I have been debating (within myself) whether Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum was going to receive my vote on April 24.

I will PROUDLY enter the booth and cast my vote for Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich is an intelligent man who is skilled in the world of Washington Politics.

While I normally object to the Washington ties, in his case I have put that to the side because I know he is capable of working within that framework NOT as an agent of the Washington establishment, but as an agent of the people.

Given that, I was still on the fence between Gingrich and Santorum until last evening.

Newt is the first Republican to ACTUALLY stand up to the liberal media and ‘call them out’.

I applaud and salute him for calling John King on the carpet and NOT backing down when King attempted to play from the hand of Obama and blame others for his own actions.

While the liberal media and its supporters have consistently blamed everyone else for the lame policies they support, Mr. Gingrich has admitted his faults as a human and owned up to the fact that he has made mistakes in his life.  He has also made efforts to correct his flaws, which is more than I can say for the folks who criticize him.

King, CNN, ABC, and all of the other tilted media establishments should be ashamed of themselves and are obligated (in my mind) to issue an apology to the American People for their childish actions throughout this Presidential election cycle.

Somehow I have to believe had this been a big contest in the Democrat Party, this media would have handled it quite differently … probably with ‘kid gloves’.

I have grown tired of Democrats trying to monopolize our political system by controlling the media, and via the distorted primary system, trying to manipulate who the Republican Party will chose to run against Obama.  Obviously they want someone they can beat, given their candidate is weak at best.

Mr. Gingrich stood up last evening regardless of what the consequences might be.

This is what we need in a leader and a President at this time … someone who speaks the truth and doesn’t stick his finger in the wind (or elsewhere) before he states … get this … the truth.

There is no longer any doubt in my mind …

Newt Gingrich should be the next President of the United States and I urge all of my fellow Republicans to …

VOTE NEWT!

God Bless America!

BTW … Watch the video … Newt Sets John King Straight

Since March of 2011, this Commission has attempted to address the need for affordable housing in some constructive manner.

Money has been allocated for ‘study and planning’, as well as to pay a part time employee/expert to guide the way.

Under the leadership of former Selectman Robert Riva this Commission has allowed politics to rule the day.  The agenda (driven in the background by Selectman James Dresser) has been to pontificate about the need and make every effort to insure that forward momentum is as slow as the process which led up to the Commission’s formulation.

As a result, the first ‘project’ of this Commission is the low budget renovation of a house at 25 Academy Street in Salisbury – which is nothing short of an insult to anyone in need of affordable housing in this generally upscale community.

The house (owned by the Town) is considered temporary since both Mr. Dresser and First Selectman Curtis Rand have repeatedly said in public meetings that it will probably be torn down in the next 5 years or so in order to make room for some type of development which they envision.

While aesthetics have been a large part of previous discussions surrounding affordable housing, obviously this was never even a thought in this process.  The only concern seemed to be how little the Town could spend on such an endeavor.

Let’s take a look at this house … (click on pictures for larger image)

This lovely front porch railing, along with the contemporary boulders lends itself well to young children who may occupy this first product of  the SAHC.  Safety issue?

The use of a different color siding to repair the exterior will certainly set a new trend in exterior finish all across the community.

By the way … didn’t our part time expert have a problem with vinyl siding?

Maybe it was the artful use of color blending that made this work.

How about this spectacular fence?  Early American ‘falling apart’, not to mention the unkempt bushes along the fence row, and the asphalt patch in the backyard … once again another child safety feature.

And how about that clothes dryer?  This place is mean and green!

This lovely home is located at the exit to LaBonne’s on a busy (yet inadequate) street with lots of traffic for your children’s play time activities.

In short, if this is what the future of affordable housing looks like in Salisbury, I should suggest that we disband this Commission and go back to letting the non profits handle this situation.  At least the units they have created show some dignity and respect.

It would appear that the motto of the Salisbury Affordable Housing Commission should be …

‘It’s good enough for those people’.

While Mr. Miles has chosen to move the FCC complaint into the court of public opinion, the final conclusions will be rendered by the Federal Agency in charge of licensing and enforcing the regulations surrounding Low Power FM radio stations.

Mr. Miles is trying to turn this situation around and (as I have already said) make it ‘all about Diane’.

The attempt to question when she assembled and filed her complain, proclaiming that she did it on ‘company’ time is thin at best.

Ms. Goncalves is a salaried employee of the Region One School District.  She does not live by a time clock.  She has no set hours.  As a matter of fact, she works substantially more hours than the average person.

The fact that she recorded her office phone number for contact does not make it company business.  The FCC has office hours which occur when she is at work – therefore that is the most logical place to note as a contact point.  There is nothing suspicious here … it is simple common sense.

I wonder if Mr. Miles gets personal calls at his job?  Should we question that since he is there most of the time?  No … it is where he is best contacted.

Was this an effort endorsed by the Region One School Board?  Certainly not.  However, given the abuse that the majority of the membership and former membership have suffered over the past year and a half, I would certainly not object to the Board endorsing such action.

One should also note that Mr. Miles was not out informing the public when his company signed a ‘consent decree’ with the FCC on December 16, 2010.  It seems that since $15,000 was to be ‘contributed’ to the United States Treasury, at least those who contribute to his non profit should have been informed so they would be aware of what their contributions were paying for.  It also seems that those who were invested should have been informed of the reason for such a payment.  Who’s hiding things now?

For those who don’t understand the alleged violation(s), maybe you should take some of your time and study FCC Regulations, as well as Federal Code Regulations.  You might learn something.

At the end of the day I support Ms. Goncalves no matter what the outcome.  She has been a dedicated Assistant Superintendent and is a valuable asset to our Regional School system.

I wish I could say the same for the other.

In our northwest corner we have two public access television stations, two radio stations, and two newspapers which serve as our sources for news and information.

Tri-State controls both television stations and one of the radio stations.  Unfortunately the other radio station is broadcast from an outside source and features little local content.  Both newspapers (even when presented with facts concerning Tri-State’s less than honorable actions) shy away from the story and tend to paint a picture which would make you believe that Tri-State is the best thing to happen in this corner since the creation of media outlets.  I should also note that these newspapers host weekly programs on Tri-State’s non commercial radio station.

It has been some time since I have posted about Tri-State Public Communications’ practices (go back on my blog posts to last year when I was personally screwed by said organization), however I was reminded of their questionable practices when I read a recent story in the Waterbury Republican American concerning a complaint filed with the FCC by Region One Assistant Superintendent Diane Goncalves.

The reporter (Ruth Epstein) crafts a story which portrays Tri-State’s President, Marshall Miles, as if he were the victim of some witches evil spell.  Sadly, this is not the first time that Tri-State has been in question for its practices by the FCC.  Mr. Terry Cowgill authored a very accurate piece at his blog concerning this and other issues with this organization.

I am amused (although it is not funny as in a ha-ha sense) by Mr. Miles’ demands for answers concerning Ms. Goncalves’ purported use of public facilities and equipment in the process of assembling and filing her FCC complaint.  I believe his assumptions have no merit and are designed to give the public appearance that he is somehow being victimize by her … not that she doesn’t have all of the right in the world considering his series of public airwave assaults on her and our Superintendent, Patricia Chamberlain, since August of 2010.

I should submit that he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones.

Many of the practices employed by Tri-State in the operations of both their public television stations and their non commercial radio station would be hard pressed to stand up to any serious scrutiny by the Connecticut Public Utility Regulatory Authority, the Internal Revenue Service, or the Federal Communications Commission (as already shown by the settlement in 2010 with said agency).

Tri-State’s Board of Directors read like a who’s who of celebrities and important people of Northwest Connecticut when it was conceived in 2002.  Today the Board of Directors is comprised of three people, two of whom have familial ties.  The IRS takes a dim view of such boards.

Mr. Cowgill mentions the consistent negative balance at the end of each fiscal year (as noted in the Federal 990 reports to the IRS), however he fails to mention that immense amounts of cash are either contributed or loaned under the name of one of the members of its Board of Directors on an annual basis.  Were it not for those deep pockets, the organization might surely be bankrupt.

Tri-State is also the ‘keeper’ of the Cable Advisory Council of Northwest Connecticut funds, which have not been accounted for with the State of Connecticut since 2005.  This is a requirement of Connecticut State law.

Maybe I should create a list of questions for Tri-State to answer.

Offer to buy Lakeville firehouse is withdrawn

was MUSIC to my ears!

I had suggested a plan to turn the old fire house into workforce apartment units.

I am going to make the same suggestion again.

This time I will not let the ‘powers that be’ manipulate the data as the Salisbury Affordable Housing Commission (SAHC) did back in October when they decided to TRASH my idea … From the minutes of SAHC (10/3/11):

The Commission discussed the proposal from Mike Flint for the conversion of the former firehouse into affordable housing.  The Board of Selectmen asked the Commission to weigh in with a formal opinion of this project.

P. Forood made a motion to approve the following resolution:

The Commission would like to express its appreciation to Mike Flint for his work and enthusiasm about creating affordable housing. After seeking advice from development professionals, two meetings with Mike Flint, and much discussion, it is the sense of this Commission that this proposal for the reuse of the former firehouse for 3 units of affordable housing does not make economic sense.

K. Kiefer seconded and the motion was approved unanimously.

SAHC never produced any documentation to refute my numbers, nor did they have the necessary information (which I have and they never obtained) to get ‘advice from development professionals’.  Considering my years in the contracting business one would think the professionals would have been asked to speak with me, however that never occurred.

I am not aware of the BOARD of Selectmen making a request to SAHC, at least not at a public meeting.

The coordinator (Jocelyn Ayer) never spoke with me about my proposal, nor did she act as if she were remotely interested in it.  Funny that I am one of those who pay her compensation yet she acted as if my plan never existed.  Maybe I should have worked an accessory apartment into the plan to peak her interest!

Now that the offer has been withdrawn, maybe we can allow an open discussion of the plans for workforce apartments.  Maybe we can ask the public and business people in Lakeville what THEY think the best use is for this building.

While I favor workforce housing, I know that other ideas are out there.  Is it not time for the people to have some input concerning the future of this Town building?

…. to be continued

The SAHC meeting of November 14 appeared to be lacking general organization or even a sense of direction.

The Chairman and members (in large part) arrived unprepared for this monthly exercise.

The paid coordinator was not prepared either.

The commission continues to receive reports from Jocelyn Ayer (the paid coordinator) about the virtues of accessory apartments.  This month she reports that three people in Salisbury have met with her and one of the commissioners to discuss units at their homes.  They also admit that these units will NOT be easy to do.  I thought we had made it easier with the adoption (by Planning and Zoning) of recommendations from the Affordable Housing Advisory committee concerning these types of units.

The commission also accepted Ayer’s recommendation to become an organizational member of HousingUS.  While it was not clear to anyone (even after they questioned the coordinator) what advantage this membership might have, the fact that it has no monetary strings attached was good enough to approve it.

I might also note that the SAHC somehow feels that part of its mission is to save people from foreclosure.  This one still mystifies me.

In another order of business the commission decided to recommend to the Board of Selectmen that ‘up to $9,500.00’ be expended from the Affordable Housing Fund to pay for improvements at 25 Academy Street, a property that is owned by the Town (you).  It appears that this project was executed without any commitment concerning who would pay the bills.  Mr. Dresser stated that he and Mr. Rand had discussed paying for it from somewhere in the  Town budget, however that was apparently not going to happen.  While some of the bills were paid from Town funds, Mr. Dresser said that he had paid some of the bills out of his own pocket.  He is assuming he will be reimbursed should the Selectmen approve using money from the Affordable Housing Fund.  (I wonder if the Selectmen will go along with this?)

Is this how we are conducting Town business?  Think about the paragraph above!

Ultimately the SAHC ditched a few of the agenda items so they would have time for an executive session.

The executive session was to discuss a possible property purchase … something that would have to be recommended and approved by Town Meeting.

Hopefully the SAHC will have the sense to meet with neighbors and do the preliminary work that is vital for the acceptance by those folks, unlike the time the SAHC coordinator didn’t bother to meet with neighbors concerning her ill-fated IHZ proposal for Library Street.  Affordable housing is of such a nature that the standard Salisbury government approach of ‘shove it down you throat’ will NOT work.  It takes careful planning and serious outreach to bring all of the players into the game.

I have good indication of the property that they were discussing.  It has a history which needs to be carefully considered and will certainly require a tactful approach, something I see sorely lacking in this commission.

I mention this because I attended a public meeting about the POCD for Salisbury on Thursday evening (11/10).  I was rather disappointed at the relatively low turn out considering this document is suppose to map out the plan of what we want our community to look like in the future.  I was also alarmed by the lack of younger people as I believe they have the most at stake in this process.

The Salisbury POCD effort is being guided by an organization called Planimetrics, a firm that was hired by the Salisbury Planning and Zoning Commission.

The two hour session included identifying things you are proud of in Salisbury and things your are sorry about.  This was done by placing dots on two maps of the town.  Green for Proud … Red for Sorry.

Attendees were also issued 50 points which they could distribute in various ballot boxes concerning particular issues of concerned to them.  These boxes were tallied and listed for discussion purposes.

The number one concern was housing … surprise!  The age old dilemma of affordable/workforce housing became topic and was bantered about the room.  As one could predict, there were those who felt we have a defined need for such housing, those who believed that we need to study the need more, and those who believe we need to carefully hide it from public view.

There was also some discussion concerning design standards, however that seemed to be generally rejected by those in attendance (thank goodness).  Some people were concerned whether new buildings would ‘fit in’.  I have issues with this concept since our community is very diverse in the styles of architecture it exhibits and I object to giving power to a commission for determining what styles people can and cannot build in this community.  Considering the diversity of  architecture the determination of what will ‘fit in’ is purely subjective and a major infringement on personal property rights.

We then moved on to a thing called ‘community character’, a term that strikes me as overly vague.  The discussion came across as some type of effort to determine the very mindset of people who live in the community, which would be impossible to do in any type of plan.  Here again, character is a very subjective term and I shall once again object to subjective judgments by a plan or planning commission.

While this two hour session may have had some value, I generally did not feel it did.  Other than to allow a group of citizens to express some concerns, I am not sure what was learned other than the fact that development in Salisbury is in conflict with conservation.  There was an obvious group of folks who believe that we are threatened by over development and have a need to conserve more open space while tightly regulating all forms of development.  The Salisbury community is far from threatened in this manner and could easily accommodate substantial development without significant impact on the amount of preserved or open space available.

The POCD is a few years late and because of a State Grant that was obtained to help offset the cost in our local budget must be completed by June of 2012.  I would suggest that you contact members of the Planning and Zoning Commission to express your ideas and pay attention to when (if) there are any other sessions held for the public input.

You might even take time to read the current POCD so as to educate yourself in this matter.  Our current POCD has been effectively laying in the file cabinet, largely ignored over the past decade plus.  Since we are spending over $10,000 to create this plan, it seems that we should be reviewing it frequently.  As a matter of fact, the Statute that details this required plan is very clear about using it on a regular basis to guide what is happening concerning matters of conservation and development.

I would again note that our younger population, including students, parents, and young to middle aged singles should be out there in force making their opinions know concerning the development of this plan.  It is you and your children’s future.  It can be the difference between a vibrant and diverse community or a sad old town that used to be.

Get involved!

I am familiar with the Region One Board and how it functions.  My regular attendance of their meetings for the past four years has kept me current with the issues in our High School, Central Office, and Pupil Services.

I was a member of both selection committees for our new Principal and Assistant Principal at Housatonic Valley Region High School.

I am a graduate of Salisbury Central (1972) and Housatonic (1976).  My daughter attends Salisbury Central.

I am concerned about the events of the past year and how they have distracted the Board from focusing on the educational needs and budget, not to mention wasting over $ 20,000 of our educational dollars.

We need to get back on track and ignore those who are simply trying to create controversy for Region One.  The personal political agenda of a few must stop so that the Board may regain its sense of direction.

You can read my statement at FLINT2011.COM.

It is important for everyone to vote in the municipal election, no matter who you support.

I hope you will consider casting your Region One vote for me at 15C on the ballot in the Town of Salisbury.

For the record I am a candidate for the seat in Salisbury.

The Lakeville Journal published their endorsements for these races (10/28) and also provided profiles about each of the candidates involved.  The Journal contacted all candidates with a questionnaire so they could create these profiles and gave equal space to all candidates.  While I may have some differences of opinion with their endorsements, I commend them for presenting all of the candidates equally and in their own words.  They also made their pages available for citizens to state their preferences.

The Lakeville Journal, a private company, did a stellar job of presenting these races to the people of our area without bias.  I tip my hat to the Journal.

Unfortunately WHDD (aka Robinhood Radio) which is operated by the 501c3 non profit Tri-State Public Communications and affiliated with National Public Radio, chose to handle the three Region One election contests a bit differently.

Apparently WHDD did not feel a need to invite all of the candidates to do interviews.  I am assuming that candidates had to go knocking on their door if they wanted air time.  While there is no violation of US Code or FCC regulations, it certainly does not fit the profile which they like to create about themselves.  WHDD claims to be the place for information in the northwest corner but has failed to make any real effort to inform the citizens about the candidates in these races.

My suspicion is that our little public radio station has an agenda that is less that ‘fair and balanced’ concerning the Region One contested seats.  Tri-State’s President and lead morning show host, Marshall Miles, has been consistent in his badgering of the Region One Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Board Chairman, and sometimes other Board members since August of 2010.  He and his co-host (also the Treasurer of Tri-State), Jill Goodman, went so far as to advocate the defeat of the Region One budget earlier this year, based on information about administrator contracts that was at best inaccurate. Not long ago they cooked up a conspiracy theory about a Board meeting that was cancelled because it would have lacked a quorum, nothing more.

WHDD (Tri-State) has not been shy about the agenda they have spouted across their public airwave.  They are trying to influence an election.  Mr. Miles went so far as to post endorsements on the WHDD Facebook page.  They are supporting candidates (at least two of the three he has endorsed) who have agenda designed to distract the Board from the business of education and target the top Regional administrators for elimination.

There has been extensive debate and some court cases concerning non commercial broadcast stations and political candidate endorsements.  While the courts have ruled in favor of free speech, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) views 501c3 non profits differently concerning candidate endorsements.

IRS provides various non profit status classifications in the 501 category.  There are three designations of non profits which allow for political activities such as candidate endorsements, however the 501c3 classification is NOT one of them.

From the IRS website:

Can a tax-exempt organization endorse candidates for public office?

The type of tax exemption determines whether an organization may endorse candidates for public office.  For example, a section 501(c)(3) organization may not publish or distribute printed statements or make oral statements on behalf of, or in opposition to, a candidate for public office.  Consequently, a written or oral endorsement of a candidate is strictly forbidden.  The rating of candidates, even on a nonpartisan basis, is also prohibited.  On the other hand, a section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) organization may engage in political campaigns, provided that such activities are not the organization’s primary activity.

While Mr. Miles and Ms. Goodman will state that ‘this is Marshall’s opinion’ (and he prints that on the WHDD Facebook page), the fact that it appears on the official WHDD page brings Mr. Miles personal opinion into question.  The IRS has issued publications on this matter, giving specific examples of when board members and executives of non profits cross this treacherous line.  While the IRS does not restrict individual speech concerning candidates for public office, they do restrict what 501c3 organizations may do in this arena.

Mr. Miles is the President of the non profit and must exercise caution when he makes his endorsements.  Based on the following example from the IRS, his endorsements being posted on the company Facebook page may well violate IRS code.

Here is one of 21 situations the IRS published in reference to rule 2007-41:

Situation 4.  President B is the president of University K, a section 501(c)(3) organization. University K publishes a monthly alumni newsletter that is distributed to all alumni of the university. In each issue, President B has a column titled “My Views.” The month before the election, President B states in the “My Views” column, “It is my personal opinion that Candidate U should be reelected.” For that one issue, President B pays from his personal funds the portion of the cost of the newsletter attributable to the “My Views” column. Even though he paid part of the cost of the newsletter, the newsletter is an official publication of the university. Because the endorsement appeared in an official publication of University K, it constitutes campaign intervention by University K.

At the end of the day I am sorry that we do not have another local radio station.  Most of the time WHDD spends its time pandering to those who might open their wallets to Tri-State.  Their local news and political coverage is bias and there is no hesitation about banning people from the airwave when they do not submit to the hosts point of view.  They even eliminate comments they don’t agree with from their Facebook page.

Hopefully reasonable people will not listen to the WHDD agenda designed to disrupt the Region One education system.  The Region One Board needs to focus on quality education and cost controls in a volatile economy, not on creating controversy for the WHDD Breakfast Club to chatter about in the morning.

We are still waiting … CL&P chose three houses to leave off the grid on Tuesday, November 1, including our six unit apartment building.  They were at the scene of the problem and got summoned away by some mystical ‘order givers’ who have no regard for anything other than the instructions they send out from their ‘power abundant complex’.

I am frustrated when I see businesses with power on one side of Main Street in Lakeville and the other side has none!  There seem to be various situations like ours where a few homes have been left literally ‘powerless’ for no reason other than orders came from the castle and the crew had to pack up and leave.  Why not finish that little bit of work so you don’t have to come all the way back?  I fear that they will forget our little situation and we will have to start calling the ‘I don’t give a damn center’ again to beg for power.

I haven’t seen a CL&P crew around here in days.

To rub salt in the wound, the ‘meter reader’ came by to read all of our DEAD meters.  I suppose we will have an estimated bill next time.  I will be on watch to see when my bill reflects this now eight days without power … something tells me my bill will stay the same and they will hope I don’t notice or complain, not that they care.

I laugh at Governor Malloy when he asks the banks to waive late fees because folks who pay online or were unable to go to the bank (because it had no power) shouldn’t be penalized.  What about CL&P?  While we were scrambling to decide whether to seek shelter in someplace other than our home, my payment was due.  Since I had no power (or clue about what the heck was going on) I was unable to make my usual online payment.  Will Governor Malloy ask CL&P to waive its late fees because of this mess that they are responsible for?  I somehow doubt it.  While the State has no power over the banks, it does have power over CL&P (no pun intended).

How about all the food we lost … will CL&P pay for that too?

Whatever!  I must get back to the blogging business, even if it is from my laptop in someone else’s living room.

Thanks a lot CL&P!  Nice work!  Too bad there isn’t some way to find some competition for your grid system service.  We can switch providers for our electricity but we are stuck with you for the infrastructure which you seem to care so little about.

Tomorrow I shall blog about a local non profit [501(c)3] who seem to think they don’t have to follow the rules.

Nice to see you all again!