Hopkinton Town Council Stupidity

The new prinicpal at Ashaway Elementary realizes that the bus situtation at the school is a problem.  It has always been a problem.  So he has asked that the Town Council temporarily restrict parking on Hillside Ave so they can make the bus drop-off and pick-ups safer and more comfortable for the kids.

“As recommended by your teacher, you have a great night’s sleep and a good breakfast, ready to take the state test,” Morrone wrote. “As you get off the bus, you get very wet walking the long distance to the school. You feel uncomfortable, and your whole mood is thrown off now and you have to take this big test. I would not do my best, and I’m sure others would not either.”

Our brain surgeon of a Town Councilor, Tom Buck, responds by saying,

“My son walks to that school,” said Buck, a Church Street resident. “My daughter is supposed to walk to that school. And you’re worried about kids walking 100 feet? I just think that’s a little extravagant.”

Well then, perhaps the bus should pick up Tom Buck’s kids so that all the students are treated equally?  Or maybe all the kids should walk in?  Or maybe we should get rid of all the buses and have parents drive in every kid and we can save some cash on transportation?  And why should we even bother stopping for busses anymore?  I got places to go and following a bus though its stops is slowing me down!  The argument that, “I don’t get it so no one else should get it” is foolish and assinine.

Buck said that as it stands now, with the buses already moving on the streets,

“In essence, you justifiably by law shut that road down”

This would be because a bus on the street picking up students has its lights flashing, it cannot be passed and the road is shut down. So why not restrict parking, get the buses into the lot and the road will no longer be impassable?  Duh.

The only person making real sense here is Thompson, who said,

…the council will do “whatever it needs to do” to protect the safety of the students, “regardless of what residents like or say.”

In a society, governed by laws, was all make compromises and submit to the whole for the good of all.  It’s why we have laws, zoning requirements, septic regulations and car inspections.  We all own property and we all have to follow the laws, that are there to protect us all.  Hillside Ave is pretty narrow anyways, as are all the roads in Ashaway Village.   There probably should be NO PARKING on any of those streets.  Suck it up you surly Hillside Ave residents.

Ishmael is Batting .500

Not a big deal, I do have some more important stuff to post when I get around to it, but I thought that I should mention that I correctly guessed that Chariho would cut a token $200,000 from the budget before submitting it for another vote.  I think the actually amount is something like $238K.  What a joke, har har har.  Unfortunately, the joke is on us.

But I incorrectly guessed that Felkner would return to the School Board.  They picked Georgia Ure instead. She will certainly be contrarian but I doubt it will make much of a difference.  Chariho is impervious to whining and complaining.

Like I said, lots to talk about regarding the HPD and our former building inspector’s suit against them, just enjoying the warm weather for now.

Wow, a Tuesday Twofer!

It’s not Tuesday anymore, but both of these things happened yesterday:

1.  As you probably know, the Chariho budget failed by one vote, 526-527.  Town by town:  Charlestown was 224-142, Richmond was 142-125 and Hopkinton was 160-260.

2.  The RI Supreme Court says that Felkner cannot be on the Town Council and the School Board.  Thus he can keep his Town job but has effectively resigned the School Board.

I’m not so surprised about the Chariho vote.  I expected Richmond to stomp the budget but they did not.  They did have a lot of “no” votes relative to “yes” votes and they likely pushed it over the line.  Now we get to watch the fireworks.  Will they sue or will Chariho fix its budget?  I’m betting on a lawsuit.

I was, however, extremely surprised by the Felkner decision.  I expected him to win although it seemed that the RI SC was somewhat antagonistic during the hearing.  They used the Town Charter and the doctrine of incompatibility against him.  I still can’t see using the Charter.  The damn thing is so full of holes you can argue either position and I think the stronger position is the one that allows him to do exactly what he was doing.  But that was because of the technical language.  The court made a point of interpreting intent.  It is a harder thing to do but I think they got that right, the framers of the Charter never envisioned allowing someone to serve on both the Council and the Board.  Regardless, I am honestly pleased to see the decision which was ultimately produced.  In the end, it may have been a political decision but I’m not sure we’ll ever know.

Personally, I think that the conflict of interest between sitting on the Town Council and the School Board is significant.  No one has attempted to do this since Chariho was founded.  It’s just common sense to most people, you don’t take 2 elected positions, especially two that are so likely to be in conflict!

Thanks for all the fun, Bill.  I guess your life will be a lot quieter sitting on the Town Council (they don’t really do all that much but complain about Chariho- you fit in perfectly).  But you could always start hacking away at the municipal budget if you get lonely and want to see your name in the papers some more!  Heck, why not rewrite the Charter to let yourself serve on two elected positions?  Now there is an idea, provided you show up to some of the meetings….

America is a Republic, and so is Chariho

Make no mistake, we are not a democracy.  We are a republic. And this is actually a good thing.  I’m not going to get into all the details that separate the two but the basic gist is that in a republic, such as ours, everyone is granted protection, there is a universal set of laws that govern our activities and we utilize a representative government to get our business done. On the other hand,  in a strict democracy, everyone has a vote on everything and all that counts is the majority will at that time that the majority decides what it wants to do.  And this is not necessarily a good thing.  It sets up a system where mob-rule takes over and leads to the term “tyranny of the majority”.  It gets more complex than that and I’ve left a lot out, but you get the point.  If you need an example, how about this:

I do not vote in Congress unless I am elected to Congress (state or federal).  I can bitch and moan at my representative and vote for a representative I like better, but the responsibility for his or her vote is his or hers alone.  I really have very little power.  And consequently, the “mob” has very little power.  And because of our Constitution, we all have protections and a set of laws that can’t be easily violated.  Imagine if we were all required to vote for every act of state legislature?  We would do nothing else.  This is a pretty extreme example of a pure democracy, but this is a pretty good example for you.

So what about the Chariho/NEA negotiations?  Should we all get a vote in that?  A lot of people think that the negotiations should be public.  Essentially, that we should all be able to see what is going on so that we can influence the outcome.  Let’s be honest, if we have no intention of trying to influence the outcome, there is really no need to observe the process, is there?  Clearly, from some of the discussions I have read on other local forums, we are all too busy to participate in our own children’s education.  If this is the case (and it seems like it is), we certainly don’t have the free time to observe the process unless we plan to corrupt it.  The Westerly Sun has the following quote:

The school committee considered conducting negotiations publicly, but decided that would be inefficient, said Eaves.
Hawkins said, “It makes it extremely difficult to conduct negotiations with the entire public.”

And the point is well made.  We elected these fools to the School Board.  Felkner the fool, Eaves the fool, McQuade the fool, etc.  Obviosuly, they are all fools.  Who but a fool would want such a dismal job?  But we elected them and it is their job to do what we elected them for.  It is not our job, as the citizenry, to negotiate teacher contracts.  Similarly, it is not our job to go busting drug dealers or stopping speeders along I-95.  We all have a job in this Republic.  The Chariho system runs like every other facet of Republic America.  We elected them, they do the job.  They do not want the process to be public and that is their decision.  If, however, we don’t like the results of these negotiations, it is our job to vote these fools out and vote in some new fools.

The other aspect to this that I have really left out is that teachers have rights too.  Most people do not seem to realize that.  The teachers and their union are treated like criminals and miscreants.  Slouches, bums, on-the-dole, good-for-nothing slime balls.  Why do we hate education so much in America?  Why do we hate teachers?  We refuse to teach our own kids and then get upset when we don’t think someone else is doing a good enough job?   Are we all just a bunch of self-conscious stupid monkeys who fear learnin’ and edumacation?  Or are we just a bunch of assholes?  I’m voting for us all being assholes.

And the whole issue of transparency is overblown.  It is generally wasted effort.  People who want to get away with something will get away with something, transparency or not.  I’ve seen a bunch of Town Councils violate Open Meetings Laws and it turns out, there are no consequences!  Shinning a bright light on anything only matters if anyone cares.  And no one does…   

Here’s a fun example:  If I want to, I could get the FBI’s file on me (assuming they have one and I doubt I’m important enough for them to care about me).  So consider my getting the file an act of “transparency”.  What on god’s green Earth am I going to do with it if I get it?  What does it matter if I get it?  It’s a pointless exercise, but it might give me something to do with all my free time.

Meaningless Educational Tests

Today, the results from the NECAPs were released.  The results were better than in previous years.  But as far as I can tell, these tests are pretty meaningless.  The reason why is simple:   in order to be judged “proficient” a student must obtain the equivalent of a B+.  And that sounds about right.  Proficient means you are pretty good at what you do.  But heres the rub:  most kids grow up to be “competent” adults, managing solid C’s.  In our culture, we see the “C” as an acceptable grade. We don’t really want proficiency, we want competency.  These are two completely different things.  So if you expect kids to turn into C-wielding adults, why do we expect them to do proficiently on the exams when proficient translates into the level of above-average and very bright students?  Unfortunately, not everyone can be above average because then the average becomes above average.

From the Journal,

The math test is tough — scoring proficient is roughly the equivalent of a B+, say education officials. But that is the level of math proficiency in algebra, geometry and some trigonometry students need today to compete globally, officials say.

There seems to be a real disconnect here.  Very few of our children go into math or the sciences.  They are simply not interested.  Maybe they are capable and could, but they do not.  So in the end, how useful will a B+ in algebra or even calculus be when you end up flipping burgers or working for a marketing firm or selling used cars?  Or even working on Wall Street?  Perhaps we could become globally competitive by interesting our kids in careers in the sciences and technology?  Perhaps this might be more useful than worrying about how competent they are at skills they are never going to use?

I do not mean to discredit the importance of mathematical skill.  I think math is very important.  However, just because someone knows the information does not mean they can or will use it.  It will never translate into economic opportunity if they never choose to use it.  Relying on test scores to tell us how successful our kids will be at solving the energy/food/population crises is stupid and pointless.  Let’s get them interested in being a physicist or a chemist or a mathematician and then we can worry about their scores.  Good luck with that…

And remember, proficient is not the same as competent.  If we are looking at competency, we probably have scores in the 90th percentile.  And most people would say that is just fine.  Like any statistic, these tests can be made to say anything we want them to because that is all they are: statistics.  Testing will never solve real problems nor will it necessarily expose existing flaws.  It’s just something for people to do to make it look like they are actually doing something.  And it is much cheaper than actually fixing anything.

Felkner is now officially costing us money

Well, not quite.  But quite probably in the near future.  From Friday’s Westerly Sun,

He also asked the court to impose a $5,000 fine against the School Committee as permitted by the state’s Open Meetings Act for “a public body or any of its members found to have committed a willful or knowing vio lation.”

So assuming Felkner wins, the School Board will owe the State a $5,000 fine.  But the School Board will not be fined as individuals, but elected officials doing their jobs.  And your taxes will cover that $5,000.  Wa-ho!  And we’ll get to pay court costs too!  Even more Wa-ho!

The Westerly Sun also points out that Felkner missed 30% of the School Board meetings, the highest of any of the members of the past two years,

Asked last week why he has missed a number of meetings, Felkner cited his job as president of the Ocean State Policy Research Institute, a free-mar ket think tank.
“I started this company a year and a half ago,” he said. “Things come up.”

He said he often travels for the non profit group, which, in addition to him, has one other full-time employee, six volunteers and three interns.
Asked again about his attendance record and its effect on his School Committee performance, he said, “There’s no doubt that if I was able to attend every single meeting that I would be able to do more work.”
He noted: “It’s not uncommon to find CEOs that do a lot of different things. That’s just the nature of the person … they tend to be involved in a lot of things.”

Well, guess what?  If you can’t make the meetings, how effective can you represent us?  And CEO?  Give me a break.  You started a bogus “think tank” to pay your salary because you can’t find anything better to do, which you admitted in the Projo article last week.  You’re running a political propaganda machine.  You are no “CEO”.

That is how Felkner said he considers himself, as he is also working to start a Rhode Island chapter of the National Association of Scholars.

Scholar?  Excuse me?  WTF?  And I’m a goddamn priest cause I went to church last month.  And I’m a plumber too, because I flushed the toilet an hour ago.  And I am lumberjack because I cut down my Christmas tree.  

How pompous can one man be?  If there was ever any doubt that Felkner has the biggest (most undeserved) ego in Hopkinton, it should be dispelled by now.

The other — and the reason why he said he wants to serve on both the School Committee and council — is to implement school choice, a voucher sys tem in which parents choose where to send their children to school, regardless of location.

Well, I told you that last week, if you have ever read his blog it is pretty apparent that it is his primary reason for being on the School Board.  Although I also wonder if he wants Chariho dissolved.  I’m just not sure.   But vouchers cost money, they do not save money.  As a municipality, we need to educate the Town’s children.  If the Town offers you a voucher, they still need to pay the teachers in the school district.  This applies even if fewer kids are going to the Town school.  And so we pay for the Town school and the kids to go somewhere else.  And most people won’t even use the voucher unless they can get the full $12,000, which the Town won’t pony up (the most you will ever see is $4,000).  The people who will use it are the people already putting their kids in private school.  So in the end, it’s wasted effort and we end up paying a little more for kids to go somewhere else and nothing changes.

And Bill Felkner doesn’t show up to School Board or Town Council meetings.  I have not been wrong yet, and I won’t be this time. 

I’m still waiting for the School Board to schedule all their meetings at the same time as Hopkinton Town Council meetings.  It would certainly solve their Felkner problem.  Maybe they are waiting until they lose in court.

What Constitutes a Monopoly

I want cheap electricity.  So I have decided to shop around.  And I think the prices offered by United Illuminating are excellent.  United Illuminating is a small independent electric company located in central CT.  So I am going to sign myself up.

 

Hypothetical conversation between you and me follows:

You:  Ishmael, you cannot do that.

Me:  Why not? 

You:  Ishmael, you are locked into using National Grid.

Me:  You mean there is a monopoly in Rhode Island and every other state in the country that requires me to get my electricity from a local provider? 

You:  Yes indeedy!

Me:  Oh, so it must be a governmental service right? 

You:  No.

Me:  No?

You:  No.

Me:  WTF! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? 

You:  No.

Me:  So you are telling me that a private company has a monopoly on electricity and I have to buy it from them?  And  if I don’t like it I can go screw off?

You:  Yes.  Welcome to America.  There is a sham group called the Public Utilities Commission that is supposed to regulate rates but they do what they are told by their corporate bosses so we end up getting shafted every time.

Me:    How can this be?  In modern day America, public services are provided to the public for the cost of their taxes.  How can a private company run a public necessity and then MAKE A PROFIT?

You:  Because the free market sucks.  Just look at the Depression of 2008-2012.  The whole thing was caused by lack of governmental regulation.  And we’re too stupid to learn from our mistakes, so there you go.    Suck it, you whittling IHOP monkeys.

 

The fact is, if I want to educate my children, I can use the governmental service or I can put them in private schools.  Although William Felkner is under the delusion that public education is a monopoly, he is simply wrong.  The public provides for public education.  If you do not like that education, there are dozens of private institutions you can send your kids to and even some public schools that will take your tuition dollars.

Grow up Felkner, if you want to rage at windmills, feel free.  But if you want to take on REAL monopolies, fight the electric company.  You will be wasting your time either way, but at least you’ll have some credibility if you take on National Grid.  The School Board is not a monopoly.  It may be as misguided as you, but it is a public service, not a monopoly.  Just because the School Board is currently a majority in opposition to you, that is not a monopoly.  Is there anyone out there that believes your ludicrous propaganda?

No Good Will Come of This

Mr. Felker is done being a useful member of the Chariho School Board regardless of whether he wrests his seat back or not.  Obviously, if the courts decide that the School Board can remove him, he will be removed.  But even if he gets to keep his seat, he will do Hopkinton no good.  And the reason for this is pretty straightforward:  In the past two years all he has done is fight with his colleagues on the Board (whether right or wrong) and caused a lot of animosity.  The problem with this tactic is that it’s pretty hard to get much done when everyone votes against you just because they hate you.  By my count, if Felkner is reinstated permanently, the School Board is generally going to vote in blocks of 5 vs. 6, with Felkner and Hopkinton being in the minority.  And I’m not even sure that everyone in the group of 5 shares much philosophically, making it a tenuous alliance.  I can guarantee that the majority will probably vote against anything Felkner comes up with as a matter of course, however. That is human nature at its finest.

In case Mr. Felkner has not been paying attention, political processes require concessions, compromises and a little bit of quid pro quo.  I am no fan of the School Board or the superintendent but these are the people we have to deal with.  Why don’t we start dealing with them instead of fighting with them? 

If Mr. Felkner does manage to hold onto his seat, it will be that much worse.  The egos of the rest of the Board will be bruised beyond repair.  And his sniping at their personal conflicts of interest does him no good.  It just makes him look angry and petty.  After siding with Felkner, I doubt very much that Carney will have much chance at being School Board President.  But she’s definitely smarter than Felkner, she waited until she was off the Town Council to run for School Council. 

In a time when we should be thinking about bringing back our 5 and 6 graders and getting rid of the horrible math curriculum, Mr. Felkner is engaging in full blown war with the School Board.  In the end, it will be Hopkinton and our kids that will suffer because of his bloated ego.   But fortunately, Hopkinton “politicians” tend to go away eventually.  In another 3-4 years, Felkner will have moved on and probably done little to redeem himself.

Who is an Elected Official in Hopkinton?

There is considerable confusion in the interpretation of the Hopkinton Town Charter, in regards to Mr. Felkner’s bid for a seat on the Town Council and the School Committee.  The relevent Charter passages follow:

1301:  School District: The Town of Hopkinton reserves the right to establish its own school district as per Chapter 16 of the Rhode Island General Laws.

2130:  Elected Officials:  Town Council members, School Committee members, Town Clerk, School Moderator, Town Sergeant, Director of Public Welfare, District Moderators and District Clerks will be elected.

1240: No elected member of the Town government shall hold more than (1) elective or position in the Town Government at the same time.  [Material pertaining to appoints appears here followed by:]  Membership on boards or commissions that act as representation of the Town of Hopkinton in regards to the School District shall not disallow that elector from serving on another board, committee or commission in Town government.”

Question 1:  Are School Committee members elected officials?  Yes.

Question 2:  Are School Committee members of Town Government?  No.  This is the debatable issue of the facts and the piece upon which my argument hinges.  If School Committee members are not members of Town Government, people can hold positions on this and the School Committee.  I argue that the School Board is not a function of Town Government.  It is a separate entity that is completely independent of Town Governance.  The Town Council (the highest level of Town Government) has no control nor authority over it’s activities, appointment, rules, etc.  Although we pay taxes to the school system and we send our kids to it, it is not a part of Town Government.  That’s my argument.  You can like it or not but at some point a judge or the AG will make a ruling and I think they will rule the way I have indicated.  Section 1240 also makes the point of separating out School Committee members to guarantee that they can serve on UNELECTED posts in Town Government, a tacit admission that they ARE NOT members of Town Government.  And section 1301 provides additional proof of this fact, it is one of the only sections referring to the School Committee and it demonstrates that we have abdicated our responsibilities in educating our children  Read the Charter and you will find that references to the School District are few because it is not a part of Town Government.  Listen, we can’t tell people what to do in Charlestown and we can’t tell the School Committee what to do either.

Question 3:  Why does the Charter list School Committee members as elected officials if they are not a part of Town Government?  Because it is an unbelieveably sloppy document written by lay people with an unqualified Town Solicitor giving approval.  

Question 4:  What are the consequences of the this interpretation?  As far as the Town goes, there would be no prohibition on Felkner holding a post on the Town Council and on the School Committee.  Assuming there is no language in the Chariho Act or State Law prohibiting such a thing, he could theoretically hold both posts.  But that is a larger issue which needs to be examined and no one seems to have done that yet.

Question 5:  What does this mean for the Charter?  The Charter needs revision.  From what I have heard, there was a Charter Review Commission in place to address these issues but they pissed off the Town Council a couple years back and were disbanded by Vincenzo “the political hack” Cordone.  Specifically, School Committee members should be declared exempt from the multiple office holding clause or they should be held to it by being declared members of Town Government and/or section 1240 should be cleaned up to mean that an elected School Committee member can serve on an appointed board (as the language intended to mean) and is ineligible or eligible for Town Council also.

Question 6:  Why does Felkner need to be such an ass?  Clearly the man has more ego than is good for him.  In the end, he’s going to end up looking either foolish or like an intolerable ass and that is not going to do Hopkinton any good.  Technically, I think he is correct.  But that doesn’t mean that what he is doing is a good thing or a thing he should do.  Read my previous post for my feelings on the subject.  In any case, this thing is going to get ugly and nasty and Felkner’s attitude is not helpful.  I predict that Felker is going to end up costing Hopkinton more money than he ever saves us.  And I am absolutely sure that George Abbott would not have pulled this crap.

What to do about Felkner?

Frankly, I am not sure.  I’ve been mulling it over for a week and seem to have run into a philosophical quandry.

If you read the Hopkinton Charter, the letter of the law seems to allow him to sit on the School Board and the Town Council.  And The Chariho Act does not bar him from being on the Town Council.  But I am not sure the Hopkinton Charter was written with the intent of letting someone serve on the School Board and the Town Council.  If you read the language as written, I interpret it to mean that someone serving as an elected School Board member can serve on, say, the Hopkinton Conservation Commission.

 “Membership on boards or commissions that act as representation of the Town of Hopkinton in regards to the School District shall not disallow that elector from serving on another board, committee or commission in Town government.”

Observe that the word “elector” refers to the phrase “School District”.  To my mind, the language means that an elected School Board member shall not be ineligible to serve as an UNELECTED member of town government.   No where in the language do you see the word “council”.  The words “board”, “commission” and “committee” are all present.  But not “council”.  The language allows a School Board member to serve on the Charter Commission or the Planning and Zoning Board or the Police Commission.  It was not intended to allow some one to serve on the Town Council and the School Board.  So if that was the true intent (as I suggest it is), the language is certainly sloppy.  But the whole damn Charter is sloppy.  If one really wishes to know what the intent was, I would suggest Georgia Ure as a first stop.  And she will likely agree with me.

There is no explicit language allowing Felkner to do what he wants to do (serve on two boards).  Conversely, there is no explicit language prohibiting Felkner from what he wants to do.  The Charter does state in section 1240 that “no elected member of the Town government shall hold more than one (1) elective or position in the Town Government at the same time”.  But is the School Board part of Town Government?  I think not.   And so here is the real conundrum.  Felkner can probably legally do what he wants to do. But the fact is, he should not do it.   There is a very good reason why heretofore, Town Councilors have not served on the School Board.  Obviously, many people thought they simply could not.  And the reason they thought this was that they knew that they should not and assumed the law would prohibit them from doing so.  Up until 2000, there was no Charter.  There was no law to look to.  It was simply common sense that you only served one elected post. Separation of powers is a phrase that has gotten a lot of play in Rhode Island over the past few years and for good reason.  Too much power in the hands of too few is a recipe for disaster.  American democracy is built on checks and balances.  Despite the fact that I am a Democrat, I fear the filibuster-proof Democratic Senate.  And I fear Town Councilors serving on the School Board.  While Felkner’s intentions maybe to help Chariho, to fix Chariho or somehow improve Chariho, serving two elected posts is not the way to do it.  The ends simply do not justify the means.

Mr. Felker: as a constituent, I implore you pick your post.  Yes, the law may allow you to do what you are about to do.  And while it may not be “unethical” in the eyes of the state, it is undemocratic and smacks of all the Rhode Island corruption you purport to despise.  Using the poor construction of the Charter to justify your position is certainly unethical.  Especially in the face of 50 years of Chariho precedent.

Credibility is a precious commodity.  Are you willing to squander yours for a little more power?