Richetelli, Blake and Joy Mum on Missing Millions

This morning when I left my office for lunch at the ComputerFox, I bumped into a local Firefighter who was with me standing in line at Dee's Deli. I introduced myself and casually began to talk about the New Firehouse on New Haven Ave. that is being built at a reported cost of about 4.2 Million.

This was perfect timing because last night the Milford Independent Town Committee met, and we discussed several issues, including the work of Dick Sieron who recently met with our new Super. Ms. Feser on education issues, but none dominated the meeting with more energy and vigor than this firehouse cost. We even had a member of the MRTC come down to ask us questions because he said "he had no idea this sort of thing was going on and that no one in the MRTC or MDTC was talking about it."

This morning he thanked the MITC for being so vigilant while others are so distracted, but to get back to my conversation with the Firefighter, whose name I will not mention, he said "we (Firefighters) are all wondering what happened to the money as well! This has been a divisive issue in the MFD!" and after I read the latest discontent with the 98-102 vote over discord with Chief Lavecchia, it became clear that the real estate deals being made are a big part of the MFD vote of "No Confidence."

Last week, Lavecchia lost his bid to the Fire Commission to combine his est 90K salary with his pension, Lavecchia wanted the same deal that Chief Mello got despite public outrage. He argued it was fair because the MPD set the precedent and Mayor Richetelli supported his request. His objective was to cash in early on his pension and be rehired as the Chief. However, and much to the credit of the fire commission, his request was disallowed and denied. Bob Joy said he also opposed it yet Blake is not on record for or against it.

These facts should bring to light our research at the MITC, we visited the new firehouse ourselves last night. We did the research and posted the construction estimates on this blog a few short days ago. We determined that the true and just construction costs for this Two Bay Garage, with no basement and an attached single story structure should have cost about 1 Million to 1.4 Million without the land. This estimate also included the Architectural design fees, and Union labor brick and steel construction.

Our Vice Chair Steve Borer who is very connected with the Fire Department and has friends and family in the Fire Department confirmed what I heard this morning, last night; that firefighters like their jobs too much. They are afraid that if they speak out or ask questions they will be punished, fired or sanctioned. This is becoming the common theme in our town, and we are hearing it more and more that city employees are afraid to come forward.

Currently Alderman Giantasio is going to be asked to provide proof, and a veritable and credible estimate of how this 4.2 Million of taxpayer money was spent. The justifications from Mayor Richetelli and the Board of Alderman are going to be expected and scrutinized with great detail, and I am going to call out to the chairman of each political party to ask the tough questions as well and hold those culpable accountable on the excessive construction amounts.

As it stands Lametta Construction has a Back Hoe on the fenced in construction site, and despite my personal knowledge of Lametta, I asked around what their reputation was. The trail leads to the City of Stratford, who declined to comment, but none the less those in the know said they were appalled with this company and advised and insisted that Milford not use them. I am still planning on speaking with Former Stratford Mayor Jim Miron to get the details on why Stratford is so visibly upset with this developer. When I find the answers hopefully it will shed some light on why there was no "Groundbreaking ceremony" on this firehouse as is customarily done.

This may also explain why it did not appear in the bidding system for city contracts, and also explain why this was a "no bid contract" to a developer that our neighbor warned us about. These are tough and serious questions that have to be answered. These are also the reasons why the Independent Party was formed, to fight this type of questionable policy and development on behalf of our failed two party system that refuses to do so.

The MITC gets few votes, makes no friends, makes no money, imperils themselves and gets routinely attacked for being a taxpayer advocate. I admire all those individuals in our city who dare to speak out and stand up for the seniors and veterans who are living on a restricted income, and I am saddened by the kids who can't seem to get an unencumbered education. As the facts emerge, I will continue to update this blog, and continue to report back with details on what appears to be a corrupt "Joe Ganim" type of construction deal.  Please report any facts or details you have to me personally.

REFERENCES

Firehouse Construction Estimator at the below link:

Milford Board of Alderman Approve 4.95 Million for new Milford Fire station.

http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2010/11/26/news/milford/bb2mifireapprove112610.txt

Ben Blake Quoted

Alderman Ben Blake, D-5, said he voted to approve the funds for the new fire station because LaVecchia convinced him it will “increase efficiency.” “Hopefully, it will improve safety and be cost-neutral or result in cost savings,” Blake said.

Jim Richetelli Quoted

"an environmental assessment of the site for the new firehouse brought no concerns. He said the architect, DeCarlo & Doll of Hamden, is designing the building, and he hopes construction could start by year’s end." “This is part of the master plan that dates back 40 years,”

Waste Fraud and Abuse Comparison

Conservative One Story 6,000 Sf
http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/rsmeans/models/fire-station/connecticut/new-haven/


Liberal Two Story 10,000 Sf
http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/rsmeans/models/fire-station2/

Rocco J. Frank Jr.
(203) 247-4357

Milford's, Comprehensive Audits Indicate Excessive Liabilities

The idea of Muni debt came front and center yesterday morning when I tuned in to CNBC and heard Merideth Whitney of the Meridith Whitney Advisory Group. There has been much controversy over the health of Municipal bonds, and Bond defaults. These defaults could total in the 100's of billions throughout America.

There has been talk and concern over our Cities bonding debt, and when the new Woodmont Firehouse was built, there was no groundbreaking ceremony. Some conservatives in town said that the ceremony was skipped because they did not want to "draw attention" to the fact that our Mayor and Democratic Boards agreed to Bond another $4M Dollars to get the site built.

The problem prompted my attention to pull the comprehensive audit reports available on the Milford city website at this link http://www.ci.milford.ct.us/Public_Documents/MilfordCT_Finance/statement/
The sections depicted above come from pages 14 and 15 of the Balance Sheet for the city of Milford. These are the Comprehensive Audited Financial Reports or CAFR's. They are not to be confused with the Mayor's budget presented to the public each year at City Hall. Members of the public are not freely given CAFR's they have to do some work to get them. Thankfully Milford puts them on the Town Website.

The graph below (Double Click to Enlarge) that I constructed for you all today shows a trend that any accountant would be very concerned with. That trend is the one highlighted for you below. It represents annualized growth of our "Total liabilities" at an average rate of 17.5% per year. Should this trend continue into 2011 the total city liabilities can be estimated to top $283M or in other words about 100% of all our assets in 2007.

There is however a paradox, because we have no idea what the city is claiming as "Depreciable assets." What we do know is that they keep growing at a rate of 6.6% Vs. Liabilities growing at 17.5%. The present pace will have the city of Milford Bankrupt, whereby Assets exceed all liabilities, by the year 2014-2015.

Serious attention has to be given to this growing imbalance. The era of of what departments need built and what services must be rendered and the usual way of doing business must be fundamentally changed. The tables presented by our towns comprehensive audits are challenging to deal with to say the least. The proper ratio of assets to liabilities is keenly out of balance and when those liabilities are left unchecked to grow as they have in the last Four years we are headed for some tough times.

Candidates running for mayor especially should address these imbalances and offer solutions that demonstrate a commitment to the future of our city. In the coming years the job of our Mayor will be much more than a Glamor Job, it is going to have more in common with a reign of bankruptcy rather than a keeper of misplaced promises. Video clip below is from CNBC's Kutlow and Kramer. It pertains to the interview of Meredith Whitney who is warning bond holders on the risk of Municipal Defaults.

To Hear The CNBC interview Click HERE

Mysterious Letter Alleges Serious Corruption In Milford

The following letter arrived to my mailbox late last night. It is included as is in its entirety for public review. While I am still looking into the facts of these serious allegations the general public is free to do their own research to authenticate its authenticity.

The letter was mailed and postmarked from Hartford so we suspect it may have originated from one our state representatives, or someone local who works in Hartford. The documents were scanned and included below in high resolution. If you have difficulty reading it double click the photo and it will expand to a larger size. Your comments would be much appreciated on this.

Cross reference articles:

        One of the responsibilities the New Superintendent will be insurance dealings. The city of Milford historically has dealt with and continues to deal with ANON. Anon was accused of steering Insurance contracts and was criminally charged by the CT Attorney General. In a letter dated March 4, 2005 Richard Blumenthal announced that ANON has agreed to pay $190 Million dollars in restitution to its victims. (Milford being one of them.)

This issue was repeated in the CT Post in an article dated July 25, 2010, and reprinted on May 21, 2011. The local insurance agents who work and live in Milford have expressed serious concern over the lack of judgement in dealing with ANON and on numerous occasion asked the city of Milford to discontinue their relationship with them. Most well governed cities have discontinued their relationship after the state probe. Milford has not, nor have they given a valid reason for why our city needs to enable those unethical companies who wrongfully exploit local taxpayers. This period of wrong doing was all under the Mayor's, and Feser's new Hiree's watch. We could only hope and pray that Feser is being lied to or used and manipulated for their own gain. Feser appears to be getting in a lot of trouble real fast.

Milford Daily Blog Makes The News Over Probate Campaign

Orange Probate Judge John Carengelo, a Republican, is criticizing his opponent for featuring a blogger’s comment on her campaign website that apparently questions his integrity.

Carengelo said he is appalled his opponent, Milford Probate Judge Beverly Streit-Kefalas, a Democrat, would allow comments from Milford Independent Committee Chairman Rocco Frank to be placed on her website. Carengelo and Streit-Kefalas, both 12-year incumbents, are running against one another because the probate courts in Orange and Milford are being consolidated.

Frank, who is an Independent Party state representative candidate, wrote that “As a judge, (Streit-Kefalas) also recognized that any Republican Party judge under the direction of the demanding (Milford Mayor James L.) Richetelli administration would likely become an “activist judge” who the mayor and its party leadership favors in exchange for the campaign money and influence given him. This would impair and impede his ability to be independent and impartial to the public.”

Read Entire NH Register story by clicking HERE


By Brian McCready, Milford Bureau Chief
bmccready@newhavenregister.com

Milford Land Use Department Erupts into Chaos, Confusion and Grievances

Three top city land use officials have since April filed a total of 10 grievances against the administration, alleging the interim director of a newly created land use agency illegally changed their job descriptions on multiple occasions.

City Planner David Sulkis, Assistant City Planner Emmeline Harrigan and Chief Building Inspector Thomas Raucci have all filed grievances against Department of Permitting and Land Use Interim Director Douglas Novak and Mayor James L. Richetelli Jr.

After years of study and reports, the city in October approved creating a new Department of Permitting and Land Use agency, which provides administrative oversight over the building, planning and zoning, and inland wetlands agencies. The new DPLU was created after years of complaints by developers and residents about a lack of service and long waiting periods to receive permits.

In Sulkis’ first of seven grievances, he wrote that the job description and functions of the new DPLU overlap and usurp his job description.

“This is bargaining unit work that has been transferred to a non-bargaining unit appointed position,” Sulkis wrote.

Click here for Brian Mcready Story at the NH Register

Messy Milford Homeowner Threatened With Punitive Fines

City Health Director Dr. A. Dennis McBride has warned the owner of a 19th century house on Gulf Street to clean up the property or face a $100 per day fine.

The 1890 home at 417 Gulf St. is owned by Neil Riggione, who used to own Knickerbockers Famous Bar and Grill at the Westfield Connecticut Post mall.The house has long drawn the ire of city officials, especially the Economic Development Commission.

Continue Reading This story by clicking HERE

Letter Exposes Kimball Report (KRIT) Not Implemented As Prescribed

"April 23, 2010

Dear [Board of Aldermen Members]

As elected current and former representatives of our communities, with more than 20 years between us serving the City of Milford as Planning and Zoning Board Commissioners, we know that what you do is important, difficult and at times, unfortunately, thankless. Please know, therefore, that our speaking out regarding the newly formed Department of Permitting and Land Use reflect genuine concerns regarding the re-alignment of the land use departments, and these concerns, expressed to your board before, reflect the views of many in our community.

As you know, this new department, formed by the Kimball Report Implementation Team, is a new item in the 2011 budget currently being reviewed by your board. This department was formed by the merging of three departments—Building, Inland Wetlands, and City Planning—into one department. The proposed budget reflects the cost of running those three departments and the salary of a new position, Director of the Department of Permitting and Land Use.

Comparing the budget request for this new department with the individual budgets for the once independent departments for FY 2010, shows that there is an 11% budget increase projected; this increase is comprised, in large part, of the salary for the Director. (Salaries for all three departments in FY 2010: $830,229 and the Mayor’s request is $934,385 for FY 2010). The total budget for these three departments: $892,752 FY 2010/$1,001,690 FY 2011. This increase does not include the cost of the Parsons remodel to accommodate the merging of the 3 departments which has been suggested to be $145,000. Part of the funding for this redesign and renovation is being funded through LOCIP Funds.

The increase – the largest for any City department – represents a stark departure from the intention of the Kimball Report which was initiated by the Board of Alderman and paid for from City Funds. In that report many recommendations were made to enhance the permitting process thereby ensuring better and more efficient customer service. Among the recommendations: Implementation of enhanced software; utilization of the City of Milford website; signage for Parsons Complex and a new staffing position, described in the report as a Permitting Authority or a concierge.

What the City has now is a position budgeted for a permanent Director of the Department of Permitting and Land Use who, according to the recently posted job description, has authority over three departments and professional staff, yet that position, paying $95,000 year, requires no land use experience, professional certification of any kind or post-high school education. During the almost 6 months that the interim Director has served the City, the operations of the three departments have remained pretty much the same; if anything the departments have less available resources than before this change was implemented in November of 2009. This was brought into stark clarity during your most recent budget hearing: the overtime costs for these departments remain as they were, and not only has overtime costs continued during the past 6 months, but staffing shortages are projected at the same level for all of 2011. As you know a key staff position (the Zoning Enforcement Officer) in the City Planning office remains unfilled, and a building inspector position in the building department has been removed from this year’s budget.

In short, the City is currently paying $95,000 for a position that has not alleviated staffing shortages as the Director of the Department of Permitting and Land Use testified to during the budget hearings.

What the City wanted with the hiring of an outside firm to review the permitting processes in the City was a plan for addressing the concerns of developers and residents who found working with the various departments difficult and confusing. But, the implementation of that plan has brought about little or no savings to the City and the key recommendations of the Kimball Report remain unfulfilled. But, more importantly, the cost for a Director overseeing professional staff has in fact made it impossible for these departments to be fully staffed and deprived these offices of some technical upgrades that were recommended and are necessary to expedite the permitting process.

As your board makes decisions on the budget, you are, as in good years and not-so-good years, left to make decisions about what is working and what is not as well setting the priorities of the City. Everyone has their own view; however, the cost to the City of a regular, full-time employee (including benefit package that will add at a minimum 10% additional cost for the position) overseeing the professional staff of three departments seems a very high price to pay when the City is cutting teachers or decreasing funding in other City departments or services. What makes the Director of Permitting and Land Use more important than preserving certain teaching positions?

In the case of the Director’s position, the City has had almost 6 months to review the progress of the changes envisioned by the implementation team, and the benefits to the City that that position has brought. We don’t believe that a fair and impartial look at what was envisioned by the Kimball Report and what has been delivered meets the vision of Kimball nor does it come close to satisfying the needs of the City.

The City needs to get the most value for their taxpayer’s money. We believe that if a position such as this is added to the City budget, this position should increase departmental efficiencies by providing customer service through a one-stop concierge service as envisioned in the Kimball Report. Further, as outlined in that report, providing customer service through development of internet tools that assist permit seekers with accurate information would go a long way to decreasing individual visits to various Land Use offices. Moreover, planned GIS upgrades—previously partially budgeted—should be implemented and inter-departmental information flow enhanced through electronic upgrades; all of which would allow professional staff to focus on their core jobs rather than attending to the myriad of questions and frustrations that arise everyday and could be handled by a mid-level employee. These affordable changes will help decrease overtime costs while providing builders and residents with quality and prompt information.

In addition to the known added costs of this implementation, there is also the unknown impact of pending grievances by union administrators. It would seem mandatory that this be dealt with before any position is funded.

We believe, that the City does not need to hire a permanent Director. However, if deemed necessary, that a job description be more in line with the goals set forth in Kimball—a mid-salary position where the duties emphasize the customer service aspect that is at the heart of the Kimball Report. Moreover, interdepartmental and extra-departmental communication needs to be enhanced through electronic upgrades that allow information to be shared across departments as well as providing basic land use information on the Milford City website.

An alternative scenario: “pause” further action and concentrate solely on the technology

up-grades; if necessary a tech consultant hired with oversight provided by a city administrator. At the end of the next fiscal year evaluate the need for any further change.

It doesn't make sense to us for the Board of Alderman to be looking at cutting overtime, consolidating copier costs and looking into cheaper ways to publicize announcements among the three departments without giving very serious consideration to the thousands and thousands of dollars the City is spending—and will continue to spend year after year—for a position that is not, in its present form, able to provide the full range of customer service objectives and departmental efficiencies that were the objectives of the City’s own funded report.

Please know that we understand the enormous responsibility you have and we hope you understand the value we place on your service to the City. We hope that with the understanding that we are all working together for a better Milford, that you consider our concerns and suggestions seriously."
With all respect,

Susan Shaw
Chairman, Planning and Zoning
203 874-0115

Jeanne Cervin
Past-Chairman, Planning and Zoning
203 878-1665

Jack Jansen
Past-Chairman, Planning and Zoning
203 215-4825

Picking Our Pockets One Business at a Time

Faux Pas Conservative Mayor Jim Richetelli announced with pride today that the city hired, private corporate tax collector strong armed Milford businesses out of triple the amount they hoped to collect a whopping $560 Grand.

While the Mayor called Milford business owners "scofflaws" and "tax cheats" he ignored the fact that Republicans are historically proponents of small business. The very engine that drives Milford's local economy. Today, despite the Richetelli propaganda Milford is indeed under severe duress, and the Tax attacks on small business are being exacerbated in aggregate. $560 Grand Collected, means the people of Milford have paid that money. This Money has been paid by the Milford Hospital Closing a unit and laying off people, money that our larger companies recoup by letting people go, cut their hours or just fire them.

In exchange the city raises our property taxes, cuts our services, grants themselves raises and closes our schools. How people are not outraged is beyond me, but as the dissatisfaction of our local Government continues and Milford's austerity goes by the wayside, the pandemonium of excessive spending at city hall continues.

The Milford leaders who bless this tax assault know nothing of the fact that Just under Obama tax levy's increased 10 Fold to 3.7 Million. To give the readers an inclination on how drastic of an increase this number is, the IRS statistics cited merely 200,000 levy's 10 years ago vs. 3.7M today confirming that there is no bailout for business owners. These levy's carry hefty penalties and interest that only go away after they are paid or the person who owes them dies trying to get out of debt.

We always hear about how Republicans are critical of Obama, the health care tax, the carbon tax the increase on capital gains tax etc. and yet we find that there are only differences in their logo's not their actions. Quite sadly and as a small business owner myself, I have seen and experienced first hand the tyranny of the IRS and the draconian measures of courts when times are tough. This year alone I had to say goodbye to many employees, and friends who lost their businesses and witnessed swarms of tax collectors shaking down businesses. If you want to see for yourself how bad things have gotten just ask you mail person how many IRS and Tax Collector letters they deliver daily and I promise you will be stunned.

But no matter how hard things get, I always find there is some clueless chap who is still willing to take a risk and rent a retail space in pursuit of the American dream. They do this with the same naivety and ignorance of their predecessors who, like them, were also unaware of how many tax predators will arrive at their doorstep demanding money.

Personally, I am a person that likes to rise to these kinds of challenges and find solutions. My friend Steve Pjuria who teaches a Milford Ed class on how to Start a Business brings his students to me for final training. I have been happy to give groups of aspiring business owners lessons in the pitfalls of opening a business. Sadly I must inform many of them that the city of Milford is hostile toward large businesses and today's headlines prove me right that government sanctioned corporations (on commission) will attack them and invade their books for a buck in this town.

This is not to say people should quit trying to make living, or pursue their dreams, but rather they need to consider a plan whereby success is profit based and often that includes taking your business mode to cyberspace, working out of your car or carving a space out in your home before becoming a Commercial tax target.

Richetelli Denies Anger's Allegations

The following quote appeared on the Milford Musing Blog run by veteran reporter Frank Juliano regarding the recent federal lawsuit and allegations made against the city.

"Mayor James L. Richetelli Jr. denied allegations in a federal lawsuit filed Tuesday by veteran assistant city attorney Cynthia Anger that she was fired because of her union-organizing activities.

But Larry Dorman, spokesman for AFSCME Council 4, said the union has filed a prohibited labor practice complaint against the city on those very grounds, and is seeking Anger’s reinstatement.

An informal hearing will be held March 23 in City Hall. If it is not resolved there it could go to arbitration, officials said."

This Richetelli rebuttal leads us no better off than when this first began, and the question still beckons what was his reasoning if his response directly challenges the thoughts of the person he fired?

This sounds like pure politics on the surface. This is also the first "non round-about" direct firing of a city employee by the Richetelli administration. Usually when a person crosses the Richetelli gang they end up being let go like Bob Adams, or in a manner that is very sneaky, confusing and stealthy never so abruptly.

Perhaps Anger was too well prepared for that kind of a practice and the direct approach was the only way he could exact his authority. Many people in town are still perplexed by this firing, few people were even aware that problems existed in the towns Law Department.

While we know that no one was previously fired for the failures of the Building Department, and no one said a word about firing anyone in the Tax Collectors office when their failure to collect taxes was outsourced. It would now appear that the Milford town authorities are only interested punishing those who are disobedient and disloyal to the expectations of their people.

Should Richetelli have fired someone in the building department, I think the town would have cheered. Had he fired someone in the tax collectors office for failure to collect the taxes he outsourced... the people probably would have understood and If he called for Barbara Lambert's resignation for playing Solitaire on the job he would have earned much public respect... but Cynthia Anger? We are still as perplexed today by this action as we were the moment it happened.

In all our endeavors, news articles and comments from locals it would appear that even Cynthia Anger appears to be confused as to why she was Fired. Can anyone explain how this is a justifiable dismissal I do'nt get it?

Milfords Budget Process Begins

The budget for next year begins deliberations this week. Things like the cost of education, infrastructure improvement, employee bonuses and compensation, etc. etc.. all come to fruition in the near future.

Republicans, have indicated they would like to see another budget cut, conservative Democrats and former mayoral candidate Genevieve Salvatore have written to the local paper and asked that we stay vigilant, take part, and speak out during the process.

The Mayor indicated that the "Grand List" will determine whether or not taxes go up down or stay the same. Early indications, however, are not good, and city services were cut many times already.

Senator Gayle Slossberg put city council on notice last month and told Milford lawmakers not to expect money from Hartford. This combined with Employee health insurance, pension payouts, and contractual wage increases, are expected to be the largest obstacles to be overcome. These issues are of vital importance to the stressed out taxpayers of Milford.

The stress I speak of is not just sardonic rhetoric. It is very real and was evident in recent news of a longtime resident who committed suicide in her home. This was alleged to have happened as a result of prolonged difficulty in paying her bills. This was only last month and should be a sobering reminder of how tough things have gotten for some.

Other sad news was about six months earlier, in the NY Times citing our Mayor Richetelli buying cab fare for a Milford mother and her two children who were forcibly evicted from their home. Their only crime was a lack of money and suitable employment to save the life and home they built here.

These incidents do not erase the fact that in Milford Two to Three people a week lose their home to foreclosure. These are real people, our friends, neighbors those with a real connection to this community and in need of sincere help.

The city has resources and can help some of these people. This help can come to Milfords poorest by way of abatement of irresponsible government, predatory loans, and tax breaks. This city does not need $95,000.00 a year Czars, $700.00 desk chairs, $50,000.00 consultants, employee buyouts, etc. etc.

The immorality of ignoring those people with the "hug and cab fare" mentality, is not the humane thing to do. Perhaps we should put our self in their shoes and imagine what it is like to live in a shelter, be out of work and in need of food.

Those arguing this years budget should remember this and more. Remember that we are all members of the same community and it is our responsibility to lend our financial help to those who are of good moral character and sincerely need a hand up, not raise taxes to pay higher wages or waste money.

Time to set greed aside and bring about some new revolutionary ideas that will inspire revolutionary change.

"Connectucut Bob" AKA Bob Adams Fired By The Richetelli Gang

Most people do not even know "CT Bob" but many are familiar with his work. Bob Adams is a blogger in Milford, and hosts a blog www.ctbob.blogspot.com. Connecticut Bob, was given a post on Milford Government Access television about a year ago. He is also a Democrat, in a "vipers den" of Republicans and Republican dominated city boards.

CT Bob, may soon be recording a board of Alderman meeting who will be voting him out. They will be replacing him with Republican Michael Cavallaro a Richetelli patsy expected to rehire Dennis Guaglianone the previous camera man who was fired for dereliction of duty. This deriliction, according to the CT Post included "not covering some governmental programs, including the mayoral candidate debates last fall, in favor of parades and other community events."

When Bob Adams was hired, his blog certainly raised Republican Eyebrows, there was fear and uncertainty that Bob Adams would add his Democratic spin to the MGAT content he produced. This has not been the case, Adams said he would conduct his work professionally and he did. Any person who watched MGAT on cable T.V. would certainly agree that the content presented was professional and non-partisan.

Who controls the camera man has now become an issue of politics as "Lord Richetelli" once again is granting favors, and rewarding bad behavior by rehiring FIRED employees. The original fear of a partisan MGAT may soon be realised as another "local power grab" of the MGAT station is executed.

Future content can be expected to filmed by authority and direction of Michael Cavallarro, who is in essence the newest Media Czar who will answer directly to Mayor Richetelli. While coverage of community events will certainly spark outrage, these issues will soon become the problem of Milford's Citizens, especially Independents, Democrats or those whose content is not cogent in the opinion of the Mayor and his new Media Czar.

This latest power grab, adds credibility to Democratic Party Boss Michael Brown's allegation that the Republicans "are replacing every Democrat from every board."

Connecticut Bobs impartiality was revealed some time ago, when he challenged his own party in favor of the public objections with Amann's support of Lieberman's policies on war. Connecticut Bob's most notable video was that of Now Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate Jim Amann. The video heard all over the web was aptly dubbed the "Crush" video when Amann was video taped saying he would "Crush any Idiot in this town who ran against him." Ironically this is the only Democrat Richetelli is supporting, as he is a frequent guest and good friend to Amann's and his political events.

Jim Richetelli Makes Insulting Offer

The Republican sweep of virtually every board has put the Republican party in a very powerful position. Our Mayor has the most amount of dictatorial power than at any time in his career and this week he used it when he asked Genevieve Salvatore, the Democratic candidate for mayor to abdicate from her party.

Genevieve, who now chairs the Economic and Community Development commission is in danger of losing her seat. This loss may be due to the fact that some conservative Democrats are falling victim to the process itself.

Salvatore become the subject of criticism by the Republican party when she began canvassing for sewer installations in the North end of Milford. This would directly benefit her and her community as her home is one of those that would benefit from city sewers.

The sewers were all set to be installed as part of a development plan, known as Avalon Grove, that failed to come to realization. The cost of the sewer system was of concern despite the fact that the city of Milford promised it to the citizens of the North End. The cost of installing the sewers "skyrocketed" when the developer of Avalon Grove backed out due to political and market conditions detrimental to their investment.

When interviewed by the Connecticut Post, regarding the Richetelli offer, Salvatore responded by saying: "To be honest, I was a little insulted that he thought I'd change parties again. I made my decision to become a Democrat because my strong values and ideals align with the ideals of the Democratic party," she said. "My decision wasn't made for political expediency."

Mike Brown, a Democratic Party Boss and supporter of Ms. Salvatore, said that "what particularly disturbs him is that Democrats who have served the city well for the past two years, while the party was in power, are not being reappointed simply because they are Democrats."

A Dollar And A Dream? Or Is It A Nightmare?

Yes this was the title in the New Haven Register today as Geneveve Salvatore and Mayor Richetelli engaged in a new program to address the "Millions" of square feet in vacant retail space.

While the dollar is merely a figurative amount to keep an account open the dream is real, but for who is this dream real. If you look to the article below (Property Transfers), dreams and dollars are not exactly what go together these days.

When a house sells for a $1.00 that means the property was foreclosed, the owners evicted and their American Dream shattered. Milford has about two to three people a week losing their homes for a dollar.

This metaphor has an unintended consequence of being being in poor taste and offensive to those who lost their properties for a Dollar. My neighbor lost his retail space/business to undocumented and illegal workers giving away their services at prices that no legal business can compete with.

The city has a good idea in wanting to help businesses, the first thing that can be done to fill retail spaces is report undocumented workers to the INS, IRS, and Local police so legal businesses can stay in business, with registered cars, fair wages, and payment of taxes.

The next thing the city can do, is to remove the oppressive property tax that taxes businesses for their unused inventory, tables, chairs, paintings, computers etc. instead of auditing them to raise revenue.

One other thing that would be very helpful would be to streamline the permitting process, lower fees, and implement a program that does not disparage a person from wanting to even consider opening a business in Milford.

The last thing that I would personally do, would be to implement a grant program, much like other cities do, to help businesses obtain start up capital, and subsidized employees like those rendered by the Department of Social Services.

One last point, offer landlords tax breaks if 100% of their space is fully leased for two or more years. This will provide them with an incentive to keep rents low, and negotiate good leases.

Should a successful program prevail, brag about it. Advertise Milford as a "business friendly town," this would be much better than constantly looking at billboards full of conniving lying politicians. People want to visit Milford because something is here for them, like a movie theater, perhaps a future Maritime Museum, Pirate Ship or like attraction.

Until then the only thing a Dollar is going to buy in this town, is a foreclosed home and someone elses shattered dreams.

Milford Gets Another Czar

The term Czar certainly makes one think of the Obama administration and his record 22 Czars, we really do not think of local government when using the word Czar. This was in fact the case just last Fall when the city appointed Board of Health Director Dennis McBride as Milford's first Czar.

Some people think there is no place for Czar's in local government, and just as soon as the debate started it ended because McBride was not really costing the city any additional money to take on the job.

Well this is now changing, especially since our new "Land Use Manager/Director" is being installed as a full time position. The interim director Mr. Douglas M. Novak is being paid as much as the Mayor who appointed him, a whopping $95,000.00 per year to do the job of a Zoning Planning Board, wetlands commission, building department, Economic and Community Development Officer and the town Conservation Committee.

This position is interesting because just about every city agency reports to the Land Use Director, but who does the Land Use Director Report To? Certainly this sounds like all the attributes of a Czar, and if that is the case, as some believe, than this would in fact be Czar number Two in Milford.

The Obama presidency is certainly emblematic of this style of government, but for a Republican mayor to follow suit is enigmatic. Milford is unlike the woods of Weston where there is also a Land use Czar, Milford's demographics are much simpler, with a whole lot less nature. This new directors job has not really been specified in depth, and some are wondering how much time does it take to go from Eisenhower Park, to the woods along the river of the town Library and perhaps visit the few farms that are left in town. Sounds like another Napoleonic coffee drinking bueracrat in the taxpayers pocket.

The issues with our land use Czar go further, and some bloggers on the Internet are wondering why the mayor chose to hire him in the first place. The blogger argues that given the "high rate of local unemployment it should be mayor Richetelli's prerogative to go easy on the taxpayers."

Some bloggers feel that the exorbitant salary, combined with the fact that this job is purely a "cushy job" has been the root cause of what some want investigated as nepotism or perhaps worse cronyism.

The arguments appear to be gaining traction as well, because if you mention these issues to anyone in town and let them know the new Czar's salary, the job description and the fact that the person who got the job does not have to do much. Milfordites get upset and also feel that their interests are not being looked after.

Most people in Milford are struggling to pay their taxes, they are not understanding of these new Czars, nor do they want a continuation of the wasteful spending of the last decade. The spending during that period resulted in an unintentional punitive tax against Milford citizens, young, old and poor. Thankfully conservative Democrats reversed that trend this year, by overiding a proposed tax increse by the Republican administration but with those Democrats gone the "Money Spigot" is turned on "Full Blast" with few conservatives left to turn it off.

As the city continues to spend on wasteful Czars, and is thinking of new ways to yet again waste more money by cutting city services and education, Milford's citizens need to prepare themselves for the next fiscal crisis and double digit tax increases. The trend of wasteful spending is leading toward this inevitable reality.

Milfords Schools In A Leadership Crisis

The New Republican dominated board of education is being sworn in today, and their first day on the job will be a nightmare. The crisis in leadership however is nothing new to some legacy board members who expunged the last Milford Superintendent in a similar swarm of controversy.

Harvey Polanski our Current Milford School Superintendent who won high and lavish praises from our mayor Jim Richetelli is now mired in a second wave of controversy. This time the Richetelli favorite is accused of lewd and lascivious acts toward two female Principals who made the allegations against our superintendent.

This is the second time this year that Mr. Polanski found himself in the news, for those who may have forgot last August he was investigated along with Republican Board of Education member Joanne Rhorig.

Rhorig resigned from the Board of Education after a firestorm of controversy occurred surrounding her household and numerous allegations of illegal activity. Charges were made that Polanski attended a party where known sexual predators lived, and underage drinking was ongoing in his presence.

Harvey Polanski is currently put on administrative leave. This occurred after an emergency closed door session of the Board of Education voted on an emergency response to the two principals allegations.

According to local sources an outside investigative agency will be hired at an undisclosed sum of taxpayer money. The investigators are expected to conduct a fact finding inquiry into the allegations made by the two Milford principals.

The Milford School System, will temporarily be under the direction of Michael Cummings the Assistant Superintendent. Larry Schaeffer previously took the post once before after our former Superintendent of Schools Gregory A. Firn "exercised poor judgment" and undermined confidence in his leadership by his handling of a situation involving a coach accused of sexual assault.

The board said "Firn's actions regarding a letter of recommendation for former coach Robert Dulin would be considered in the Superintendent's contract negotiations in June." Firn later Resigned of his own recognisance.

This years case may be much more egregious and prove to be an even poorer choice of a candidate for Milford's top paying job should these allegations be proven true. Aggregate factors already overshadowing our current Superintendents administration has also been the terrible results of the CAPT test scores, a test vital to the graduation of Milford's High School students.

The Republican dominated administration holds a majority on every board in the city of Milford except the Planning and Zoning board of which they hold an even stake. The rebuilding of our schools leadership will be at the helm of the incoming administration.

Most onlookers in the know, however, have been less than impressed with the Richetelli record on education of which now includes the towns second Superintendent being mired in troubles, failing CAPT test scores, standing room protests over 180 teachers having their employment threatened, objections over the Jonathan the Law additions, and controversy over media aides being let go and then rehired.

A Post Endorsement Letter From Peter

Dear Milford neighbors,

With Election Day just around the corner on Tuesday November 3rd, I want to remind you of just 2 things.

1. I ask for your vote
My objective in contesting this Mayoral election is to give you the choice to vote for someone who will represent your interests instead of representing the bias of a political party.

As an Independent, I can and will make decisions based on what’s best for Milford and for you.
I have a proven background in leadership and management, meaning I can effect the necessary changes and make decisions based on what is best for our city and its residents.
As your Mayor my aims are:

• Fiscal responsibility
• Educating our children
• Citizen safety
• Business development
• Historical preservation
• Environmental advancement
• Infrastructure improvement

In summary, my principal goal is the betterment of our wonderful city.

I pledge to you that during my term as Mayor, I will always put PEOPLE BEFORE POLITICS. I respectfully ask for your vote on November 3rd to enable me to serve you and serve Milford.


2. Vote!
Why is it so important to vote?

1. VOTING AFFECTS YOU. This election is solely about Milford. The candidate who wins will directly impact YOUR life and YOUR community.
2. VOTING IS YOUR VOICE. Many people complain about the current Mayor and Board of Aldermen, with their irresponsible behaviour and decisions. Well, this is your ONLY chance to do something about it.
3. VOTING IS A RIGHT. Vote because you can. Voting is a ‘right’ which is actually a ‘privilege’ when compared to many places around our globe.

In closing, I request that you consider voting for me, Peter SPALTHOFF, so I can work at making Milford the best city in Connecticut to live, work and raise a family.


Faithfully,
Peter SPALTHOFF

Spalthoff, Milford's Best Candidate For Mayor

Traditionally I have never really been in the practice of endorsing any candidates, but this year with so many great contenders I thought adding my personal opinion might benefit many of you out there who have not had time to do the research or watch the debate videos.

Hard as it is to believe the election is only a few days away, and soon thousands of Milfordites will be storming in the voting booths and voting for their candidates. To help ease the anxiety of looking at a voter card with a bunch of faceless names, I am going to give you my thoughts on each of the candidates.

Before I begin it is important for me to give you my disclaimer, currently I am on the ballot in the First district as the Independent candidate for the board of education. However, my views and opinions are based solely on my own research and personal attendance of the mayoral debates, personally speaking with every candidate, and reading what local newspapers represented about each of them.

My assessment is as Follows:

Genevieve Salvatore: She is a relatively new citizen here in Milford, and many people do not yet really know her very well. Genevieve serves on the Economic Development Commission and practices law here in town.

Genevieve won an overwhelming vote from her party over longtime resident Tim Chaucer and received the endorsement from our U.S. Representative Rosa Delauro. Salvatore was also recently endorsed by the New Haven Reigister over Incumbent Mayor Jim Richetelli.

Her views are very favorable toward a local green economy, and has pledged a policy of zero based budgeting to keep taxes affordable on our cities struggling people. These two views are also complimented by Spalthoff.

Problems I personally have with Ms. Salvatore is her newcomer status, but more grave than that is her friendship with Rosa Delauro and Chris Dodd. In the coming years Milford and the state of Connecticut are expected to have a challenging relationship with a failing federal government. Dodd was recently ostracized over his banking relationships and Delauro has been pushing a bill "The Food Modernization and Safety Act" that would put all our local farms under Corporate and Federal control.

The Democratic Party, has also been involved in the negative and misleading campaign that borders on the actions of an impish spectacle. Their theatrical engagement of the Republicans has not sat well with many people who are concerned about the issues in town.

For these reasons, and even though I think Genevieve is a stellar person, I will always have some discomfort over her parties negative influence, in tandem with her ability to challenge Federal Democratic leaders, especially in a crisis situation.

Jim Richetelli: Last Election I supported Richetelli and had a sign of his on my lawn. He has been our mayor for many terms, and in the past has done a great job in leading our city. Personally I would like to thank him and acknowledge up front all of the great work he has done. However, we vote in the present and we look to the future. The very fact that Jim lost the endorsement of the Register, a paper that endorsed him so many times before was a testament as to the political climate that exists today.

This year Jim has been called out time again over Taxes, educational cuts, historical preservation, business audits, absenteeism, and contract negotiations. Two of the three debates I have been to (in my opinion) have not been very favorable for Richetelli. (You are free to view them on this site just refer to the archives.)

The latest challenge our Mayor experienced was the Democrats and the Republicans engagement of an intensely negative campaign whereby voters are being deliberately confused and misinformed with negative information about their opponents.

Voters I believe have grown tired of this practice and just want to hear the issues and the facts. Jim being the incumbent has a terrific re-election advantage this year, but I personally believe that advantage has been diminished.

Tim Chaucer:Tim is a lifelong resident of Milford, he worked tirelessly trying to support and protect our cities historic properties and open space. Chaucer has been very critical of the destruction of the Cadley House, and the development of the property next to the Milford Library.

Personally I have spoke with Tim and found him to be a sincere person, however, in my opinion, he has a narrow view of interests in our town. Tim is also running as an "Unaffiliated" candidate since he lost the support of his primary political party to Genevieve Salvatore.

Tim took the loss in my view too easily, early on he struggled with the idea of a primary and then opted out instead of standing by his convictions that he was treated unfairly by his party.

Personally I found Chaucer to be a great person with much to offer Milford and even though I think he is the weakest candidate I sincerely hope that he stays involved and continues to fight along with us for what he believes in.

His views on open land purchasing, historic preservation and city planning are supported by all candidates across the board and we will need his expertise on future committees and at council meetings, should he not prevail.

Chaucer can certainly be a unifying force with his broad knowledge on keeping Milford's growth in harmony with our history. Personally I would look forward to Tim's continued involvement in those areas as his message was well received and he certainly proved himself as an asset to our city.

Peter Spalthoff: Peter is my personal favorite, not because he is an Independent but because of his selfless nature, investment in our community, and financial background in understanding debt, contracts, loans and financial instruments.

Of all the candidates in the running Peter has run a very ethical and honest campaign. Peter has pledged transparency in government, and adopted a policy that puts "people first." Every week new letters arrive to our local newspapers in support of Peter. His candidacy as an Independent has been larger than any that I remember in recent memory.

Peter also represents a realistic new choice for the growing number of people in town who have become despondent with the two party system. Peter's list of endorsements is also impressive, and he is the only mayor in CT to receive the official endorsement of the state Independent Party and the Independent American Party.

Peter's skills will be needed in the coming years especially with the 110 Million in financing that will be needed for our school improvements. Peter is also very open minded and works well with others. His most recent post in a political party was the chairman of the Republican Town Committee, but due to his own disappointment with the Republican party decided to reinvigorate the ranks of the Independents here in Milford.

When Peter Made his campaign announcement on the green early this year, he invoked the spirit of the late Charles Iovino. Iovino was the only Independent mayoral candidate in Connecticut's history to win a Mayoral election as a write in candidate.

Your vote this election will count more than before, and I personally hope you will lend that support to Peter Spalthoff My choice for this years Mayor.

Rocco J. Frank Jr.
Milford Daily Blog Contributor

Mayoral Hopefuls Debate Local Environmental Issues

The (Environmental Concerns Coalition) ECC Debate kicked off as scheduled at 6:P.M. all candidates in the running were present and questions were prepared in advance by the ECC moderator.

Candidates had 2 minutes to answer each question, and a rebuttal of their opponents of one Minute. This was the protocol for the first few questions, the next four questions were drawn randomly from a hat and were pre-written by the ECC and selected by each candidate. The audience was also permitted to openly ask questions at the end of the debate.

Of the initial questions asked, the issue of purchasing open land was agreed upon as a good idea by all candidates. The next question regarding Milford's deplorable record on Recycling sparked the most debate.

While the question formulated by the ECC corresponded with the 6% figure as reported in the CT Post Jim Richetelly took issue with the numbers as inaccurate. Richetelly alledged that the number was "under-reported... an error" and held up a copy of the DEP report that he claimed indicated Milford was recycling 12% of its renewable waste not 6%. Richetelli said that Milford is not "last in the state, but doing much better than people believed."

One public question came in regarding the funds to purchase open space, Richetelli exhausted nearly all the money in the open space fund in his latest Naugatuck land deal purchase. The issue of how to pay for this was best addressed by Peter Spalthoff who indicated he would make it a "budget item," and purchase land as part of the routine operations of the town. There was little disagreement to this, since all the candidates agreed that purchasing open space saves Miford's taxpayers money.

There was also debate on adding a paid commissioner to go out and manage the land purchases. Tim Chaucer said that the best candidate for this job would be an "outdoor enthusiast who really knows the town and its land very well."

Each candidate Praised, and addressed, the Clean Energy Roadmap approved by the Board of Aldermen last month. The plan lays out steps the city should take to become environmentally sound. The Roadmap was authored by a community task force and is a step by step plan for city officials to follow.

When it came time for the audience to ask questions, the first question was regarding public transportation. All candidates vowed to improve public transportation and do their part to make certain Milford has more bus stops and convenient locations to get people to and from their local destinations.

The next question from the audience got interesting because I do not think the moderator expected an off topic attack of Richetelli. The man who asked the question specifically addressed it to Jim. He started by saying he made several unanswered telephone calls to Jim, then followed up with more unanswered e-mails. Than after contacting his aide was able to get to talk to him.

Expressing disgust over his experience, he then charged that he did not get the tax decrease that Jim advertised in his "mail piece" that he held up to the audience. He said "I am an engineer, and I am very good with numbers. I looked at my old bill and compared it to my new one... where is my savings!" The moderator told the gentleman that this was an environmental forum not to get "off topic." she said that perhaps "the candidates could answer those types of questions after the debate."

The candidates nonetheless did answer the gentleman's question, and Richetelli stood up and told the gentleman "everyone in Milford received a 2.6% tax decrease plain and simple." Geneveve Salvatore reminded the man that the tax decrease was courtesy of the Democratic led Board of Alderman and that Richetelli's rejected budged actually would have raised his taxes.

The event lasted over an hour, and all the Candidates for Mayor remained long after the meeting and respectfully spoke to the public. However it is important to note, that what is mentioned above are just some notable highlights. MGAT Channel 79 on Cablevision did videotape the event and it will be made available to the public in its entirety in the next week or so and I recommend we all watch it. The more informed you are the better choice you will make come election day.

******************************************************
Video Per Commenters Request
Double Click Video if Cropped
******************************************************

Vince Ross Calls Republican Letter "Amazing Fiction"

Unfortunately, it appears that Genevieve Salvatore, mayoral candidate and leader of the Milford Democrats, has concluded that Democrats can't win without personal attacks on Mayor Richetelli.

Mayor Richetelli has called on everyone, regardless of political party, to come together. He's said local government shouldn't be about partisan politics, it should be about people serving our community and about neighbors joining together to ensure that government works effectively to keep Milford a great place to live.

On November 3rd, voters are going to have a clear choice between Mayor Richetelli's vision for Milford and Salvatore's brand of attack politics.

Tom Jagodzinski
203-876-2749
Paid for by the Milford Republican Town Committee

****************************************************

I refer to the above piece of creative writing and amazing fiction.

Isn’t it nice that the Mayor and the RTC Chairman now want local politics to be about ‘serving our community’, ‘neighbors’ and not ‘partisan politics’?

Some 9 months ago when Peter Spalthoff first voiced these same words as the underlying principles of the Milford Independent Party, both the Republicans and the Democrats laughed from their high-horse saying that these were not even worthy of being the basis of a party.

They derided these principles, stating that they were just jargon. They dismissed the foundation of who Peter Spalthoff is, his love for Milford, and the fact that he wants to stamp out partisan politics so that Milford is the focal point of every decision made. Yet now they use his very script and hypocritically do not even acknowledge Peter.

Back to what you know best, hey Tom? Partisan politics, cheap tactics and mimicry.

The major parties are so barren of any true concern for Milford that they even resort to copying Peter Spalthoff’s genuine passion, yet try to ignore his presence since they know he is the only candidate that has and always will put Milford first.

“Neighbors”… what an unusual word to be coming from the Republicans. This is the party that:

-dismisses Peter Spalthoff but uses his words and his ideas;

-Publicly and privately they butchered loyal Milfordite and respected Republican Tom Beirne for suggesting that Richetelli should improve his performance;

-Resorts to defamatory name-calling the members of an opposing party for telling the truth about Richetelli’s sizeable pension payout;

-Has rubbished the reputation of State Representative Barbara Lambert and even had a fundraiser with the sole intention of ridiculing her;

-ALWAYS vote along party lines, even if it means approving a salary increase for the Mayor: Knowing all the while that at the same time school employees could be fired and the Mayor is negotiating union wage freezes;

-Has without proof, ruthlessly questioned the moral virtues of the Democratic mayoral candidate.

“Neighbors” … how novel for Tom and Jim to use that term. Just for their edification:

“Neighbor - a person who shows kindliness or helpfulness toward his or her fellow humans.”

Maybe Tom and Jim were thinking of another word to describe themselves:

“Hypocrite - a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.”

The major parties should stick to what they know best - their self-interest - and let Peter Spalthoff be voted in as Milford Mayor so he can govern this city the way it should and must be governed. He is the only mayoral candidate that has constantly, consistently and honestly put the people of Milford first and foremost.

Vote Spalthoff and keep these undesirable ‘neighbors’ out of our local politics.

Vincent Ross
Milford

Democrats Demonize Richetelli's Addiction Issues

All one has to do is look at the barrage of articles today at the Connecticut Post and you will read a sad tale of Democratic charges of Mayoral accusations, insinuations, and claims of dereliction of duty.

Richard Smith the Democratic Party Chairman has made Richetelli's fight with addiction a matter of partisan politics. Smith alleged that had our Mayor not been preoccupied with his addiction issues the city of Milford would have qualified for more stimulus money.

Democrats allege that Compared to other towns who were on the ball Milford got less stimulus benefits. Freedom of information requests are reeling in by the Democrats, and the Republicans said they intend to comply, however the documentation requested is voluminous and may not be available until after the election.

The Republicans also Responded with THIS press release claiming that the democrats have it all wrong, that they were the ones who declined the funding to Eisenhower Park because the money came from U.S. Sen. Lieberman whom the Milford Democrats are angry with. Richetelli charged that Lieberman's betrayal of Lamont was the main reason why they declined funds for Eisenhower park.

The Democrats however were not persuaded by Richetelli's remarks and continued to insist that his addiction to an "un-named" prescription drug and his flight to a Maryland rehab is the real cause of his lack of effectiveness in delivering the Federal funds.

With all these heated exchanges in play, Tim Chaucer the Petitioning Candidate for Mayor jumped into the Melee and charged that Richetelli was "sleeping at the wheel" in (THIS article) when he allowed a developer to purchase the space next to the library. Chaucer said that that space could have been 22 now needed parking spaces for the library and not purchasing the land was a mistake. He claimed Richetelli was not interested or involved in keeping that lot.

Richetelli has been under a steady attack since his first Debate where he was accused of contributing to the destruction of the Cadley House, allowing complacency in the Building Department, falsely taking credit for this years tax decrease, and not supporting Jonathan Law's educational infrastructure.

Much to Peter Spalthoff's credit, he did not take sides, or jump into the partisan character thrashing from both Republicans and Democrats. Spalthoff instead focused on the issues affecting our community and gave his opinion as if he were the mayor at the time.

The Democrats have now reached a new low by engaging in what may be perceived as an intensely negative campaign making Richetelli's drug problem the focal point of their press releases. Truly a sad way to run an election, perhaps it would be best if all candidates just focus on the issues and refrain from personal attacks.