 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Let Your Voice Be Heard! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page will reprint letters to the editor, on subjects relevant to the residents of Lincoln, published in the Valley Breeze, The Providence Journal, The Pawtucket Times, Neighbors and the Woonsocket Call as well as letters of interest submitted to the webmaster.
8/8/08 I'd like to comment on your recent article on the Limerock Dam. First, I believe you're not being fair in your assessment as you've only told one prejudiced side of the issue. From what I understand there is no risk to anyone's life as there is certainly no probable life risk to anyone from the Barney's pond dam.
You should contact the Town Administrator's office and speak to Mr. Almond and find out the true facts rather than reading an article in the paper and/or making your own assessment of the issue. Than you should publish the town's side of the issue. Don't you think if there was truly a life endangerment issue that the State would fine the town more than $1000? It doesn't make sense.
I realize Mr. Barr has made an issue of this but you should consider also what others have considered to be the true facts. Please leave politics out of the issue and get a fair and correct assessment of this concern.
Respectfully,
George W. Hadley
(Note from LTA: All our information came directly from the legal complaint of the Department of Environmental Mangaement)
7/24/08 Douglas Lumber Sewer Connection I just wanted to take a moment to relay the fact that many a Lincoln resident are not in favor of any Lincoln councilman sponsoring a private Smithfield sewer connection for Douglas Lumber to the Lincoln sewer line for Lincoln town council consideration. Why any elected Lincoln Representative would expend political capital on this closely watched Lincoln issue bewilders me. Greatly expanded development possibilities of that commercial site and the northwest corner of TwinRiver road and abutting commercial parcels would become an unwelcome reality for Lincoln residents. Collection of unpaid sewer tax through the traditional sewer lien foreclosure process allowed by statue will be problematic. The town and many Lincoln residents said no in years past. With this answer in hand and correctly in the toilet the correct trajectory for Douglas lumber is to hire a engineer and submit a septic system redesign for this site to DEM. There are many "high tech" systems that will accommodate a high water table. Stop polluting the nearby watershed, get on with a new septic redesign and installation. Telling Lincoln residents that the flushing effect of a new Smithfield 2 inch sewer discharge connection would be "beneficial to Lincoln residents" STINKS. Kind of like putting lipstick on a pig.
John Mongelli 3 Anne drive LincolnRI 02865 401-578-4326 cell 401-724-8108 home 404-722-2020 fax
6/20/08 Twin River Bankruptcy Now the truth comes out: BLB 's Rhode Island state casino is headed for bankruptcy if it can't broker a new deal with Rhode Island taxpayers. These are businessmen 'smarter' than the rest 6/10/08
Senator Montalbano's total disregard for constituents is beyond comprehension
November elections will be here sooner than you think. Candidates must file for candidacy for state and local office in approximately three weeks. Do voters in Fairlawn or Marieville and the neighborhoods surrounding Twin River, Camp Meehan and the former site of the proposed courthouse really care what happens in November? Their elected representatives are betting that memories will be short and their political doublespeak and revisionist accounts of history will fool enough voters as to who took what position or behaved badly.
These elected officials apparently have little regard for the intelligence of our local electorate but may have made a bad bet. At the Statehouse, the budget for Fiscal Year 2009 and beyond is out of control with a record deficit projection that grows weekly. The talk in the General Assembly is about sacrifice, but the sacrifice is for us, not the members of the General Assembly. They won't even pass legislation requiring a 10 percent contribution to the cost of their, taxpayer paid, medical insurance.
The betting is that Senator Joseph Montalbano, as one of the key players, and president of the R.I. Senate, will make sure this legislation, sent up from the House, is dead on arrival in the Senate. When you look at the budget mess you need to ask: Who was driving the bus? Senate President Montalbano, along with Speaker William Murphy, drove the budget bus into the ditch. It did not happen overnight. Now they want to be re-elected? They would be fired if they worked in private industry. The voters can fire them if they choose to. Leaders should and must be held accountable for the financial and ethical performance of the enterprise.
What about the ethics commission fine? Sen. Montalbano received the third-largest fine in the history of the R.I. Ethics Commission. Apparently, the $86,329.00 he was paid consulting for the proposed casino in West Warwick slipped his mind, and he failed to report it as required by the R.I. Ethics Commission. All the while, he was participating and voting in favor of a joint resolution by the Senate Committee on Constitutional and Gaming Issues, in conflict with his proper duties as president of the R.I. Senate. He paid a $12,000 fine. Enough said.
When the people of Lincoln voted overwhelmingly not to extended hours or expand of gaming at Twin River, Senator Montalbano did not hear them. Although the Twin River casino is smack dab in the middle of his district, he forged ahead with extended hours at Twin River. His total disregard for his constituents is beyond comprehension. Now that the good citizens of Lincoln have fought and helped kill the proposal to build a courthouse between two schools and in a heavily congested residential area, Sen. Montalbano says he wants to respect the wishes of the voters. Where was he when his constituents were fighting to kill this misguided plan? He was silent. The voters spoke when they voted against expansion of hours and gaming at Twin River. They spoke when they said no to a courthouse in Lincoln. They may also say no to another term for Sen. Montalbano, despite the few small crumbs he tossed us in terms of revenue from extended casino hours on weekends. Ed O'Neill Lincoln
5/22/08
Lincoln's FTM Was Hijacked By Thieves in the Night
Having come from last week's Lincoln Town Financial meeting (which I classify as the best show in town), it was disheartening to see Lincoln is now just like the rest of the state when it comes to spending money. We give no thought to how we will spend the "extra money," don't care where or who it comes from and will not hold our elected officials accountable as to how it is spent. If this Lincoln situation doesn't sound like our state legislature and the financial mess they have put our entire state in, I don't know what does. Once again a small group of individuals "high-jacked" (and I use this word very deliberately) the several months of hard work and number crunching that the Budget Board, the town administrator and the School Department expended to arrive at an acceptable (albeit not perfect) budget for the upcoming year for the town. Then without any notice, thought or concern for the rest of the town and with only thoughts of what "they" want, 183 individuals said to the rest of the town, go to hell. I want what I want and I am going to get it. In case you were not aware of what happened at the Financial Town Meeting, a proposal was made by one individual representing 183 other voters in attendance, to increase the school budget by the maximum amount allowed by law (or 5 percent over last years' budget). The individual making the proposal had no idea what the size of this dollar increase would be, had absolutely no idea what the school department was going to use this money for or for that matter as was later learned had even consulted with the School Department as to possible uses for increased school spending. The sole apparent rational was that the school could always use more money and "it" would put the extra money to good use. And this was after the School Department said it could live with the proposed budget. This motion was later amended by the individual to reduce his initial (as it turned out to be) $1,083,000 proposed school budget increase to a mere $517,248 increase. Again there was not even one suggestion as to what this money would be used for but rather that the increase "sounded about right." The 183 voters in favor then decided that all of the town residents could afford this "minor tax increase." This proposal was passed. As a former member of the Budget Board and Town Council, this is outrageous. Any individual who wants to see an increase in town spending in any capacity has the absolute right (and in my opinion the duty) to utilize the numerous opportunities throughout the year to come before the Town Council, the School Department and/or the Budget Board (in particular) to present these ideas as to how to increase the budget and spend additional money. Every one of these meeting is open to the public. But very few (and I suspect no one who came to the Financial Town Meeting with the agenda to increase the budget) actually come to any of these meetings to make their proposals. They wait to surprise the residents at the Financial Town with their own "pet goals." Like thieves in the night they sneak into your home and steal your money. They do it under the guise of democracy rather than real open government. Richard K. Foster Lincoln
5/16/08
Another open letter to Lincoln voters/taxpayers to encourage civic improvement.
Quotes: Yogi: "Deja vu all over again!" The Who: "I'll get down on my knees and pray, we won't get fooled again." NOT !!! Dylan: "You can't win with a (Lincoln Financial Town Meeting) losing hand." Ben Franklin: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." John J. Cullen: " The definition of insanity is doing the Lincoln Financial Meeting over and over and expecting different results." T.Joseph Almond: " The Lincoln school committee was reckless and they betrayed the taxpayers." (when they endorsed by their silence a half million dollar increase to the school budget) "A large group ( of voters) doesn't come in like that unless incited to." Georgia Fortunato: " That's what I like about the Financial Town Meeting, the community has a voice. I'm very excited." Kenneth Booth: "Democracy at work. Whether we like the outcome or not, we can only have a voice if we are there." Well, the one percent (170 voters) of Lincoln's 17,000 voters who added a "SURPRISE" half million dollars to Lincoln's 2008 budget showed how wrong the 75 percent of Lincoln voters were in November, 2006, when they voted to keep the Fleecing Town Meeting, but refuse to attend these meetings. Maybe, just maybe, the Lincoln voters, if they get another chance, will be "excited" enought to abolish the Fleecing Town Meeting (please see my Oct.18,2006, commentary). This may have been Mr. Booth's democracy at work with a very small d, but I characterize it more as Demockery of the Lincoln taxpayers at work year after year, again and again. As a taxpayer, I thank Administrator Almond for trying to hold the tax line for all the Lincoln taxpayers, only to be undermined by the very selfish and deceitful (170) minority. I ask the Administrator and Council to reconsider a proposed charter amendment I submitted in 2004 (see attachment). I also ask the Lincoln Town Council, and I ask Mr. Almond to try to persuade the town council, to use their town charter power on page 15, section 14, which states: "The town council shall have the power to take any action necessary to give effect to any vote of the Financial Town Meeting in accordance with the general or special laws of the state." Since the passage of a half million dollar increase to our 2008 budget had no reason or explanation, what protection does the Lincoln taxpayer have from a million or two million increase at future FTM'S? Want to see something really scary? Wait until the next Fleecing Town Meeting. I propose that the Town Council, with Administrator Almond's support, find this financial increase arbitrary and capricious, thus null and void with no effect. If the the school committee or the budget board takes exception, let them litigate and defend their position, which they could not on May 12,2008. I also encourage the school committee, and ask Administrator Almond and the Town Council to encourage the school committee, to share with the Lincoln Taxpayers the financial details and impact of the new teacher contract before it is signed, so the taxpayers can weigh in on matters that they will ultimately pay for. School committee members are responsible to all the taxpayers and voters and not just the special interests. John J. Cullen Lincon, R.I. 334-3307 4/24/08 The Valley Breeze
I was reading Mr. Paiva's letter to the editor that was printed in the April 17, 2008 edition of The Valley Breeze, and feel that I need to address the disingenuous allegation that he has made against me, which is that I am in favor of expanded hours of operation of Twin River. This is completely false! First of all, in November 2007 it was I who submitted Resolution 07-44 which was passed unanimously and sent to the governor and members of the General Assembly. This resolution stated, in part, that the "Town Council of Lincoln stands opposed to any increase in hours of operation of Twin River..." Additionally, I was the only councilman to attend both the House Finance Committee's and the Senate Constitutional and Regulatory Issues Committee's hearings on H 7040 and S 2009 respectively. In these hearings I presented both written and oral testimony, and stated for the record; "...the taxpayers in Lincoln do not want to have Twin River stay open 24 hours a day, and respectfully ask that you keep the wishes of the voters of the town of Lincoln in mind as you deliberate the merits of this legislation." Twin River's hour of operation, for gambling, can be set by either the State's Division of Lotteries, or by statute. If the Division sets the hours, they can do so without any input from the public, The General Assembly, contrarily, must have and has had public input, which is why I (alone) attended both hearings. By being in attendance, and listening to the discourse among the committee members, I assessed the situation and came to the conclusion that an increase in gambling hours is almost inevitable. That is why I feel that it is my duty and obligation, as an elected official, to offer suggestions and ideas to these committees so that they may amend the legislation in such a way as to have the least negative impact on our town. That is why I advocated for the following three changes to the original bills, should the General Assembly move forward with the bills in spite of our opposition. First, to not allow 24 hour gambling every day, but rather only on the weekends; Second, that a sunset provision be added so that the town can factually assess the impact these expanded hours have on our community; and lastly, that the town receive an increase in the percentage of revenue that is generated by these expanded hours so that we can offset the increase utilization of our town's services. In other words, I was advocating for the best interest of our town. I stand firm in my conviction to represent the will of the people, in my district. When decisions are being made that are outside the purview of our Town, then I must also advocate for what I believe is in our town's best interest. I have spoken to many Lincoln residents about this issue and look forward to hearing from anyone else who I have not had the pleasure of speaking to as of yet, including Mr. Paiva.
Keith E. Macksoud Councilman, District 3, Lincoln
4/17/08 It's time to stop rolling the dice with Twin River Even for the most astute Lincoln residents, it is difficult to recollect all of the changes implemented at Twin River in recent years. First, there was the sale to BLB. Then came the expansion. Then came the rotary, followed by the hours extension, followed still by the addition of virtual dealers. We live under the omnipresent threat of 24/7 operation, and the proposal of even more forms of gambling and other attractions. In light of this, it is easy to forget all of the promises that have been made to us along the way. Flashback for a moment to the summer of 2005, when the General Assembly authorized the sale of Lincoln Park to BLB Investors. There was a rare moment of bipartisan collusion as the governor and the top brass at the Assembly touted the transaction as one which would bring well-needed tax relief to the state. Three years later, the tax relief has failed to arrive. Our local economy still lags behind that of our neighbors and we're facing massive projected deficits for the remainder of the decade. Municipalities have predictably been forced to raise taxes to provide basic services. Just when it seems we're in dire straits, Sen. Paul Moura, a longtime heavyweight in the General Assembly, has thrown us a life jacket in the form of... around-the-clock gambling! It matters not that Rhode Islanders - and, at the local level, Lincoln residents - have voted overwhelmingly against every possible form of gambling expansion. Nor does it matter that numerous studies show that gambling parlors distress local property values and lead to increases of all sorts of crimes. We need 24/7 gambling, we're told, because the state is broke. And, we need it to offset the inevitable competition that will ensue when Massachusetts opens its casinos. Our 60 percent share of any additional revenues is more than we can afford to pass up. Except the three-casino plan in Massachusetts is, for now, a dead issue. Bay State lawmakers killed the bill last week, without even allowing for a floor debate. And Twin River, in spite of all its upgrades, expansions and extensions, has been making headlines for its financial troubles. It owes millions to contractors, has missed a payment on its massive loan, and is shutting down two of its restaurants during weekdays. Refusing to admit defeat, Moura has amended his own bill to allow for 24/3 gambling instead of 24/7. Only one member of the Lincoln Town Council, Keith Macksoud, whose district includes Twin River, supports the idea. He has implied that he considers it a good compromise between the state's need for revenue and the impact on the quality of life in town. But given that Twin River has demonstrated its inability to generate projected revenues during the week, it would appear that "24/3" gives the casino exactly what it wants - increased revenues during peak times without the heavy fixed costs of around-the-clock operation. In an ironic twist, Twin River is beginning to resemble a gambling addict. Just grant it one more favor, whether it's 24/7 or 24/3 or virtual tables, and it promises to get its act together. I, for one, am tired of bailing this facility out. Lincoln residents have made clear that they oppose gambling expansions of any kind at Twin River. Yet our will has been overruled by lawmakers who have been wrong about every prediction with regard to gambling revenue thus far. Nothing in their latest attempt to expand gambling indicates that they'll be any less misinformed this time. In our relationship with Twin River, we are basing our financial stability on an industry predicated upon chance. In such a high stakes game there's only one hand to play. Call your representative, state senator, and the one Lincoln Councilor who supports 24/3, and suggest a "straight-flush" of Moura's latest ill-conceived proposal. Joseph A. J. Paiva Lincoln
3/24/08 (the following is the last paragraph from an article written by Jim Baron of the Pawtucket Times about the financial situation at Twin River) There may, however, be a uniquely Rhode Island solution to Twin River’s difficulties.
3/20/08
I am writing in response to a letter written by Town Administrator T. Joseph Almond on March 13 where it states that I am making ˇinflammatory and unequivocally false statements to the people of Lincoln in regards to their police department, I find those remarks nothing short of ridiculous. In further response to these troubling statements made by Administrator Almond, I can only begin to wonder what he was thinking by responding in the manner that he did. Almond has suggested to the public that you need to give your resume before you can question or challenge your public officials or that Almond does not need to adhere to the charter because it is not a 200 year old document and that it is meant to be changed every five years? (What kind of message is he sending to the public?) He has taken very important issues and turned them into a political charade while turning instrumental facts into fiction. First of all Almonds letter does not even entertain the substantive issues of my letter. Further he did not explain as to why he was violating the charter nor did it address the conflicts of interest as stated in my letter. Instead he chose to manipulate and twist the merits of my letter into a personal attack against the Deputy Police Chief Brian Sullivan character, whereas his character never even came up as an issue in my letter. Deputy Sullivan is a fine man and should not be brought into this. However if in fact the Deputy is doing such a good job and qualified as stated then why doesn˘t the Administrator appoint him to the office of chief? It has been five months now. The law requires that position be filled at all times. This leads me back to some of the problems that do in fact exist within our police department. Now Administrator Almond is quoted as saying (I`d say it`s far from being troubled, and that there is absolutely no issue whatsoever with public safety).I respectfully disagree in where there is a difference between public safety and a properly run police unit. This clearly falls at the feet of Administrator Almond in not appointing a chief in a timely manner. In addition Administrator Almond thinks that I am being recklessly irresponsible for believing they are issues in question. I respectfully disagree in that every time something of significant happens we need to rely on state police aid to handle local corruption and or other matters. On March 13 in the Valley Breeze he wrote that the police department is adequately staffed? On March 6 in the Pawtucket Times he is quoted as saying... (We staff so efficiently, so effectively .We`re at the level we need to be. If anyone wants to see that, it`s all public record.)Which is it adequate or effective? Perhaps we should see what the public record has to offer. In the Comprehensive study done by Edwards and Kelcey Inc. brings a far different picture than what the Administrator Almond has suggested to the people of Lincoln. They are quoted in the first sentence of their report as saying (The police Department finds itself in a situation where it is falling further and further behind industry standards with respect to almost all facets of its operations). Service Element page 17. In addition the study also has found that the sworn officer staffing was appreciably lower than regional standards. Where we are currently at 33 officers and should be at 43 to where we should be staffed at nearly 51 people by the year 2005 in regards to both officers and staff. One has to only wonder why we do not have accreditation status. Further information on this study can be read at http://www.lincolnri.org/documents/planning/comprehensive_plan_final/municipal_services_element.pdf. In conclusion it disappoints me to the see that Administrator Almond and Councilman Flynn statements in the press as categorizing my letter as an attack. What they fail to say publicly is that I had sent them written correspondence on these issues months ago and either they failed to respond or did not have a public meeting(proper venue) as requested to hear these important issues . While immediately dismissing that the law was not being broken but fails to show how the law is being adhered to. Therefore the only resource left is to bring these issues to the forefront. Dean Lees Jr., Former Lincoln Council President
3/3/08 Where Lincoln Can Do Better!
It comes to me with great interest to see how the Mayors of the Town of North Providence and the City of Woonsocket have acted in such a professional and expeditious manner in having the Rhode Island state police come in and take over operations in regards to their police departments in the wake of the police Chiefs retirement.
Now recently, I was listening to the Dan Yorke radio talk show on 630am WPRO where he made a comment and stated on Wednesday February 20 (What a simple common sense thing to do) for Mayor Charles Lombardi to act in a responsible manner and have the state police come in at a time of need.
Which leads me to start thinking why doesnt the Town of Lincoln have a police Chief? Now back in the beginning of October of 2007 Chief Robert Kells put in for his resignation to the current Administration of T. Joseph Almond. Now what`s troubling to me is that under our own town charter we are mandated to have a police chief at all times. In Article section C9-1 it states (There shall be a police department which shall be the chief of police).So I ask why doesnt our administrator appoint a police chief that is required by law? Now some would suggest that we have a deputy that is in an acting capacity however in Article section C9-1-2 of the town s charter is states as follows (In addition to the chief of police there shall be a deputy chief). Now there is a reason why our forefathers wrote these provisions into our charter, to be sure that there is stability within the ranks and to also allow for checks and balances within our uniformed law enforcement body. It is also to be noted that these charter provisions are not to be confused with the capability of the Deputy Chief but rather the importance of adhering to the rule of law.
So it has been nearly five months and still no effort has been made to obtain a professional individual to lead our troubled department. This leads me to my next points! Since 1992 the town of Lincoln has been officially notified that the department is in dire need of improvements. In our 2003 Comprehensive plan it states that The Lincoln Police Department finds itself in a situation where it is falling further and further behind in standards with respect to almost all facets of its operations (Services and Facilities Element page 17). In addition the plan acknowledged that the departments sworn officer staffing was appreciably lower than regional standards where they are currently at 33 and not meeting the level of 51 by the year 2005 as the study recommends. Clearly these problems did not come overnight however these are just a couple of the many issues that have been identified in a long list as urgent issues to be addressed.
This leads me to feel that with unfortunate circumstances comes opportunity in where I see our Administrator Almond failed to seize the moment. Now for example what could we have accomplished by acting in the same manner as the North Providence and Woonsocket Mayors? Some examples are as follows:
One by having the state police come in, it allows for a fair, impartial and non biased professional to come in and evaluate the police department. Two the administrator lost the time and ability to have a 360 degree Feed Back evaluation done of all the police officers where they rate and evaluate each other objectively on each others strengths and weaknesses in addition to their supervisors. Thus enabling the personnel department along with the state police in determining the most suitable develop plan that is best for the Lincoln Police department. Third these simple procedures allows for the personnel board and town administrator to cultivate, develop, and implement a list of characteristics that will be needed to fulfill the necessary critique of the new Police Chief position. I strongly feel that immediate and swift action is to be taken on behalf of our police department. We have good men and woman on our department that work very hard but the community has continued to under fund and staff the department thus restricting their full potential both for themselves and the people of Lincoln.
The people of Lincoln need professional experienced people doing their jobs, we need leaders to have the foresight to plan and develop strategies to protect the peoples interest. An example of this would be the tremendous impact of growth of Twin River and the effect it will have on our neighborhoods. A Police chief with the right credentials could do this. Administrator Almonds actions are borderline impeachable offenses. His clear disregard for the law is obvious with little to no regard for the people of Lincoln. It is in my opinion that Administrator Almond has violated the following sections.
It states in Article 21-2-1 (Willful violation of any provisions of the charter or ordinances).Two in sections 21-2-4 (Willful neglect of duty).Three 21-2-6 Willful misconduct to the injury of the public service. It is without question that the above matters pertaining to the Police Chief fall into the realm of sections 21 of our charter.
So therefore it is in my opinion that the town council with its public safety oversight powers to investigate as to why there is no police chief and to order the town Administrator to adhere to his responsibilities under charter provision 6-6-11.Where it states that the Administrator shall adhere to any resolution and or ordinance of the town council and that he shall be ordered to adhere to his charter responsibilities. The very publics safety demands it.
In conclusion since this story broke in the Pawtucket Times on March 6. Administrator Almond has taken a very strong stance against me and has suggested that I am misrepresenting the facts to the general public. This is clearly untrue and unfounded. So therefore I ask the general public to read the towns study at http://www.lincolnri.org/documents/planning/comprehensive_plan_final/municipal_services_element.pdf.
Here you will read firsthand how and why it is of the most importances that we have the state police come in until we have a qualified police Chief appointed to the town of Lincoln.
Dean Lees Jr
Former Lincoln Council President
February 7, 2008 LincolnTown Council President OGrady Flip Flops Against The Residents Of Lincoln! I read with much interest this mornings news story in the Providence Journal where Council President Jay OGrady is dropping his opposition to expanded hours at Twin River "slot parlor". Last November the residents of the Town Of Lincoln clearly sent a message that they do NOT want to keep TWIN RIVER to open 24 hours a day by defeating the question put before the electors by a margin of more than 60 percent. Now Council President Jay OGrady is buckling in to the special interests to expand operations to 24 hours a day at Twin River. Jay what dont you understand the residents of the Town Of Lincoln voted NO to 24 hour expansion at Twin River and now you are not supporting the residents of Lincoln! I wonder why since you state : "It is worth noting that 5 members of the House Finance Committee already have their names attached to hours expansion bills as do 3 other members of House leadership. Senate leaders are proposing expansion as well." It is very clear by your actions you are supporting Members Of The House and Senate NOT Residents Of The Town Of Lincoln of which elected you. You also state: "Given this climate of inevitability, I believe I have an obligation to work for a compromise solution that minimizes any additional burdens on the town, while maximizing our benefits," Jay you are only 1 member of the Town Council and 1 vote and I believe other members of the Town Council support the wishes of the residents of the Town Of Lincoln as they have sent a clear message voting NO to 24 hour expansion at Twin River last November. On January 8, 2008 Jay OGrady stated: "While I am opposed to this expansion- and believe last Novembers referendum demonstrates that a majority of Lincoln residents share this opposition- I recognize that operating hour decisions ultimately lie with the General Assembly and Governor," OGrady said.
Let the representatives of The House and Senate and the Governor make the decisions that they are elected to do not you a single member of the Town Council.
I wonder how all of the residents of the Town Of Lincoln specifically the residents of Limerock and Salesville who voted NO against the expansion to 24 hours feel about your flip flopping on this issue.
Dennis M. Auclair 4 Sunset Drive Manville, R.I. 02838 356-1978
Valley Breeze, 1/23/2008 Lincoln Town Council 'more concerned with politics than government' I want to follow up on my November 2007 published opposition to the Town Council's unnecessary November referendum. Even though it was common knowledge that such operations at Twin River were the authority of the state government, Mr. O'Grady and other council members passed the ordinance to allow this non-mandated poll. They even did a voice vote prior to the referendum opposing expanded hours. The Board of Canvassers was outraged when they were refused any input to this referendum. Prior to the vote, the whole council stated that they were against expanded hours at Twin River. They represent their districts after all. The results were the same. Rhode Island Speaker of the House Murphy stated. "The Lincoln vote won't change anything." But, seeing potential political opportunity by the majority party on the council, it was decided to have this expensive, unnecessary referendum." President O'Grady states on his Web site "I recognize that operating hour decisions ultimately lie with the General Assembly and the governor." I guess that could be called an epiphany. Now he recognizes that fact...$13,000 of the taxpayers money later? Then there was year's resolution suggesting to private businesses they hire only union janitors. That's not the council's business! The council also passed a resolution to inform Chief Justice Williams of its opposition to the proposed courthouse at CCRI property. The judge rejected or ignored it. Independent Councilor Macksoud of Albion, the district where the proposed courthouse would be, decided to take decisive action. He requested and spoke to Justice Williams in person and was able to convince the judge to at least consider other possible locations. For his effort, he was scolded by fellow Council members in the press and at council meetings for making a "secret deal" which is totally false. Could it be jealousy? Could it be politics? The truth is, his action showed the impotence of this "resolution prone" council majority. Now we have Councilor "shoot-from-the-hip" Flynn who saw political opportunity with the incident with the town vehicle issue. He would change regulations and wrote a proposal. The town charter gives personnel authority to the town administrator. Then Flynn said he was going to pull the ordinance. At the Town Council meeting on Jan. 15 he in fact submitted his proposal to the ordinance committee confusing all those attending, including members of the council who questioned why he was doing this. He responded to this writer's query that he was concerned "the issue may come up again in 10 years" and he wanted the town to be prepared in case it does. Huh? Administrator Almond, it seems to most, handled this whole affair with professionalism, promptness and good judgment. Mr. Flynn also drafted the town's new sidewalk repair ordinance which will cost the town thousands of dollars without any idea how it will be paid for and has stated so. Expect no dollars from the state. Mr. Jantz, also of the council majority party, supported this unfunded mandate by stating "Mr. Flynn did promise this to his constituents." What a pal. The majority party on the Town Council seems more concerned with politics than government for the people. We had hoped that was behind us. Next November, we have a choice for a more fiscally responsible Town Council. After all it is the people's money, not the government's. George Hadley Lincoln
Dec 21, 2007 (Regarding N. Providence's Town Council meeting on Camp Meehan-expletived deleted)
"Those ******* idiots on the N.P. Zoning Board didn't even have the balls to make a decision tonight, after three ******* hours of OVERWHELMING evidence, detailing why open space (the most restrictive type of space) shouldn't be the site of a cheap kid amusement park....in the middle of a beautiful nature setting............... I'm really getting tired of the ******* stupidity out there.... a slam dunk, no brainer.....the residents come out repeatedly in droves in opposition of those money-hungry ******, and those jerks on the Zoning Board can't even satisfy us with a decision.....they motioned for a continuance for another twenty days....to consider what exactly??????!!!!!!....to put bumper cars, a Ferris wheel, a cheap plastic carousel, an asphalt parking lot, and a go-cart track in the middle of our last piece of undeveloped land......"
Dec 14, 2007 (Regarding the proposed courthouse in Lincoln)
"Since I am new to Lincoln (6 months) and November23, 2007 (Regarding the liquor license for Twin River)
A rather mundane November 20 Lincoln town wide yearly liquor license renewal took an interesting twist when town council presient Jay O'Grady opened the floor up for public discussion and only John Barr, a local resident, eloquently described dissatisfaction with the method in which the hours of operation at Twin River were extended from 1 AM to 2 AM without seeking town approval. Town council members concurred that the existing license madated a 1 AM closure. Barr offered that this was a window of opportunity for the licensing board to address a 2 AM clsoing. Mr. Barr further wnet on to say that the existing footprint had been expanded during a recent expansion and no mention of this was in the liquor renewal and thereforethe application was incomplete especially considering there was no representative from Twin River to address concerns. There was some discussion by the board to postpome the existing license renewal pending further review; a vote was taken and passed to approve the license renewal. Voting in favor was Keith Macksoud, Jim Jahnz and Ronald McKenna. Voting against was Jay O'Grady and John Flynn. Present and attending but with no comment was town administrator Joe Almond. John Mongelli Lincoln, RI
Re: Possible computer fraud/alteration of public documents
Dear Councilman:
It has come to my attention that certain parcels of land have had their zoning classifications changed without proper authorization by the town council.
In my research, I have found that parcels numbers specifically Plat number 42, lots 28, 29, 30, 41, 25, 50 currently hold a zoning classification that they are not entitled to hold.
What prompted my research was the recent sale of Plat 42, lot 28 owned by Deborah Ingham of 1646 Louisquisset Pike. This property was zoned in town hall records as being a CR-2 zone commercial recreation. However, back in November of 1994, plat 42 was rezoned from RS-20 residential single-family to RA-40 residential agricultural, not CR-2. Only Lincoln Park was to be a CR-2 zone, however it was curiously zoned mapped to a CR-1 classification at the same meeting. There alone you have two separate votes in the same meeting as to what zone the track is to be. I believe this needs clarification.
With this understanding, the only other time zoning issues were being discussed for this area were in the year 2001 when I was on the town council. During that time the CR-2 zone was amended only for Lincoln Park. The ordinance that was submitted by then Councilman Raymond Depault was to only lessen the restrictions for operational uses for the track, not change or alter the surrounding lots none of which were listed, printed nor posted by the town council for change. The other lots listed above currently hold the CR-2 classification. How?
This leads me to the other lots in question. Back in the year of 2001, a sketch map that was attached to the new zoning amendment was to outlay three levels of usable allowable uses for then Lincoln Park that carried a 350-foot buffer. Now, this map and zoning ordinance was specifically written for Lincoln Park Plat number 42 lots 24.What concerns me is how and when these other lots changed. These lots in question are currently owned by the track (Twin River) but have residential homes on them that are currently lived in by people. Since these lots are small in nature it is impossible for them to be CR-2 simply because they are not big enough to carry a 350-foot buffer zone that is required for any uses. While certainly being a non-conforming use at minimum it should perhaps be classified properly back to RA-40 as stated in the November 1994 minutes.
The liability alone to the Town of Lincoln on the sale of the Ingham property will be, in my belief, serious at best and should be a matter given to the town solicitor for review. At least the very nature of these issues given to you can lead to possible significant financial windfalls for the properties in question and the detriment of the homes and neighborhoods that surround them.
Clearly, this is a very involved issue that will need further discussion and I offer myself to the council for any further questions.
In closing, neither in 1994 nor in the year 2001 were these lots (other than the track) ever to be listed as CR-2, only as to RA-40 as the records shows.
Sincerely,
Dean L. Lees, Jr.
"For a reaction there needs to be an action" (from Dean Lees)
24-hour slots a public safety, public health concern Valley Breeze July 13, 2007 If Sen. Paul Moura from East Providence has his way, the General Assembly will convene this summer to allow slot machines around-the-clock in Lincoln. In the closing days of the General Assembly session, Reps. Henry Rose from East Providence and William San Bento from Pawtucket introduced bill H-6940 which would have stripped Lincoln's power to limit the operation or expansion of the slot casino. The bill was not acted upon, but Moura wants a special summer session to pass it. At the June 19 Lincoln Town Council meeting, I asked the Town Council to pass a resolution in opposition to the Rose/San Bento bill and forward it to our two senators and three representatives. Our local leaders have been extremely disappointingly nonchalant when it comes to opposing expanded gambling in our town. Our local senators and representatives have been enablers of slot expansion rather than a fight for a local vote for Lincoln citizens. I have pointed out for years that Lincoln's 1996 ordinance mandating a public vote for any expansion of gambling has been ignored by our elected officials, unlike the proactive stance taken by Newport to stop slot expansion. It was reported in the press that Administrator Joseph Almond recently sent a June 15 letter to Gov. Carcieri stating he had no public safety concerns with around-the-clock slots. I believe the administrator and Council should call a special public meeting to hear if Lincoln voters believe there are no public safety concerns. I, for one, believe there are serious public safety concerns as well as public health concerns. The New Hampshire Anti-Gambling Coalition, which has been successful in keeping New Hampshire casino free, has a Web site (noslots.com) that can educate those willing to be educated to the public safety and health concerns of slots around-the-clock. On June 20, it was reported in the press that when Senate President Joseph Montalbano was asked his position on 24-hour slots at Lincoln, he responded: "Will I support that? Yes, I would, because I believe the extended hours would raise significant revenue that we need." I suggest that Sen. Montalbano call a town meeting to hear what Lincoln voters want, not what he wants. In a July 7 press article, it was reported that four of the five Lincoln councilors oppose 24-hour slots. The councilors should tell Sen. Montalbano and members of the state delegation of their opposition. Lincoln Council President Jay O'Grady, a member of Montalbano's senatorial district committee, should encourage him and Administrator Almond to publicly oppose 24-hour slots. In the same article, Gov. Carcieri stated he would not support 24-hour gambling unless it had local support. The governor has shown to some degree respect for Lincoln citizens while some members of the General Assembly continue to show contempt. John J. Cullen Lincoln
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Home Page | About Us | Current Issues | Meetings | Town Government | Important Links | News Flash! | Agents of Change | Camp Meehan | Join the LTA | Meet Your Town Officials | Twin River Casino | Letters To The Editor | Contact Us! | Election 2008 | Smithfield Sewer Tie In Copyright © 2008 Lincoln Taxpayers Association. All Rights Reserved. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
