The split budget vote proposal last night was soundly defeated by 151 votes against the change to 48 votes for making the change. The proposal was for the town government budget and the education budget to split and for each one to be voted on separately. It was clear throughout the night that people were not as supportive of the change as the advisory vote last fall indicated. Many people at the meeting were confused as to why we needed to make this change when there are advisory questions as part of the ballot already. Many people commented that this was an attempt to segregate the education budget in an attempt to make it harder to pass. Supporters of the change tried to convince voters that they would have better control over the budget by going with this system but most were very concerned that this would lead to more confusion and came away unconvinced. Those who supported the change could not convince the majority that this change would improve the process of approving the budget. This is why it was soundly defeated.
Ron Cowles also managed to cause a paper ballot to be used instead of the usual voice vote. It is his contention that there are many people attending town meetings from other towns and then voting on the town business. There is no evidence that this has happened nor that is it a current problem. It did lead to long delays as everyone had to wait in line to vote.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
Lebanon Residents Arrested
Raymond C. Crosby, 26, of 129 Lynch Road, Lebanon, was charged Friday in Griswold with failure to carry registration and insurance card, driving with a suspended license, driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs and failure to drive in the proper lane.
Julie Lang, 20, of 339 Beaumont Ave., Lebanon, was charged Saturday with third-degree assault, disorderly conduct, and risk of injury to a minor.
Julie Lang, 20, of 339 Beaumont Ave., Lebanon, was charged Saturday with third-degree assault, disorderly conduct, and risk of injury to a minor.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Lebanon's 6 Million Dollar Question
The town of Lebanon is going to be faced with a large and expensive decision very soon. Lebanon has been under a consent order, from1987, to deal with the water pollution problems that exist on and around Amston Lake. This problem has been featured in the Hartford Courant as a front page article which has led to negative press attention to the problem and political pressure. The problem is that it will cost each citizen in the town about $802 and will benefit only a small portion of the towns residents.
The question is do we need it? Apparently, the town is being forced into this decision by the State of Connecticut because of water quality issues on Amston Lake. If we do not agree to a remedy we will be taken to court and forced to do something about the issue. The First Selectmen, Joyce Okunuk, has already signed a consent order that has the force of a Court Decree and the time line if very tight. Hebron settled their pollution problems in the late 1980's when the original order came out and now we are going to be paying for a system that will cost far more to install than it did when Hebron installed their sewers. The waiting game is over.
There is an attempt to obtain a grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to pay for half the project. The problem is Lebanon does not currently qualify for the grant because our household median income is greater than the state median. There is a current study of the residents incomes, in the Amston Lake district, to see whether they meet guidelines for receiving the grant. The town may still not qualify for the grant if the incomes are greater than the median income of the state.
Many residents of the Amston Lake area are already asking for their properties to be added as year round residences after the project is completed. Clearly there are some indirect costs that are involved with this project because the majority of the residences around the lake are seasonal at this point. The Willimantic Chronicle has already wrote a opinion article that supports the contention that there is no reason to keep those seasonal homes from transitioning to rear round residences once the project is completed. There are about 200 residences in the Amston Lake district and about 160 of those are seasonal residences. By allowing these residence to transition to rear round residences then we will have the addition of at possibly 200 new residents and the addition of more students to the school system.
The addition of more residents to Lebanon could lead to increased costs to the town as a whole. The seasonal homes are only paying partial taxes at this point. What will the addition of year round residents and children do to the towns tax rate? No one knows. In fact no one knows whether there will be additional homes built on empty lots that surround the area now. All of this could lead to increased taxes to the residents as a whole because it is well known that residential developement does not pay for itself through taxes on the new developement but leads to increases in taxes on residents as a whole.The town has commissioned a study to see what could happen if these homes do transition to year round residences.
The newly appointed Water Pollution Control Authority says on the town of Lebanon's website that "the Amston Lakes residents will pay their fair share". No one knows what that means at this point. Does it mean that they will bear the full cost? If that is the case then each residence in the district will be responsible for about $29500. If they receive the United States Department of Agriculture grant then the grant will pay for about 50% of the cost of the project.
At this point it is a wait and see period for the town. There is a push to have the project voted on and approved at the annual town meeting that is held in May.It may not pass. The question is what if? What if it's not passed? The State of Connecticut has already forced other communities to fix their pollution problems. This has occurred after protracted and expensive court battles. Our options have clearly run out. The question now is is who is going to pay for the project.
The question is do we need it? Apparently, the town is being forced into this decision by the State of Connecticut because of water quality issues on Amston Lake. If we do not agree to a remedy we will be taken to court and forced to do something about the issue. The First Selectmen, Joyce Okunuk, has already signed a consent order that has the force of a Court Decree and the time line if very tight. Hebron settled their pollution problems in the late 1980's when the original order came out and now we are going to be paying for a system that will cost far more to install than it did when Hebron installed their sewers. The waiting game is over.
There is an attempt to obtain a grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to pay for half the project. The problem is Lebanon does not currently qualify for the grant because our household median income is greater than the state median. There is a current study of the residents incomes, in the Amston Lake district, to see whether they meet guidelines for receiving the grant. The town may still not qualify for the grant if the incomes are greater than the median income of the state.
Many residents of the Amston Lake area are already asking for their properties to be added as year round residences after the project is completed. Clearly there are some indirect costs that are involved with this project because the majority of the residences around the lake are seasonal at this point. The Willimantic Chronicle has already wrote a opinion article that supports the contention that there is no reason to keep those seasonal homes from transitioning to rear round residences once the project is completed. There are about 200 residences in the Amston Lake district and about 160 of those are seasonal residences. By allowing these residence to transition to rear round residences then we will have the addition of at possibly 200 new residents and the addition of more students to the school system.
The addition of more residents to Lebanon could lead to increased costs to the town as a whole. The seasonal homes are only paying partial taxes at this point. What will the addition of year round residents and children do to the towns tax rate? No one knows. In fact no one knows whether there will be additional homes built on empty lots that surround the area now. All of this could lead to increased taxes to the residents as a whole because it is well known that residential developement does not pay for itself through taxes on the new developement but leads to increases in taxes on residents as a whole.The town has commissioned a study to see what could happen if these homes do transition to year round residences.
The newly appointed Water Pollution Control Authority says on the town of Lebanon's website that "the Amston Lakes residents will pay their fair share". No one knows what that means at this point. Does it mean that they will bear the full cost? If that is the case then each residence in the district will be responsible for about $29500. If they receive the United States Department of Agriculture grant then the grant will pay for about 50% of the cost of the project.
At this point it is a wait and see period for the town. There is a push to have the project voted on and approved at the annual town meeting that is held in May.It may not pass. The question is what if? What if it's not passed? The State of Connecticut has already forced other communities to fix their pollution problems. This has occurred after protracted and expensive court battles. Our options have clearly run out. The question now is is who is going to pay for the project.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Arrest of Lebanon Residents
Colchester State Police
December 5 2009
Michael J. Cavallo, 51, 101 Clarke Road, Lebanon, 12:50 p.m., second-degree threatening, breach of peace; court date Dec. 17, Norwich Superior Court.m Police
December 5 2009
Michael J. Cavallo, 51, 101 Clarke Road, Lebanon, 12:50 p.m., second-degree threatening, breach of peace; court date Dec. 17, Norwich Superior Court.m Police
December 6 2009
Melanie R. Carducci, 27, 23 Rita Drive, Lebanon, 12:08 p.m., obtaining a prescription drug by fraud, bad check, second-degree forgery; court date Dec. 16, Rockville Superior Court.
December 8 2009
Nicholas R. Gebbie, 27, 21 Hinckley Road, Lebanon, 2 a.m., third-degree assault, disorderly conduct; court date Dec. 8, Norwich Superior Court.
Colchester Police
December 6 2009
David Rax, 41, 170 Lakeside Drive, Lebanon, 12:05 a.m., drinking while driving, operating under suspension; court date Dec. 22, Norwich Superior Court.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Bridges of Lebanon
Tobacco Road Bridge
In the Norwich Bulletin article, that was just published and posted on this blog, it was mentioned by the First Selectmen that were were several bridges that were in need of repair in addition to the one on Tobacco Street. Research conducted by myself indicates that here are least two additional bridges that are also in need of immediate repair and there is no funding in the future to repair these bridges. The first is the bridge on Waterman Road over the Pease Brook and the second is the McGrath Lane bridge over the Yantic River. In addition, the bridge over Bartlett Brook on Taylor Bridge Road is in imminent need of repair and/or replacement.
Bridge on Waterman Road
The concern of the towns residents should be what is going to happen with the bridges that have not been funded. The Waterman Road bridge should be of particular concern to the town since that is one the main routes to the south end of the town. If I lived on either McGrath Lane or Taylor Bridge Road then I would be very concerned that those bridges could be out of service either permanently or for an extended period of time. It should be abundantly clear to everyone that there is some chance that the town could have to foot the bill for at least several of these bridges on our own. We have to ask ourselves whether we have spent enough money on maintaining our infrastructure in this town and whether it has come back and hurt us now. Due to the economic conditions we have put $80,000 dollars aside for the towns road and bridge repairs. Last year we put $150,000 dollars aside for these repairs.As we move forward we have to ask ourselves whether this is enough because deferring maintainence never is a good idea.
In addition it should be noted that at the Town Meeting that we are going to spending our whole road and bridge maintenance budget for this fiscal year on this project. It had been portrayed in the Norwich Bulletin article that we are going to be not spending any town monies on this project but that is untrue. That is why its my opinion that we need to dedicate more money to our annual Road and Bridge budget.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)