SC greenlights Prudence Island School leaseback RFPs

Last night's meeting of the Portsmouth School Committee was the most civil in ages, and not just because Chairperson Wedge announced a renewed adherence to parliamentary procedure and threatened to call the cops if people are disruptive. But that probably helped.

The big item was the Prudence Island School. With just two students currently in this one-room schoolhouse, there have been persistent calls to close the school to save money.

Richard Carpender and the Prudence Island subcommittee reported on the results of their investigation, and while there is not a lot of money to be saved by closing the school (those two students would have to be tuitioned into Bristol, at a cost of $24k) they did some out-of-box thinking and came up with a leaseback approach.

Under the proposal, the Town would transfer the property to one of the several RI historical societies which might be interested, and lease the space back at a pre-determined rate. This would move the maintenance costs out of the school budget, allow for predictable funding, and retain the school as an option in the event there are more kids on the island.

While the School Committee and audience had some questions about the details of the leaseback arrangement (setting a cap on the yearly amount lower than the cost of closing, understanding the total capacity, investigating fire code regs) there was general agreement, and even a note of approval from one of the PCC members in the audience for the subcommittee's work. The SC voted to approve the preparation of RFPs to historical societies, subject to the Town Council's approval.

In tonight's HeaneyWatch™, the Jamester popped into the approval of the SC by-laws with "What happens when a by-law is broken?" Now, I'll admit that I wouldn't have known the answer to that last week, before I started reading Robert's Rules, but shouldn't someone who was already on the Town Council know the answer to that question? Hint: As Doug Wilkie said, you raise a point of order. Faucher added that it can call into question the validity of any action that was taken in contravention of the by-laws. See, for example, RONR (10th ed.), p 106, l. 20-24.

See "An Inconvenient Truth" this Saturday

Al Gore and MoveOn.org have teamed up to spread the word on climate change with viewing parties this Saturday.

If you haven't seen the film, or if you'd like to connect with like-minded folks for a fun evening of greenhouse horror, you can locate and sign up for a party here: AlGore.com

(Do I hear the Oscar® buzz starting?)

Well, uh, at least the Pledge of Allegiance wasn't contentious...

Whoo-eee. Just got back from the first official meeting of the newly seated Town Council, and the agenda was thick with high-profile issues, the majority of which were kicked a bit further down the road into workshops (for which I have a suggestion up my sleeve).

In a delightful bit of seasonal fun, the Fire Department Santa, who drives around all the streets in town, ho-ho-hoing and giving out candy canes, paid a visit just as the meeting was kicking off. That was the last bipartisan moment of the night.

You know you're off to a rocky start when the Council can't agree on appointing new members to the Tree Commission. And that was just a table-setter.

Sewers
Bob Gilstein reminded the new Council that the question of a Wastewater Management District vs. a bond issue for sewering the (North End of) town had been studied to death, and with the DEM now breathing down the town's neck, it was time for a decision. Council President Canario thought the recent letter from DEM was an attempt to "strongarm the town into sewers."

Bob Drake, one of my neighbors here in Island Park, gave a forceful and articulate overview of missed opportunities over the past years, and urged the council to answer the right question: "How do we resolve the pollution, as opposed to how do we get the DEM to go away." The last thing you want, he said, is to implement a WMD, force IP residents to upgrade their septics (at a cost of >$15K) and then discover a couple of years down the road they need to pay again for sewering.

Canario rightly suggested that with two new members, there needed to be another workshop to bring everyone up to speed; that will be scheduled for January.

(In the meantime, why not start the discussion over at a new community site Mark Katzman and I have been noodling with -- a blog/forum site for Portsmouth. Not ready for prime time yet, but if you're reading this (and you know who you are), go take a peek: PortsmouthCommunityForum.com. Thoughts, suggestions, participation most welcome.)

Charter change
Following the Tent Meeting last August, there was widespread dissatisfaction with the Financial Town Meeting, and Councilor Len Katzman proposed asking the Town Solicitor to draft some language that would preserve direct democratic input on the budget, but take it out of the Tent and make it a real vote.

And then (if you can forgive the partisan spin) the efforts began to run out the clock. First, the "independent" on the Council, Karen Gleason, proposed amending the language to be "automatically invoke a vote any time the Town Council budget exceeds the state cap." (When I pointed out to her during recess that this would not address a systematic effort by a future Council to underfund the schools, she replied, "Well, they'd have Caruolo." "Uh...and you'd really want their only recourse to be Caruolo?" I asked.)

Larry Fitzmorris said he was "uncomfortable with the Council amending the Charter," until the Town Solicitor read him the authorizing passage (Section 8, Article 13) of the Constitution of the State of Rhode Island.

Huck Little suggested that we really ought to add the question of why the Town Council has a vice-president to the referendum.

Then Pete McIntyre had the bright idea of adding the sewer/WMD decision to any referendum.

(Get the picture? Add enough crap to push the thing past the '08 budget cycle.)

Salvatore Carcellar, a citizen who had proposed the Charter change in the first place, got up and did a great job at showing what was really at issue:

  1. Everyone did not get a vote at the Tent Meeting, including our people in the Armed Forces, for which "we should be ashamed."
  2. The voting process was not anonymous, dividing neighbor from neighbor
  3. The process wasn't informed -- there was no way of understanding what was at issue, or what impact the proposed cuts would have. "There was only one informed decision that could have been made -- to leave it alone."

Where it all came out was another workshop, to be held January 27th, at which former Charter Commission members and the public will have at the language of a revision. (Already started a forum topic to discuss this one too...)

Caruolo
Solicitor Kevin Gavin urged the Council, since they had not concluded their discussion, to pass it back into Executive Session. James Seveney made the modest proposal that, given the timeframe, it might be prudent to at least schedule a workshop with the School Committee to explore common ground, and man, you would have thought he was proposing that they microwave Mother Theresa.

Larry Fitzmorris reiterated his position that the Town Council lacks the authority to make any changes in the budget, so if they were planning on a meeting with the School Committee to think about any stipulated agreement, they better think again. Town Solicitor Gavin reminded him that state law saw things differently.

In an interesting aside that probably shouldn't have been aired in open session, Karen Gleason said that she didn't want to schedule a meeting "until they hire a legal team and get some legal advice." That leads one to think that the "independent" as well as the Republican/PCC bloc on the council is going to fight to have Gavin recuse himself because he has children in the schools, and run up the town legal bill by hiring lawyers, an additional fee they can lay at the feet of the School Committee.

Nonetheless, the idea of at least looking at a meeting with the School Committee seemed to have enough support, and they'll get back to them prior to tomorrow night's meeting.

Also, I can't resist, another installment in the continuing saga of Jamie Heaney. After the Economic Development Committee presented their report, of which one major victory was securing access to a low-interest 2.6m bond opportunity for wind turbines, potentially sited at the Middle and High schools, Heaney got up and said, "You should involve the school committee." The members of the EDC sort of looked at each other for a moment before saying something like, 'we've been talking to them for months.' As if they were going to have a major proposal for locating a giant freaking turbine on school property and not talk to the committee?

But I digress.

Warning: Severe geeekiness. No really...

sandwichOkay, I know I've really exceeded my geek quotient when Karen comes downstairs, looks at the thing I'm chuckling over, and shakes her head in total, blank disbelief. "And this is funny...why?" Shrug. "If you're a Linux admin..."

Via XKCD (Want it on a T-shirt?)

Linc sinks Bolton; pisses off Bush

The questionably qualified recess appointment to the UN finally gave up the ghost, unable to advance from committee, largely at the hands of our own Lincoln Chafee. Even following his loss in November, Linc stuck to his principles and resisted the Administration's last-minute effort to ram Bolton through. Listen:

"I have long believed that the go-it-alone philosophy that has driven this administration’s approach to international relations has damaged our leadership position in the world. Mr. Bolton did not demonstrate the kind of collaborative approach that I believe will be called for if we are to restore the United States’ position as the strongest country in a peaceful world," Chafee said.

"This would be an appropriate time to choose a nominee who has a proven ability to work with both sides of the political aisle, a history of building strong international relationships and a reputation of respect for the institution of the United Nations."

Bush issued a statement today condemning Republicans, like Chafee, who opposed Bolton.

"They chose to obstruct his confirmation, even though he enjoys majority support in the Senate, and even though their tactics will disrupt our diplomatic work at a sensitive and important time," Bush said. "This stubborn obstructionism ill serves our country."
--Via Projo

Get that? You call for someone with "proven ability," "history," and "reputation," and the President calls you obstructionist.

I sincerely hope we get the chance to vote for Chafee again. He is not a "politician," but rather in the best tradition of "servant leader."

Portsmouth Caruolo suit filed

Just hit the ProJo newsblog. In a delicious synchronicity, the total of the B&E deficit plus the other expenses turned out to be $1.1 million. That made me laugh out loud. I bet Fitzmorris will pop an artery. They're going to get it all back, Larry. Prepare to cough up $180 in taxes. Have a nice day.

The requested funds include an estimated deficit in ordinary expenses of $770,167, as well as $125,000 to pay for an efficiency audit of the school system and a little more than $200,000 for legal fees connected with the lawsuit.
-- Via ProJo

Gore's smart, gutsy GQ interview

The whole interview is well worth reading, but there is a wonderful gem that captures the fire that Gore has shown in his stump speeches since his "defeat" in 2000. Responding to a question about the Bush administration [read: Bush, personally] ignoring the series of warnings about Usama bin Laden in the summer of 2001:

"And you know, I’m even reluctant to talk about it in these terms because it’s so easy for people to hear this or read this as sort of cheap political game-playing. I understand how it could sound that way. [Practically screaming now] But dammit, whatever happened to the concept of accountability for catastrophic failure? This administration has been by far the most incompetent, inept, and with more moral cowardice, and obsequiousness to their wealthy contributors, and obliviousness to the public interest of any administration in modern history, and probably in the entire history of the country!"
—From GQ Magazine

Sigh. RFK in 68, Gore in 2000. There are a couple of much happier alternate universes out there, somewhere...

PCC leader admits budget cuts too deep

"Top Chef" was a re-run last night, so Karen indulged my preoccupation with cable access and watched Monday's School Committee meeting again. And she caught something I missed: In Larry Fitzmorris's summary speech right before the Caruolo vote, where he's warning the SC not to usurp the electors, he talks about the deficit of "770K, which I think is more like half a million."

"Did he just say that?" Asked Karen. "He just admitted that they cut too much."

Yes, in the way that off-hand comments can inadvertently reveal the truth, Fitzmorris, by apparently agreeing that there was a 500K deficit was tacitly admitting that the PCC cuts at the Tent Meeting went too far.

Now I'm sure that Fitzmorris will deny that's what he meant, but here's the guy who said "The Tent Meeting was not the place to compromise" admitting that his proposed cuts are directly responsible for a 500K budget deficit.

If the PCC wants to talk about accountability, I can tell them where to start.

Portsmouth goes Caruolo

There is a wonderful, chilling scene in the movie "Dead Zone," where precognitive schoolteacher Johnny Smith touches a Presidential candidate and has a vision of a grim future nuclear holocaust. "The missiles are flying. Alleluia," says the gleefully insane Martin Sheen.

Despite my obvious elation at the party-line 4-3 vote taken by the School Committee tonight to engage attorney Steven M. Robinson and pursue a "Caruolo" action in Superior Court, I couldn't shake the feeling that the PCC has been waiting for just this moment, whipping its adherents into a fine frenzy, and that there are missiles aplenty just over the horizon.

They certainly had the PCC camp out in force at the meeting, well rehearsed in all their arguments:
-"If this was a business/I've run businesses for 40 years and let me tell you..."
-"This town is already divided too much."
-"Town Charter blah blah blah." [paraphrased]
-"How did you get us into this position without accountability?"
-"You need an audit of the entire process and the value to the community"
-"You threaten to sue the town because you lack the courage to comply with the voter-approved budget."

PCC leader Larry Fitzmorris summed it up nicely: "The decision to sue the people of Portsmouth is an attempt to subvert the decision of the people at the Town Meeting. The Charter reserved [the right to change the budget] to the meeting in August. Your vote is a statement that you don't accept that authority and that you are replacing the electors of Portsmouth."

Against all that rhetoric, let me cite the strongest evidence for the other side, advanced inadvertently by Jamie Heaney. In explaining his vote against going Caruolo, he said, "I ran on a platform of opposing Caruolo, and that's the way I'll vote."

What was probably not immediately obvious to Heaney is that the converse is also true -- the 4-3 majority of the School Committee is patently the will of Portsmouth, res ipso loquitur support for Caruolo, as Rob Schulte pointedly noted: "Or Carpender wouldn't be here."

And, lest we focus too much on just the laws the PCC happens to like, Mark Katzman reminded everyone, seeking a "Caruolo action is following the law just as much as the Tent Meeting."

The PCC can't have it both ways: you can't claim that the people spoke on August 19th, but not on November 7th. And you can't claim to defend the Town Charter and just ignore Rhode Island General Law.

Oh, but they will. They've threatened to sue the town, and now their bluff has been called. The missiles are flying. Alea iacta est.

Army Stoned! Another day, another recruiter sting...

Earlier this month, ABC7 NY did an undercover piece you can read here where they sent folks with hidden cameras into recruiting offices, and discovered the most marvelous things: the war is over, nobody is being sent over to Iraq anymore, and you have a higher chance of being killed ordering lunch at Subway.

As if that wasn't surreal enough, CBS4 Denver duplicated the scam, but pushed on the "moral waivers" that have been more generously granted to spur enlistment. And guess what? Criminal records for possession are no longer a problem. In fact, people get high in the Army, according to one recruiter: "I have smoked, but you can't smoke all the time or you will get busted."

How about being a gang member? "That, in and of itself, does not disqualify you." You'll be in good company:

"From 2004 to 2005, the number of recruits brought into the Army with serious criminal misconduct waiver jumped 54 percent, drug and alcohol waivers increased 13 percent and misdemeanor waivers increased 25 percent."

Of course, past performance is no guarantee of future behavior. In America, even a drunk driver can grow up to be President.

Pages