The following letter, submitted to the Board of Selectmen by a resident - thus a matter of public record - was sent seeking reconsideration of a vote with respect to our decision to relocate the Veterans Monument to its original placement in front of Town Hall. A resident, by way of a post to this site queried whether residents could have access to the letter, or if they would be able to read it, as it had been discussed at Monday's meeting of the BOS. As the letter is a matter of public record, I indicated that I would post it in its entirety on this site as soon as possible. Today, a small article about the letter appeared in the Worcester Telegram; thus it important now for the entirety of the letter to be published.
My comments with respect to the letter will be brief for the time being as the letter itself is nearly 4 full pages First, I recall at no time, members of the Board referring to the Veterans Monument as a "War Memorial". That is not to suggest it was not said, but merely that I do not recall it coming from any member of the Board of Selectmen. As well, I can say with certainty that no member of the Board of Selectmen - in any way - demonstrated any level of disrespect towards the Veterans Agent. Additionally, the veterans who attended and filled Town Hall to capacity that evening, ranged from a survivor of the Pearl Harbor attack to those from the Post Viet Nam era. None invalidated the service of their brothers in attendance that evening, nor considered their contributions any more or less valuable. All, merely wanted something returned that they had not been provided an opportunity to speak to previously, the return of the Veterans Monument to its original placement in front of Town Hall. They requested nothing further. The letter is as follows:
__________________________
The purpose of this memo is to request that you reconsider and rescind your decision to relocate the World War II, Korean Conflict, and Viet Nam Conflict veteran lists from their current position in Veteran's Memorial Hall. There may possibly be information below which was not available to you at the time of your meeting.
First, this grouping of three plaques was not and is not a "war memorial". the lists are not any different from or more significant that the lists of Civil War, Spanish American War, and Great War Soldiers, sailors, and marines whose names surround you at every meeting. Did you make yourselves familiar with the specific origins of these older lists? The story of their creation resides in town meeting records, and in the interpretative essay accompanying the relevant sections of their digitized version, "The Mind of the Town", as well as the study "The 28th Man", all available in the Joshua Hyde Library. You also do know that it was simply a lack of available wall space in the old Veteran's Memorial Hall - not special significance - which was the reason for outdoor installation of the tree most recent lists?
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
WEST NILE VIRUS CONFIRMED IN STURBRIDGE
The Sturbridge Board of Health released the following Advisory today:
WEST NILE VIRUS CONFIRMED IN STURBRIDGE
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health announced today that West Nile virus (WNV) has been detected in mosquitoes collected from Sturbridge. WNV is most commonly transmitted to humans by the bite of a mosquito infected with the virus. While WNV can infect people of all ages, people over the age of 50 are at higher risk for severe infection. In 2010, 3,558 mosquito samples were tested STATEWIDE for WNV and 121 samples were positive. Sturbridge had no positive mosquito samples identified in 2010.
STEPS THAT YOU CAN TAKE NOW TO PROTECT YOU AND YOUR FAMILY
By taking a few, common-sense precautions, you can help to protect yourself and your loved ones:
Avoid Mosquito Bites
WEST NILE VIRUS CONFIRMED IN STURBRIDGE
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health announced today that West Nile virus (WNV) has been detected in mosquitoes collected from Sturbridge. WNV is most commonly transmitted to humans by the bite of a mosquito infected with the virus. While WNV can infect people of all ages, people over the age of 50 are at higher risk for severe infection. In 2010, 3,558 mosquito samples were tested STATEWIDE for WNV and 121 samples were positive. Sturbridge had no positive mosquito samples identified in 2010.
STEPS THAT YOU CAN TAKE NOW TO PROTECT YOU AND YOUR FAMILY
By taking a few, common-sense precautions, you can help to protect yourself and your loved ones:
Avoid Mosquito Bites
- Be Aware of Peak Mosquito Hours - The hours from dusk to dawn are peak biting times for many mosquitoes. Consider rescheduling outdoor activities that occur during evening or early morning. Otherwise, take extra care to use repellent and protective clothing.
- Clothing Can Help reduce mosquito bites. Although it may be difficult to do when it’s hot, wearing long-sleeves, long pants and socks when outdoors will help keep mosquitoes away from your skin.
- Apply Insect Repellent when you go outdoors. Use a repellent with DEET (N, N-diethyl-m-toluamide), permethrin, picaridin (KBR 3023), IR3535 or oil of lemon eucalyptus [p-methane 3, 8-diol (PMD)] according to the instructions on the product label. DEET products should not be used on infants under two months of age and should be used in concentrations of 30% or less on older children. Oil of lemon eucalyptus should not be used on children under three years of age. Permethrin products are intended for use on items such as clothing, shoes, bed nets and camping gear and should not be applied to skin.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Governor Patrick's Visit
Governor Patrick was in Sturbridge today and met with residents on Streeter Road and Willard Road. He spent the vast majority of his time speaking with, and listening to residents. There were a great many who took the time to meet with the Governor and were truly heartened that he took such special care to spend a significant amount of time with them.
The following link will bring you to the website of Willard Road resident Bob Arnold, who took a great many photos of today's visit to Willard Road. Additionally, there are a significant number of photos on his site of the tornado and its aftermath.
The link to today's photos is as follows: http://www.wellfleetosprey.com/Other/Governor-Patrick-visits/18238126_psCjPL#1402456112_BLMfv2W
The link to the overall site where the tornado related photos can be found is as follows: http://www.wellfleetosprey.com/
Monday, July 25, 2011
"It is always the right time to do the right thing".
This evening I sent the following correspondence to some members of the Tantasqua Regional School Committee. It was sent as a follow-up to a public statement I read into the record at tonight's meeting.
Mr. Haggerty, Ms. Barnicle, Mr. Galonek, Ms. Tichy, Ms. Fitzgerald, Mr. Ehrhard,
This evening, I made the following public statement as an individual member of your Board of Selectmen. It is my sincere hope that you may find cause to consider the content of this statement in your capacity as residents of this great community whom I am charged to represent to the best of my ability. Equally, I invite you to consider the role you share as stakeholders in the protection and fulfillment of our Town Charter. Please note that I am not requesting a response, but merely consideration of the significance one may ascribe to the Town Charter in the governance of our community. I have copied your Chairman and the Superintendent as a courtesy. The statement read as follows:
Many are aware by now of the divide that exists between the Tantasqua Regional School Committee and the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen with respect to appointment process of vacancies to elected positions on the TRSC.
Some have tried to frame this as an issue of precedent and others an issue of sovereignty. In the end however, this is merely an issue of the law and how we respond to our obligation to adhere to the Rule of Law.
This was not a situation that either the TRSC or the Sturbridge BOS sought, nor one that any of us find cause to enjoy. It is an issue that was thrust upon us via the discovery of an agreement that is on file with the Department of Education, representing the manifest will of the people, in that it was voted upon by them at Town Meeting. To that end, it serves as an order for our local government.
The BOS is bound by our Town Charter to “…cause the laws and the orders for the government of the Town of Sturbridge to be enforced”, and we are afforded no capacity to pick and choose which laws and orders we enforce and which ones we do not, whether they are 60 years, or sixty days old.
Ultimately, this issue is one that speaks to reverence by which we hold our Town Charter, the very Constitution of our community and the foundation for our entire form of local government. I, as an individual member of the Board of Selectmen appeal to the Sturbridge members of the TRSC to truly consider the course of action they have undertaken and the long-term ramifications of stepping away from agreements forged at Town Meeting, consistent with State Law, and representative of our Town’s Constitution.
I invite you to please join us in unity as we all demonstrate the importance and respect we attend to our local Constitution, recognizing that there is no regret or shame in placing the principle of our Town Charter, above the difference of opinion we share with respect to this one issue.
Let us all recognize that this legal agreement, supported by the Department of Education, the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, legal counsel for both the District and the Town, as well as by Superintendent Dan Durgin, constitutes the current legal process for appointments and need not be a dividing line between us, but rather a teaching moment for all in terms of our responsibility to the Rule of Law and its prominence in our community.
Martin Luther King often said that “It is always the right time to do the right thing”. Let us prove to our children that these are not hollow words.
Thomas R. Creamer, Selectman
Mr. Haggerty, Ms. Barnicle, Mr. Galonek, Ms. Tichy, Ms. Fitzgerald, Mr. Ehrhard,
This evening, I made the following public statement as an individual member of your Board of Selectmen. It is my sincere hope that you may find cause to consider the content of this statement in your capacity as residents of this great community whom I am charged to represent to the best of my ability. Equally, I invite you to consider the role you share as stakeholders in the protection and fulfillment of our Town Charter. Please note that I am not requesting a response, but merely consideration of the significance one may ascribe to the Town Charter in the governance of our community. I have copied your Chairman and the Superintendent as a courtesy. The statement read as follows:
Many are aware by now of the divide that exists between the Tantasqua Regional School Committee and the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen with respect to appointment process of vacancies to elected positions on the TRSC.
Some have tried to frame this as an issue of precedent and others an issue of sovereignty. In the end however, this is merely an issue of the law and how we respond to our obligation to adhere to the Rule of Law.
This was not a situation that either the TRSC or the Sturbridge BOS sought, nor one that any of us find cause to enjoy. It is an issue that was thrust upon us via the discovery of an agreement that is on file with the Department of Education, representing the manifest will of the people, in that it was voted upon by them at Town Meeting. To that end, it serves as an order for our local government.
The BOS is bound by our Town Charter to “…cause the laws and the orders for the government of the Town of Sturbridge to be enforced”, and we are afforded no capacity to pick and choose which laws and orders we enforce and which ones we do not, whether they are 60 years, or sixty days old.
Ultimately, this issue is one that speaks to reverence by which we hold our Town Charter, the very Constitution of our community and the foundation for our entire form of local government. I, as an individual member of the Board of Selectmen appeal to the Sturbridge members of the TRSC to truly consider the course of action they have undertaken and the long-term ramifications of stepping away from agreements forged at Town Meeting, consistent with State Law, and representative of our Town’s Constitution.
I invite you to please join us in unity as we all demonstrate the importance and respect we attend to our local Constitution, recognizing that there is no regret or shame in placing the principle of our Town Charter, above the difference of opinion we share with respect to this one issue.
Let us all recognize that this legal agreement, supported by the Department of Education, the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, legal counsel for both the District and the Town, as well as by Superintendent Dan Durgin, constitutes the current legal process for appointments and need not be a dividing line between us, but rather a teaching moment for all in terms of our responsibility to the Rule of Law and its prominence in our community.
Martin Luther King often said that “It is always the right time to do the right thing”. Let us prove to our children that these are not hollow words.
Thomas R. Creamer, Selectman
Town of Sturbridge
Friday, July 15, 2011
Precedent when it suits some, the law, when it doesn't.
Recently, a letter to the Editor as well as a post on local blog constructed and submitted by Tantasaqua Regional School Committee (TRSC) member and bankruptcy attorney James Ehrhard, have sought to argue the importance of precedence over the law in terms of appointments to the Regional School Committee. Mr. Ehrhard has argued consistently that 60 years of past practice should and does outweigh the law. He maintains this position despite the fact that Sturbridge Town Counsel, the TRSC Counsel, the Department of Education, the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, and M.G.L. Chapter 71, Section 14B, all clearly and unequivocally state that the Regional School Committee Agreement – voted on and approved by voters at Town Meeting – must be adhered to. Equally, these parties agree that past precedent - regardless of its tenure - does not and cannot trump the law. Though Mr. Ehrhard cites M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 11 as his statute for guidance, it is imminently clear to all of the parties cited above that that particular statute is a) for local town offices (the TRSC position is a regional office covered by M.G.L. Chapter 71, Section 14B), and b) that statute savored by Mr. Ehrhard might be useful as a guide in those situations where an agreement consistent with Chapter 71, Section 14B did not exist. Here, unfortunately for Attorney Ehrhard, a 60 year-old agreement does exist and is in fact - the law.
That said, there remain a few questions and inconsistencies in terms of Attorney Ehrhard’s position as it relates to “precedent” and/or past practice. First, he argues that this practice of joint appointments has been ongoing for “60 years”. The fact that no records have been found to substantiate such a claim, nor the reality of his being much too young to have walked this earth for 60 years, as well as the fact that no one who has could state with any level of certainty when this practice began, seems to be of no consequence to his position. This is more an argument of convenience that reads and plays well as a sound-bite, but in truth has no definitive historical timeline that can be adequately accessed. Clearly, even if such were the case it would be of no relevance as the Law always takes precedent over past practice, when in fact a clear law exists as it does in this case. No one - other that is than Mr. Ehrhard – has argued that the law is secondary to a past practice. Others on the TRSC have argued that we should continue past practice and I respect their position, but the issue of the law is quite clear – it must be followed, though Attorney Ehrhard would have otherwise. Or would he?
That said, there remain a few questions and inconsistencies in terms of Attorney Ehrhard’s position as it relates to “precedent” and/or past practice. First, he argues that this practice of joint appointments has been ongoing for “60 years”. The fact that no records have been found to substantiate such a claim, nor the reality of his being much too young to have walked this earth for 60 years, as well as the fact that no one who has could state with any level of certainty when this practice began, seems to be of no consequence to his position. This is more an argument of convenience that reads and plays well as a sound-bite, but in truth has no definitive historical timeline that can be adequately accessed. Clearly, even if such were the case it would be of no relevance as the Law always takes precedent over past practice, when in fact a clear law exists as it does in this case. No one - other that is than Mr. Ehrhard – has argued that the law is secondary to a past practice. Others on the TRSC have argued that we should continue past practice and I respect their position, but the issue of the law is quite clear – it must be followed, though Attorney Ehrhard would have otherwise. Or would he?
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
The Smear Campaign
It is with regret that I find myself in a position wherein I feel compelled to raise a matter of urgent concern. Though the TRSC and the Board of Selectmen currently find themselves at odds with respect to the matter of appointments, one would hope we can all agree that good people of good intention will find just cause to differ at times on matters of process. In a civilized society this is both expected and understandable as different human beings will review and interpret the same information or process differently. With little doubt, as long as individuals direct their arguments towards process as opposed to personalities, relationships can also be bridged despite the chasm between viewpoints.
That said, there are those times - unfortunate as they are - when individuals will choose to misdirect the discussion and contaminate the waters by way of irrelevant and malicious information intended solely to alter the perception of the process by generating discussion towards personalities. Sadly, I find myself in receipt of direct information from one TRSC member in the form of email correspondence and am aware via multiple reliable sources that another member have both initiated what one could categorize as a campaign of innuendo, smear, and misinformation specific to a member of the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen and another Town official, who sought the office of Regional School Committee. Let there be no mistake, this is not conjecture, but rather absolute FACT. Individuals of good character do not level these types of charges without absolute proof of the position they are undertaking.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Honoring the "Rule of Law"
Having read this morning's report of the meeting held last night by members of the Tantasqua Regional School District (TRSD) and their position with respect to the law, it is clear that the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen is in agreement with the TRSD that State Law must be adhered to as the Board of Selectmen is obligated by the Sturbridge Town Charter to "…cause the laws and orders for the government of the Town of Sturbridge to be enforced and to keep a record of same…". To that end the Board of Selectmen is responsible under MGL Chapter 71, Section 14B, paragraph (a), to honor the TRSD Regional Agreement on file with the Department of Education, which clearly states that "Vacancies occurring in the Regional District School Committee shall be filled as follows: in the case of members appointed by the School Committee of a Participating Town, by such School Committee; in the case of those elected at an annual town election, by the Selectmen to serve until the next annual town election".
Further supporting this legally obligated course of action the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen has received multiple consistent opinions from Sturbridge Town Counsel that have subsequently been accepted by the TRSD Attorney, as well as the Executive Director of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees as legally binding. Thus, the Board of Selectmen as a governing body, does not unfortunately, have the latitude to depart from a fully enforceable agreement that is consistent with State Law. To ignore an existing legal agreement would place the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen in conflict with the Town's Constitution and State Law.
That this agreement has not been adhered to in the past or previously discovered is regrettable as we would not now find ourselves in this situation. That said, the discovery of this legally binding agreement (which constitutes an Order for the government of the Town of Sturbridge) and its current possession by the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen, allows said Board no choice but to maintain compliance with the Sturbridge Town Charter, State Law, and any agreements the Town is party to. To do otherwise would be an affront to our Charter, the laws of the land, and any agreement entered into by this body. Who then, could trust the Town of Sturbridge government to maintain and stand by the rule of law if it were to choose which laws, which orders, or which agreements it deemed worthy of adherence? What message would we send to our residents and our children if we allowed ourselves the luxury of picking and choosing the agreements or laws we abide by?
Further supporting this legally obligated course of action the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen has received multiple consistent opinions from Sturbridge Town Counsel that have subsequently been accepted by the TRSD Attorney, as well as the Executive Director of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees as legally binding. Thus, the Board of Selectmen as a governing body, does not unfortunately, have the latitude to depart from a fully enforceable agreement that is consistent with State Law. To ignore an existing legal agreement would place the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen in conflict with the Town's Constitution and State Law.
That this agreement has not been adhered to in the past or previously discovered is regrettable as we would not now find ourselves in this situation. That said, the discovery of this legally binding agreement (which constitutes an Order for the government of the Town of Sturbridge) and its current possession by the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen, allows said Board no choice but to maintain compliance with the Sturbridge Town Charter, State Law, and any agreements the Town is party to. To do otherwise would be an affront to our Charter, the laws of the land, and any agreement entered into by this body. Who then, could trust the Town of Sturbridge government to maintain and stand by the rule of law if it were to choose which laws, which orders, or which agreements it deemed worthy of adherence? What message would we send to our residents and our children if we allowed ourselves the luxury of picking and choosing the agreements or laws we abide by?
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Boot your body into shape!
A summary article from the Southbridge Evening News:
"STURBRIDGE — Residents interested in getting into top summer shape won't want to miss the third annual Summer Body Boot Camp at the Tantasqua Regional High School track, a fun three-day session that focuses on every part of the body.
Led by personal trainer Julie Gerrish, of Brimfield, this camp is a must for those who are serious about toning up.
The camp will be held five times throughout the summer, beginning on Monday, June 27 to Thursday, June 30. Additional dates will be July 11-14, July 18-21, July 25-28, Aug. 8-11, and Aug. 15-18. Every camp will feature classes on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday mornings from 6 to 7 a.m., and the cost is $40 for each three-day session. The program is designed for high school students and adults, as some of the exercises are too challenging for younger children.
"The program consists of a mix of cardiovascular and strength training exercises," Gerrish said. "We will use body weights, the medicine ball, and also focus on agility and core training."
Gerrish typically only accepts about 12 students for each program to allow participants to be given proper instruction, so be sure to sign up as early as possible for the program that fits your schedule. All participants will receive a reusable aluminum water bottle."
For residents interested in learning more, you can access Julie's Sturbridge Summer Body Boot Camp Facebook Page at https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sturbridge-Summer-Body-Boot-Camp/129050263779458.
"STURBRIDGE — Residents interested in getting into top summer shape won't want to miss the third annual Summer Body Boot Camp at the Tantasqua Regional High School track, a fun three-day session that focuses on every part of the body.
Led by personal trainer Julie Gerrish, of Brimfield, this camp is a must for those who are serious about toning up.
The camp will be held five times throughout the summer, beginning on Monday, June 27 to Thursday, June 30. Additional dates will be July 11-14, July 18-21, July 25-28, Aug. 8-11, and Aug. 15-18. Every camp will feature classes on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday mornings from 6 to 7 a.m., and the cost is $40 for each three-day session. The program is designed for high school students and adults, as some of the exercises are too challenging for younger children.
"The program consists of a mix of cardiovascular and strength training exercises," Gerrish said. "We will use body weights, the medicine ball, and also focus on agility and core training."
Gerrish typically only accepts about 12 students for each program to allow participants to be given proper instruction, so be sure to sign up as early as possible for the program that fits your schedule. All participants will receive a reusable aluminum water bottle."
For residents interested in learning more, you can access Julie's Sturbridge Summer Body Boot Camp Facebook Page at https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sturbridge-Summer-Body-Boot-Camp/129050263779458.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
