have had another hour before dark.
When I look at the cascading wall of ice, it really just doesn't occur to me that I should climb it. It's beautiful and impressive, but climbing it is just not an instinct I have.
I've been rock climbing a few times, at least twice at this quarry. It was an interesting challenge and an interesting experience, but I still can't imagine why anyone would look at a wall of ice and feel inspired to climb up it.
If you want to see more ice climbing in Thomaston, here's a link to a video on YouTube:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgMi5DWQl4E&feature=channel_page
Last weekend, I was driving north along the river into Thomaston, when I suddenly spotted three or four dozen people swarming all over the side of an icy cliff wall. My jaw dropped, I slowed down to look closer, wishing I had my camera, then kept going. Today I went back, with my camera, but not until the end of the day, when the sun was getting low in the sky and there were only six climbers doing their thing.
To get there, you take Thomaston Avenue north. It turns into Waterbury Road, and eventually you reach Jackson Street, which is where the climbing happens (at a small and fairly old former quarry). There's a little bit of off-street parking, then you follow a short and very lovely path through the snowy woods.
If you look closely (click on the image to enlarge), you'll see one of the climbers up high to the right:
Here's a closer view of the climber:
And another view. Here you can see that he's using a safety line, so if he falls, he won't fall far (assuming the two guys standing on the ground holding the other end of the rope do their job!).
Here are the guys holding the safety line. Ice climbing looks like a fairly slow process. The guy on the wall (see him way up there?) didn't get very far while I was there. At one point, he stopped to rest on a ledge and chatted with his friends about how there were a couple times he thought the ice was going to break off.
There were three other climbers present, but they weren't actually climbing. Two of them were being taught how to climb ice by the third one. Given how low the sun was, it seemed a little late in the day for a lesson, but I suppose they might have had another hour before dark.
When I look at the cascading wall of ice, it really just doesn't occur to me that I should climb it. It's beautiful and impressive, but climbing it is just not an instinct I have.
I've been rock climbing a few times, at least twice at this quarry. It was an interesting challenge and an interesting experience, but I still can't imagine why anyone would look at a wall of ice and feel inspired to climb up it.
If you want to see more ice climbing in Thomaston, here's a link to a video on YouTube:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgMi5DWQl4E&feature=channel_page
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Tax Address
I just wrote a check to the city tax collector for the second payment on my motor vehicle tax bill. I don't have time or patience to pay in person (the last time I had to stand in that line, I was there for 40 minutes), so I'm paying by mail. The mailing address is a post office box in Hartford. I'm really not sure what to make of that. I'm going to swing by Grand Street, put the check in the mailbox located at the post office, two blocks away from the tax collector's office, and my letter is going to be sent all the way to Hartford before it finally returns to the office two blocks away from the post office I mailed it from.
I'd like to believe there is something logical about this system, but I can't imagine what it might be.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Dragging Us All Down With Them
I was horrified and appalled by what I read in today's newspaper. Out of the $125,000 of state campaign fund money received by Waterbury's Independent party, more than $17,000 was pocketed by the Independents and their extended families. Waterbury's Independents have used their political position for personal financial gain. While they may not have done anything illegal, it certainly seems unethical. At the very least, it is self-serving and sets a terrible example.
The Independents have spent years insisting that they are Waterbury's watchdogs, always looking for political corruption on the part of the Democrats (they even requested that the FBI investigate Mayor Jarjura's activities), and insisting that they are the only ones who care about saving money for the city's taxpayers.
In 2007, they finally were able to get five members of their party elected to the Board of Aldermen. A short time later, they started campaigning for every state legislative office they could, which struck me as a disservice to the city residents who voted for them as Aldermen--shouldn't they have been focused on their municipal responsibilities, rather than immediately reaching for something else? Their campaign seemed particularly questionable considering that their chances of winning were incredibly low--it seemed like they were campaigning just for the sake of campaigning.
Now we learn that the campaign was an opportunity for them to take taxpayers' money for themselves. Again, while apparently not illegal, it was a really bad decision. Waterbury has an ugly reputation for political corruption. The last thing we need are politicians profiting from their campaigns.
Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats pay to have supporters stand outside the polling locations, but the Independents paid their families to do so, using taxpayers' money. Mike Telesca gave himself $6,000 of taxpayers' money as compensation for filming his fellow Independent's commercials--this might actually be okay, assuming that the money simply covered his costs and didn't involve a significant profit (but if he didn't have to buy new equipment, then that's pretty much all profit).
The worst expenditure was $11,000 paid to Larry DePillo for "consulting" as the campaign treasurer. He claims this was acceptable, as the work involved made it a full-time task. This is just plain repugnant. There are hundreds of Waterbury residents who volunteer thousands of hours of their time without ever expecting financial compensation, who work more than full time on charity events because they want to make a difference. DePillo is a founder of Waterbury's Independent Party, this is what he supposedly believes in, why is he entitled to profit financially when no one else does?
Their actions and decisions have further tarnished Waterbury's reputation. Their profit makes us all look bad.
The Independents have spent years insisting that they are Waterbury's watchdogs, always looking for political corruption on the part of the Democrats (they even requested that the FBI investigate Mayor Jarjura's activities), and insisting that they are the only ones who care about saving money for the city's taxpayers.
In 2007, they finally were able to get five members of their party elected to the Board of Aldermen. A short time later, they started campaigning for every state legislative office they could, which struck me as a disservice to the city residents who voted for them as Aldermen--shouldn't they have been focused on their municipal responsibilities, rather than immediately reaching for something else? Their campaign seemed particularly questionable considering that their chances of winning were incredibly low--it seemed like they were campaigning just for the sake of campaigning.
Now we learn that the campaign was an opportunity for them to take taxpayers' money for themselves. Again, while apparently not illegal, it was a really bad decision. Waterbury has an ugly reputation for political corruption. The last thing we need are politicians profiting from their campaigns.
Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats pay to have supporters stand outside the polling locations, but the Independents paid their families to do so, using taxpayers' money. Mike Telesca gave himself $6,000 of taxpayers' money as compensation for filming his fellow Independent's commercials--this might actually be okay, assuming that the money simply covered his costs and didn't involve a significant profit (but if he didn't have to buy new equipment, then that's pretty much all profit).
The worst expenditure was $11,000 paid to Larry DePillo for "consulting" as the campaign treasurer. He claims this was acceptable, as the work involved made it a full-time task. This is just plain repugnant. There are hundreds of Waterbury residents who volunteer thousands of hours of their time without ever expecting financial compensation, who work more than full time on charity events because they want to make a difference. DePillo is a founder of Waterbury's Independent Party, this is what he supposedly believes in, why is he entitled to profit financially when no one else does?
Their actions and decisions have further tarnished Waterbury's reputation. Their profit makes us all look bad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)