City Balance Sheet Dilemma! Blake Proves Worse Than Richetelli

FACTS DO NOT LIE! Milford Republicans prove themselves as less irresponsible than Milford Democrats. The Graph below demonstrates that when it comes to eroding the city balance Sheet, Mayor Ben Blake has topped all previous records held by the previous kleptocrat Jim Richetelli. The city is not yet bankrupt because we still have more assets than liabilities, but we are well on our way with Blake "the snake." I predicted some years ago that under the present trends the city would be in big trouble around 2014 at the latest, because that is when (under the present trends) Milford would have depleted its entire asset base. Every good accountant will tell you that when you have more Liabilities than assets you have a negative net worth or in other words you are bankrupt. This makes borrowing more difficult and creditors grow concerned about a responsible plan whereby the city can balance not only its budget but its books. This often results in a massive spike in property taxes, credit downgrades and a decline in services. The future of Milford looks bleak with this administration we may want to think about a change come next election. 

To see the graph click the link:

http://www.facebook.com/#!/roccofrank.milfordindependents

Open House Mayoral Event, Come to Cafe Atlantique

Come out to Cafe Atlantique, 33 River St., in downtown Milford from 6 to 7 pm Wed. Sept.7 as part of the New Haven Register’s ongoing community engagement series. You’ll meet Milford Bureau Chief Brian McCready, who will be accompanied by Milford Democratic Mayoral candidate, Republican Mayoral candidate, and Milford Independent Party Mayoral candidate Rocco Frank. You’ll have an opportunity to interact with them, and McCready. If you can’t attend but would like to ask the candidates’ questions please email questions to bmccready@nhregister.com and he will ask your question. Check the Register’s website www.nhregister.com for a recap of the event along with videos.

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

Time To Get Out And Vote

The early morning voting in the Milford election was weak, but nonetheless the day is not yet over. If you have not voted, please do go out and vote. Milford cannot prosper without people caring enough about our democratic process enough to do so.

Check back at this site for post election comments and race results on all candidates in the running.

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.

Charles R. Iovino Rests In Peace

For those of you who might have missed it, I want to bring to your attention that Charles R. Iovino passed away on September 5th in Peabody Massachusetts at the age of 99.

While many of you may not know Mr. Iovino, he was the Mayor of Milford back in the late fifties and early sixties. While being the Mayor is significant in and of itself, Mr. Iovino was the very first Mayor of Milford and won not as a Republican or Democrat, but as a write-in candidate and he won overwhelmingly. His winning was a first in Connecticut as an Independent candidate.

Although I never met Mr. Iovino, he was/is an inspiration to me as I know an Independent candidate here in Milford can win just as he did back in 1959. His commitment to the City and not the political parties is my inspiration and I am truly sorry that I never had the opportunity to thank him for his leadership and commitment to the Milford community.

So, in this little way with this formal notification I wanted to say “thank you” Mr. Iovino for not only your inspiration to me, but more importantly for the years you served as one of Milford’s wonderful Mayors. May he rest in peace knowing that he has served us well.

From a very grateful citizen, an appreciative Independent Party, and a thankful community to have had the likes of Charles R. Iovino serve as our Mayor. I send our condolences to the Iovino family.

Peter L. Spalthoff

Independent Party Candidate for Mayor

Independent Party Candidate Concerned Over Milford's Business Audits

Regrettably for Milford’s Business community, the opportunity for Milford’s Board of Aldermen to rescind their approval to hire the North Carolina based firm named Tax Management Associates has lapsed. Milford’s Government Administrators who have the responsibility to assess and levy taxes have convinced the Board of Aldermen unanimously that this new process is fair and not business unfriendly.

Tax Management Associates are now implementing this new doctrine as an agent of the city and some of our businesses should be hearing from them soon. The adoption of this new process may be one of the best single reasons so far for every taxpayer and elector in Milford to consider seeking some new replacements for the Board of Aldermen and Mayor. As a taxpayer and elector you may be asking yourself why it is important to elect new members.

Their actions don’t seem to be directed towards us and it even seems to be a nice financial benefit for us residential taxpayers. So, why you may ask? Here’s why…. Milford’s business community contributes most of the funds paying for all the good municipal jobs and their benefits, quality education, and services that we expect and enjoy. It’s not good business for the city to start deciding which business group can and should pay more in taxes than another. Especially since it’s based on an arbitrary amount of assessed value derived from previous federal profit and loss statements. I would not consider this business friendly and it brings discrimination to our business community.

Their discretion in the implementation of this new process is just the start of the discrimination phase. Everybody should want this discriminatory practice to go away because if not, you never know who the next victim will be when they again decide to process other groups in this manner.

Milford should be more business friendly than all of its surrounding communities. That would be the key to our financial security. When every Alderman agrees to allow one segment of the business community to be discriminated against, that’s a problem. People should elect public officials that are not strangled by major political parties and their contributors. Arrogance veiled with a smile and courtesy can not be tolerated anymore in Milford.

Stephen Borer

Milford's Democratic Party Officially Split On Mayor

Tim Chaucer has officially decided to forgo a Democratic primary. Instead he will be a brave "lone Democrat." Chaucer who was recently "snubbed" by the Milford Democratic Town Committee, sought to avail himself by forcing a primary.

However, the bosses of the Democratic Town committee saw fit to do things their way. In one evening and by an exclusive members only vote, chose the less "well known" candidate of their choosing. The Democrats decided on a gamble that their candidate Genevieve Salvatore , has enough charm, charisma, and debate to show Milford she is "a class act." The Milford Democrats are counting on her skills as a lawyer, in selling Milford their "new face."

Chaucer, rightfully has been concerned with Genevieve Salvatore's affiliation with "questionable" developers who may circumvent business and political ethics with money and "high priced" attorneys. Chaucer represents a different breed of Democrat, the first (in a long time) to stand up against his party and engage in a de-facto protest.

Chaucer is currently very popular with many Democrats in his district, and around Milford many know him for his contributions in preserving Milford's Heritage.

Peter Spalthoff the Independent Candidate for Mayor is also expected to get a large draw, and with more Great Democratic names in the races... call it just when I say "eat your words" Genevieve it is no longer you against "three republicans" looks like the playing field just got a little more leveled and every vote now counts four times.

Tim Chaucer Demands Change In Milford

The city would look very different today if Tim Chaucer were running things.

In formally announcing his candidacy for mayor Monday evening, the Democrat listed several instances when his intervention -- even as a private citizen -- got large development plans rejected.

"When the current administration formulated plans to consolidate our two geographically balanced high schools, we formed Milford Citizens Against Mega Schools," he said during a rally on the City Hall steps.

"We showed how consolidating was not only a bad idea educationally, but would be more costly to the city taxpayer. We won the battle."

Chaucer said he opposed a proposal in the 1980s to reroute Gulf Street so that a developer and his daughter would have homes with a better view. "I am proud that we protected the beautiful vista from the Indian burial ground on Gulf Pond when elected officials did not have the city's best interests at heart."

The retired history teacher reminded the 15 supporters at the rally that the historic Merwin-Cadley homestead on Gulf Pond was torn down last year despite assurances by Mayor James L. Richetelli Jr. that it would be saved. A developer paid less than the market value in exchange for a conservation easement that was to protect the property, Chaucer said.

The candidate said he opposed a plan to improve Eisenhower Park because it would have meant charging fees to residents to recoup the cost. "The park is there for
everyone to enjoy, for free," he said.

"And it certainly doesn't need $20 million of so-called improvements."

City officials were "asleep at the switch'' when the Langner property next to the library became available several years ago, Chaucer said.

"It was a park-like setting with black walnut trees, and it could have been acquired to add to the recreation complex next to it," he said. "Instead, there are condos on it now and parking at our ball fields is at a premium."

Chaucer said that he would foster open government by, among other measures, putting a logbook in the mayor's office that anyone could review. "It's transparency. We ought to know who our mayor is spending his time with." He'd also consider periodic public hearings on the operation of city departments and to hear residents' complaints.

The candidate admitted he faces an uphill battle at the Democratic nominating convention Wednesday night. Most party leaders seem to have promised their support to Genevieve Salvatore, currently the chairman of the Economic Development Commission. Chaucer would not rule out a primary.

Salvatore said, "It isn't surprising to me that there are more people interested in this race. Many people in Milford are dissatisfied with the status quo and we all agree that it is a good time for a change in leadership. While it's great that others are concerned about Milford's future, I am confident that I will be nominated by the Democratic Town Convention this week.

"I have a strong vision for our city's future and I believe that such vision, together with strong leadership, will be crucial for our success in November and beyond."

Richetelli said he is running on his eight-year record in office.

Peter Spalthoff, the Independent Party mayoral candidate, said, "Tim announcing that he is running for mayor simply goes to my belief that the citizens of Milford can only be the winners with more choices of candidates. There is no reason in the world why there should only be two candidates for the position."

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

About Chaucer: Timothy Chaucer is the former chairman of the Milford Conservation Comission and a former elected member of the Milford Planning and Zoning Board. n He founded Milford Citizens Against Mega Schools several years ago to fight attempts to consolidate Jonathan Law and Joseph A. Foran high schools. n Chaucer has been program chairman for the Milford Historical Society for the past five years, and is nominating chairman for the Milford Preservation Trust. n He is the founder and director of the Milford Marine Institute Inc., which has educated more than 1,000 Milford children since 1983 about the value of salt marshes, woodlands, farmlands and meadows. n He is a retired high school and college instructor of American history, as well as criminal and civil law, and retains his state teaching certification

ORIGINAL ARTICLE BY FRANK JULIANO

Spalthoff Challenges Mayor's Commitment To Jonathan Law's Students

Mayor Richetelli’s sense of priorities and judgment continue to frustrate and confound me. I spent July 6Th at the Milford Aldermanic meeting along with other fellow tax payers. We were all there to speak up in favor of moving forward with the existing plan and proposed bonding for completing important and long needed renovations on Jonathan Law High School. This is a project that was previously approved and committed to by the Mayor. To date, tens of thousands of dollars have been spent. I, along with other Milford taxpayers at the meeting, spoke out in favor of completing the project, and adamantly objected to leaving important renovations to this school unfinished at a time when our community needs the investment most.

The contractor has decreased the project’s cost by nearly 25%, which will, if we move forward, save the City almost $750,000.00. In addition, the current interest rate on the bonds are likely lower now than they will be in the future, and completing the project now would most certainly bring a larger reimbursement from the State as a high priority infrastructure project. But, all the numbers and logical arguments aside, Mayor Richetelli made a commitment to the citizens of Milford, and to the students and faculty at Jonathan Law. A commitment that he is now not ready to follow up on.

Sure, these are difficult economic times-and some projects, even important ones, will have to go on the back burner. But just a few days after the Aldermanic meeting, the Mayor got word from Governor Rell that she was standing by her commitment to the Silver Sands boardwalk project. Ironically, Governor Rell noted that “the State should honor its promise to extend the boardwalk. “Not surprisingly, Mayor Richetelli agreed with her, calling her decision “wise” because construction costs are low and significant money has already been spent. Sound familiar?

Fortunately, by the end of the July 6th meeting, the Aldermen did pass the resolution to raise the bond money and finish the Jonathan Law renovations-despite the five republicans voting against it, and Mayor Richetelli’s personal recommendation to vote against it as well.

The most confusing and frustrating part of Mayor Richetelli’s inconsistent opinions is that it would appear our Mayor is more strongly in support of extending a boardwalk than investing in our schools. This, my friends, is completely unacceptable.

I do want to thank Governor Rell for standing by her commitments to Milford's infrastructure projects, and to the Aldermen who made thoughtful and logical judgments in favor of the Jonathan Law bonding proposal. And, an extra-special thank you to all of you who took time out of your day to make your voices heard at the Aldermanic meeting. It is largely your voices that moved the project forward and gained the Aldermen’s support.

Peter L. Spalthoff

Independent Party Candidate for Mayor 2009

City To Auction off Two Lots

The city is getting set to auction off two parcels of land that became somewhat controversial during the recent budget deliberations.

Mayor James Richetelli Jr. expects the sales to bring in $250,000, $225,000 of which has been calculated into this year’s budget. Other politicians criticized him during budget deliberations for predicting a sales figure, which they said is not a sure thing.

This week the mayor announced the date for public auction for the two single-family building lots, which are in the West Shore area. The properties each are approved for one single-family dwelling.

The auction is set for Friday, June 26, at 11 a.m. in the City Hall auditorium, 110 River St. The minimum bid for each lot, as set by the Board of Aldermen, is $125,000.

People wishing to bid must present a certified or bank check for 10% ($12,500) 30 minutes before the auction.

One of the two properties is at 2 Welton St. and combined with 28 feet of 6 Stone St. The two together produce a lot size 100-by-108 feet or 10,787 square feet in an R-5 zone.

The second parcel is a rear lot on Stone Street, which has a lot size of 15,000 square feet in an R-5 zone.

A copy of the official notice, bidding instructions, general specifications and other pertinent information are available at the city’s purchasing department or from the city Web site, ci.milford.ct.us. Click on “City Departments,” select “Purchasing” and then “Current Bids.”

“The sale of this property will achieve many desirable objectives,” Richetelli said. “[It will] generate much needed revenue to aid the city taxpayers; relieve the neighborhood and the city of vacant lots, which have become dumping grounds as well as places to ‘hang out’; create oversized building lots where attractive, single-family homes may be built, which will add value to surrounding properties; put these properties back on the tax rolls; and create jobs through new home construction.”

“In addition, this will continue to enhance our common goal of revitalizing the Walnut Beach area,” Richetelli added.

Written by Jill K. Dion Original post Click HERE


For further information call 783-3201.

Richetelli's Re-Election Would Cost Taxpayers Extra.

Amid these difficult times, and the already unprecedented jubilee over the "once in a lifetime tax decrease" more concern over a "bait and switch" sales tactic surfaces among my colleagues who are "in the know" of local Milford politics. Our current mayor, who now seeks yet another term appears to be "going for broke." Richetelli is seeking a fifth term that will qualify him for a life long pension at a substantial cost to the taxpayers.

While I do not not know the exact details of his personal pension related future monetary entitlements, I do know that it will cost our city extra money over the course of his lifetime, beginning upon his retirement. While many like myself supported Jim in the last election with a sign on my lawn, this time around I do not plan to because I am of the opinion that the cost of retaining him is going to add too much future debt to our city.

This opinion of mine is not because I think Jim is a bad person or did a terrible job, its actually to the contrary I think Jim was simply the best choice of the candidates Running last go around. This year is different, we have three other choices besides Jim including my personal favorite Peter Spalthoff who believes in the fundamental fairness of "people and not politics." He is also a selfless individual who has lived in Milford many years and has been a part of many of our local clubs and organizations and traditions. Peter is the only person I ever met who personally invested his own money in our community. I cannot really say that about any of the other candidates.

This year I simply urge all voters to make the best choice for our city and with tax increases and out of control spending being the current theme we may want to think twice about voting for a person who will add additional pension obligations to the city's already over burdened treasury. Jim, in my opinion is a great person who will qualify for a very high paying corporate job after his retirement from the city. We need not worry about him or his future should he fail in his bid for re-election.

*********************************************************
6/14/09 Correction and an addendum to this Post.

The previous title of this post alleged millions, perhaps that is true or perhaps its not I did have the opportunity to get some more imput about this opinion of mine of which is changed a bit due to some new updates.

As it was explained to me the Mayor Recieves 2.25% in pension benefits for each year he holds office. Jim, should he get re-elected to his fifth term would qualify for 10 Times the 2.25% or 22.5% of his $93,000.00 a year estimated salary. This amount would be due and payable upon his 60Th birthday and would be subject to the review of the Pension and Retirement board. This board, at their discretion, could agree to give him Cost of living adjustments to compensate for inflation or like scenarios that could diminish the purchasing power of his pension check.

Should the mayor collect his pension from 60-90 or 30 years, this sum would total Apx. $21,000.00 Times 30 or $630,000.00 without cost of living adjustments by the board. How much this figure grows is entirely up to the Pension and Retirement board and their willingness to increase his benefits in the future.

The ultimate amount could be a million or more, but this is really contingent on how many years the Mayor collects, how many increases he gets along the way, and any other unforseen additional expenses (such as continued health coverage)related to this debt obligation. This figure is pure speculation.

Update 6/27/2009

Quote from Brian McCredy NH Register

"The combined city and schools proposed budget is $170.8 million, compared to this year's $160.1 million, representing a 6.69 percent increase. The proposed budget basically keeps services at the same level. Fixed costs such as health insurance, electricity, contractual wages, pension contributions and workers compensation make up 91.2 percent of the increase."

LINK to full article

Bulk Pick Up This May 6Th

Mayor James L. Richetelli, Jr. has announced that the city will begin its 2009 Bulk Waste Pickup Program on May 6.

The Bulk Waste Program has been funded for two pickups per year: May and September. The May pickup is intact. However, the Board of Aldermen is currently debating the fiscal year 2009-10 budget that could cut the September schedule if aldermen do not fund it, the city said in a prepared statement.
All homeowners are asked to honor the schedule and not place bulk waste at the curb any sooner than 24 hours prior to their scheduled pickup.

The schedule is: if you garbage day is Monday, pick up is May 6; for Tuesday garbage days, pick up is May 13; for Thursday, May 20, for Friday, May 27.
Call the Public Works Office at 783-3265, the Monday before your pick up if you have goods such as stoves, refrigerators, dishwasher, hot water heaters and other similar appliances.

Peter Spalthoff Announces Independent Bid For Milford Mayor

A few words from Peter:

I believe that I posses the skills of a good manager. I also know that I can and do relate to the senior citizen population in Milford because I am a senior citizen and I was fortunate enough to have sold my home before the taxes were raised high enough to force me to do so.

I can also relate to the trials and tribulations of our veterans. I have experienced what it is to be a returning war veteran from Vietnam. It was due to those experiences in Vietnam that I created the “Window of Honor” as well as the “Tie a Ribbon” campaign on the Green that was so well received by our community several years ago on Broad Street.

I know that I will make a difference in the management of this city. I am doing it out of love of the city, and no matter how silly that may sound, it is the truth. I do love this city and the people in it. It has always been and still is my desire to serve my neighbors and I know of no better way to serve them then by becoming the mayor of Milford.

I tell people that while I respect and sometimes envy those individuals who were born and raised in Milford. Unlike them I had a “choice” of living in Milford or one of the 168 other city or towns in the state. My wife and I chose Milford because we fell in love with the community and its people. As we chose Milford for our home we also decided to settle our business here as well and in doing so we felt a strong sense of community service and responded to that call in numerous ways. We have helped over 300 families in Milford obtain their homes here. Our company, Shoreline Mortgage, was also helpful and pledged financial support to help defray the costs of having the Simon Lake submarine returned to the city.

Although it’s often viewed as very political to make promises, I will make one none the less — I promise that I will run my campaign above board and will not take any personal shots at either of the other candidates. I will stick to issues.

If and when elected, my neighbors will be made aware of where I stand on all the issues affecting our community. From taxes to senior citizen issues to veteran issues to Eisenhower park issues to historical property issues and others that come across my desk, I will address each and every one before they become a problem. There will not be any surprises coming from the mayor’s office when I am elected.

I believe, and hope you all agree that we should be electing the individual to the office of mayor. Whether or not that individual is a Republican, Democrat, or Independent or any other group. We should vote for that person based on what she or he has to offer, what they stand for and not the party to which they belong. As a patriot, a senior citizen, a Vietnam veteran, a small business owner, a parent and grandparent, a deeply committed community activist, and an overall good guy; I am asking for your support and vote to become Milford’s next mayor.

Thank You

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

Peter Spalthoff
Employment History:
Police Officer in Trumbull
Vice President with People’s Bank for twenty years
Small business owner for sixteen years
Executive Director of a state wide trade organization for seventeen years and counting
Community Service, Past and Present:
Treasurer, President and now Chairman of the finance committee of the United Way
Director at Bridges
Director of the Milford Rotary
Director of the Milford Fine Arts
President of the DMBA
President of the Point Beach Association
Treasurer of the Woodruff YMCA
Treasurer of the Chamber of Commerce
Treasurer of the Caswell Cove Association
Chairman of the RTC for 5 years
Member of the Economic Development Commission
Member of the Harbor Commission
Founder Milford celebrates New Years Eve party

Mayor Richetelli Dropped by today.

The race for Mayor in Milford must be heating up, because Jim Richetelli and his entourage stopped by my home today. The mayor has been campaigning hard, I received three mailed advertisements from him in the last few weeks, and today a personal visit and a chance to to speak with him briefly.

Shortly after I announced my campaign a few weeks back I called Mayor Jim and spoke to his associate. My intention of the call was to discuss the issues here in Milford, and also register my views on issues regarding the state of CT; Since Jim Amman, my opponent, outright refused to meet with me, even after contacting both his local and state offices.

There is no chance that Mr. Amman did not receive my message, because he replied to a reporter at CT NewsJunkie that the reason he declined to meet with me was because he found my request "odd" and that in his opinion "opponents do not always meet." Once again today and for the second time I invited Mr. Richetelli to meet with me. It is my hope that after the election debacle wound down he will follow up. I also permitted the Mayor to place a campaign sign on my front lawn. We will give him time to follow up.

As an update to the events of my discussion today, and I must admit I was very vocal, I flat out told Mr. Richetelli that I object to Mr. Amman's current bonding pressure to run up debt in CT. I also told Mr. Richetelli that I find it amazing that Mr. Amann can find plenty of money to build a boardwalk, yet Milford has no money to assist the elderly, or any intent to help children. I communicated to our mayor that Milford having the largest boardwalk in CT is a disgrace and a misplaced priority. Milford should return that money to the now ailing SCHIP program to make sure Milford's children have proper medical attention.

Today was hardly the platform for a debate on such issues, and his staff was under pressure to get the Mayor moving door to door. One of his staff members seemed clueless about the boardwalk project of which I found odd. Apparently their energy is not in reading all the news at the moment.

My endorsement of our incumbent mayor is largely due to the fact that Kerry Rowland listed the following on her website as her credentials:

Kerri is a 1992 graduate of Boston College. Her accomplishments include:

BA English
BA Secondary Ed.
4 year Women’s Hockey
2 year Captain
AWCHA champions

Kerri’s work history includes:

· New Standard Institute,
Internet Marketing Manager (current)

· Head Coach Girl’s Hockey Notre Dame, Fairfield (current)

· Milford Rec. Dept.

· Milford ASA Umpire.

· Asst. Hockey Coach Sacred Heart University.

Its my belief that anybody, who has any experience hiring people, would find Rowlands qualifications as insufficient. In my opinion, to suggest a little league coach is capable of 80-100 Million a year in cash management decisions is irresponsible.

However, one issue I do agree with Rowland on, is that Jim could have done a better job in keeping our property taxes lower. But neither candidate is offering any security to the struggling elderly, and those near forclosure who fear our local government or bank will evict them. Some of the locals I know are afraid their property will be confiscated. They fear losing their land and/or home if they fall behind on their ever increasing taxes.

Many of these retirees are becoming victims of reverse mortgages, only to have the balance of their estates destroyed by CT's unfair inheritance tax. Should a person be fortunate enough to even have estate balances, will discover that attorneys pay all outstanding health and hefty medical expenses as a first priority.

Both candidates are a troubling choice for me as far as the issues go, but as far as the qualifications go, Kerry Rowland does not hold a candle to Richetelli. My opponent Jim Amman on the other hand thinks that her ridiculous credentials warrant his support. If Rowland wins the election it will be nothing short of having your kids little league coach in charge of 80+ Million Dollars a year. The Democrats ought to be ashamed of themselves for even nominating such a weak and risky candidate.

Rocco J. Frank Jr.