The Editor's Notepod, Wed., Apr. 8, 2009

Meriden: that block grant money. It’s easy to understand why the idea seems good to cut a lot of the agencies by 10 percent, but suggesting they shouldn’t rely on this funding is like suggesting they shouldn’t rely on being able to breathe. All of them survive on slender threads. If the Boys & Girls Club has been running a $20,000 loss for the last few years, imagine the shape of the other agencies. Sidewalks can wait, if necessary. Keeping some of these agencies alive – and they’re taking 10 percent here and 10 percent there — it adds up.

Wallingford: The decision to cut the shelter’s budget by an amount equal to what the Juul donation might produce in interest is a fiscal rape of that donation. The town has a responsibility for animals. Pulling this sort of stunt with someone’s donation for a good cause is the quickest way to discourage anyone else from making a similar gift. Shame on the councilors, no matter how miserable the economy.

Meriden: The ranked list for school system budget cuts is a reasonable way to proceed, one supposes. Almost all the cost of the school system is personnel, and there’s no way around it. One can presume that negotiations are in progress?

Meriden: Firefighters contract. The presence of concessions in the contract on health costs and possibly other issues is not to be disregarded. Shamock makes a valid point about freezes, but it comes rather late in the process, given 18 months of negotiations. He’s wrong about requiring firefighters to live in the city: that’s desirable, but unenforceable for good reason. Is Greg Polanski serious about his offer to “help out” if everyone else does? How about it folks?

Wallingford: This interesting ethics question about whether a now-out-of-date and never executed ordinance can be made the basis of an ethics complaint. C.f., Lubee, Comerford, vs Dickinson. It’s essentially a political debate, not an ethical one. Let the ethics committee deal with conflicts of interest, gifts, disclosure, transparency, and let the council deal with the executive’s failure to carry out its wishes.