Take two thick slices of Noonie's day old bread, smear Honey Cup honey mustard
liberally over both. Cover both slices with green leaf lettuce. Then on one slice only lay smoked turkey on the lettuce,
a tomato slice on the turkey and sprinkle it with shredded carrot. Then on the lay a slice of provolone cheese over the
carrot then a green pepper ring on top of the cheese. Sprikle with sprouts. Cover with the other slice, lettuce side down.
The letuce should be stuck to the bread with honey mustard so it doesn't fall off when you turn it upside down to cover the
sandwich. Slice sandwich in half with a knife. Wrap in tightly in plastic wrap. Use too much wrap. Tape on label. Tadaaa!
Weighs one pound. Costs Four Bucks.
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses
yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your
teeming shore, Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed,
to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and
no warrants shall issue,
but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place
to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Ethan Allen Tower
"During the 1992 campaign, Bill Clinton
sometimes spoke of a 'twofer' (two for the price of one) presidency,
implying that Hillary would play an important role in his
administration."
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis ligula lorem,
consequat eget, tristique nec, auctor quis, purus. Vivamus ut sem. Fusce aliquam nunc vitae purus.
Whatever things
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis ligula lorem,
consequat eget, tristique nec, auctor quis, purus. Vivamus ut sem. Fusce aliquam nunc vitae purus.
Pooled Cash=Taxpayer Funds
Saturday, December 05, 2009
You know for Jonathan Leopold to state flatly the other night that "Pooled Cash is not taxpayer funds" is so upsetting. That is clearly false.
The only possible way to rationalize that "pooled cash is not taxpayer funds" is to parenthetically insert the word "(only)" between "not" and "taxpayer funds."
It isn't only taxpayer funds, true. There are proceeds from parking fines, impact fees, charges from overdue library books, grants, and whatever the folks at the Boathouse feel like contributing- sure. Of course. But it's the property tax, more than any other source that funds the pool.
If Leopold wants to act like a Stephen Wright joke ("Sometimes you can't hear me because I'm speaking in parentheses.") he can.
So the council's big BT meeting is going to start in about 15 minutes. We'll see what kind of information they're given. I'm sure they will hear all kinds of dire warnings about what will happen if they don't take the financing. Leopold will craft projections to assure the council of BT's eventual profitability. People can make numbers say whatever they want them to say.
The good thing about tonight is that the city council is trying to pry open the hood on this baby so as to finally have a look-see at the engine. It's ridiculous that everything has been so friggin' secret. I'm proud of the things Paul Decelles said in the paper today. It's not monopoly money, and I hope he does fight like hell to avoid executive session tonight.
If it's "our network" then enough with all the damned secrecy. It's OUR network!
***
10:29pm- They did the hard scary stuff with Leo and numbers first and got that that of the way- now the BT folks are doing the feel good stuff. The new customer service person Lisa seemed good, however her presentation included the use of "ie" where she actually meant "eg." Oh God, does she make Donnelly's old salary? Jesus Christ. I want to die.
Is it me or did Leopold change his tune a bit from "you don't just walk away from a 33 million dollar debt"a few weeks ago to "no legal recourse" tonight, saying now that if the council decided not to appropriate a lease purchase payment, then Piper Jaffray could only seize BT and no more, and the investors who purchased the certificates of public good will have simply realized the downside of their own risks- taken freely by them. Sure, heh heh- nobody else would want to enter into a lease purchase finance with the city ever again, but otherwise- Scott Free! It was unclear to me what their answer was as to how that scenario might affect the city's bond rating.
It's like I'm watching a game show. You know the contestant is gonna say "no deal!" They're gonna press their luck and they're gonna shoot the works.
There are only two options: kill BT now or keep rolling the dice, and it's simply a political impossibility that they kill BT now. It simply is. It's like fighting gravity. Killing BT would certainly incur painful unknowable fallout and cause many bills to come due immediately. Whereas refinancing... ahhh... the can gets kicked down the road... things settle down... the issue goes away...
Remember kids- no good deed goes unpunished. Suppose a majority votes to pull the plug now. What will they be remembered for? Killing BT. Even if it's the right thing to do, it won't win you any votes, because voters and tax payers would feel the pain immediately. Kicking the can down the road is politically irresistible, because A) if it fails down the road, you don't get the blame B) If BT actually succeeds you can take credit as a visionary, and C) it isn't your money at risk, except for part you might personally have to pay to the city for your own property tax and whatnot.
There are immutable laws of the universe that far surpass what we suppose is our own free will. This issue is done. It is as I have foreseen.
And hey- maybe BT can add the customers it needs and become a success. Who knows? It was me who had the problem with emailing BT and getting called back, by the way. I am all about treating the customer right, especially when I'm the customer.
You are visitor #95,999 to this blog. Thank you for reading. Visit Often!
"You don't just walk away from a thirty-three million dollar debt." -Jonathan Leopold
The city of Burlington has always owned the risk for Burlington Telecom. The notion that taxpayer money was never at risk was patently false. Big D or small d department, BT belongs to the City and always has.
Now it owes fifty million and is worth perhaps fifteen. If it died today the taxpayers would have to make up the difference.
So what do we do? Cut our losses or keep rolling the dice and hope it improves?
Here's a poll for Burlington Taxpayers only. If you don't pay property tax to Burlington, please don't vote in the poll:
"Had I been there I would have voted against splitting the question, and against the postponment of the letter of intent."-Me from the last post
A prominent local attorney wrote to me yesterday to express his belief that Monday's resolution was more binding than I thought. Why a resolution authorizing the pursuit of funding from a lender, with whom a tentative agreement had clearly already been pursued?
Good point.
The bottom line though- can BT possibly repay one-hundred million dollars in twenty years on its own merits? Based on its current track record, a reasonable person could conclude- no. They could not become cash flow positive after spending fifty million dollars and there is no proof they ever can.
Let's look at the facts, OK? BT has 4,500 subscribers (maybe). Comcast has twenty-five million. That's five thousand times as many. What makes the city interested in competing with that? It feels like we're trying to cross the ocean in a row boat with this thing. For what? We might just want to turn back while we can still see the shore. In another year or two Burlington Taxpayers might only be able to dream of owing just seventeen million dollars.
This re-fi makes the city liable to repay 6o million in principle and 40 more million in interest. Sure the city may repay the money with BT proceeds if it wishes, and if they're sufficient to do so, but as far as Piper Jaffrey is concerned repayment is "fungible." That means they don't give a shit where the money comes from as long as we pay them.
No creditor ever gives a shit where the money that pays them back comes from.
And when BT revenues aren't enough- the money will come from the taxpayers.
At this point it's hard to imagine Chris Burns and Jonathon Leopold can slap together a convincing business plan to show how BT becomes profitable. I mean for heaven's sake- they start their customer service reps out at seventeen dollars per hour. Seventeen dollars per hour! That is so much money! They aren't worth it. Richard Donnelly alone took home nearly 70K in FY08. Somebody could have done whatever the hell he did for BT for half of that I'm sure.
Most of the network is already built in Burlington. Wiring the city with fiber was forward thinking, but who really cares who runs the network? And the value of fiber could easily drop with more and more wi-fi available.
The thing is BT is a totally non-essential city service. It could disappear tomorrow and Bob Kiss could still be remembered as a good mayor for creating a rainy-day fund and paving the roads. Who care about BT? Judge Judy is Judge Judy regardless of the cable carrier. So who cares?
"Um is not an answer, sir!"
Is it worth the risk of owning a 100 million dollar dinosaur that eats? I urge my city councilors Paul and Vince in particular to consider that question carefully, since they are the swing votes.
Well that was one of the more entertaining council meetings I've seen in recent years. In the end Bill Keogh couldn't quite keep up with his officiating duties and posed the motion to postpone in such a way as to be unintelligible by all present except city attorney Ken Schatz, and perhaps Jonathon Leopold. The council didn't really understand that they had just voted to kick the can down the road to December 7, but they did.
The administration wanted the council to give its collective signature to a letter of intent with Piper Jaffrey to start working on the 61 million dollar financing deal. The resolution on the table had two parts. Part one said the BT would come into compliance with condition 60 by repaying pooled cash within sixty days. Part two was the letter of intent.
On a motion from Ed Adrian, the council voted to split parts one and two. He and Joan Shannon had attempted to split the "whereas" clauses, as well as the operative clauses in the resolution, but Ken Schatz and Sharon Bushor correctly pointed out that for Shannon to have assigned her notion of which whereas clauses fit which "resolved" clauses, would have in fact created two new resolutions.
C'mon people. Really? Split the "whereas" clauses? You got to be kidding me.
The council passed part one, but then postponed funding it with part two pending more info.
What info? Mainly like a business plan for Burlington Telecom. Apparently the one they've got is two years old. In other words no planning since Nulty left. Nice. Here's an idea to save BT some money. Besides start their CSRs at $2 less per hour- just eliminate Chris Burns. Does he do anything except fill the space between Leopold and the rest of BT?
Anyway. At one point Sharon Bushor was very vexed, red-faced and at a complete loss of words, quite obviously because of Adrian. You could almost hear her wishing Kurt Wright were there to call the cops on him. That was kind of funny to see.
The meeting started sizzling around 11:30 when words started to fly. Some quotes-
"I won't be scolded!" -Nancy Kaplan
"I won't be boxed in by this council!" -Sharon Bushor
"I am appalled!" -Marrisa Caldwell
"You are voting to destroy Burlington Telecom for the sole purpose of embarassing this administration!" -Jonathon Leopold
"I would appreciate Mr. Leopold it if you would not speak to me in a condeceing way!"-Mary Kehoe
"I screwed up the queue." -Bill Keogh
"How is that doing what's right for the city?"- Marrisa Caldwell
"I really don't like be accused of not having the city's best interest in mind." -Joan Shannon
Cheif administrative officer Jonathon Leopold keeps pushing the limits of the public's credulity. Take a look at this recent email between Leopold and city councilor Marissa Caldwell in which Leopold tries to defend calling Burlington Telecom a "department" in a recent Free Press Op-ed.
From: Jonathan Leopold To: Marrisa Caldwell Hello Marrisa-
Thank you for forwarding this email to me.
The remark that I have incorrectly or inappropriately referred to BT as a "Department", is not correct. If Mr. Feeney read the article carefully, I did not call BT a "Department".
In fact what the article asked in one question was "is BT the only city department to use pooled cash. By inference one would conclude that I called BT a “department”. The use of a small letter "d" for "department" instead of the capital "D" for Department was intentional since BT is not a formal "Department". I used the term "department" in lieu of more complicated, but technically correct terminology such as "enterprise fund accounting entity" or simply “enterprise fund”. However, then the question would have been phrased "are there any other "accounting funds or other entities" which have used pooled cash. The technically correct language would have been confusing to the public and would have made an already lengthy article even more so. As it was even with extensive editing, the article was more than 50% longer than the normal limit for the BFP. Thus, I used the term "department" as a more meaningful term for the public to understand the use of pooled cash by all of the various entities of the City, including Departments, Divisions, Special Projects, Capital Projects, Enterprise Funds, Special Revenue Funds and Trust Funds, etc.
Finally, Mr. Feeny's incorrectly states that because BT was not a "Department", "allocating funds from the city cash/pool/resources should never have occurred in the first place". Like much of the public "discussion" about BT, this statement is incorrect.
In fact many of the accounting entities participating in pooled cash are not "Departments". I have no idea what Mr. Feeny's alleged expertise is to make such a statement but he is incorrect
Please feel free to share this response with the people in the original email.
**** That's ridiculous! If he wanted to avoid causing confusion he should have used the technically correct language, not wrong, obviously misleading language.
I didn't care for the " alleged expertise" remark, either. What was the point of that?
The Mayor discusses the ongoing controversy surrounding Burlington Telecom at The Prog Blog.
Also, The Burlington Free Press obtained an unauthorized copy of the communications between Leopold and city lawyers. The documents won't officially become public until the resolution to release them, passed unanimously last night by the city council, gets the mayor's signature. The story will be here for a limited time.
Shay lashes out a little at the Dems this week, as if they may end up destroying BT with their bad attitudes, although his column doesn't address how the seventeen million might be repaid. On the other hand, Odum thinks it's the Progs who might end up destroying BT with their bad attitudes. Odum also does not discuss how BT might refinance its debt.
Shay also charges Dems "rallied" for Adam Cate last year. I don't remember it that way. It seems to me that in general, the whole council was trying to figure out what the hell was going on with Cate. I don't recall anyone really 'rallying' for anyone, except perhaps for Bob Kiss who "rallied" for Cate's right to privacy in the whole matter.
Anyhow, the sad fact is BT's death may have been a fait accompli when Nulty walked. He wanted to expand, and obviously he knew what the hell he was talking about. The simplest explanation for what might have happened was Leopold got all up in Nulty's face at some point and Nulty was like "fuck this."
Nulty is a Jedi and Leopold is a Sith. We're left with the Sith. And nobody knows where the seventeen million is coming from. It's nothing to do with bad attitudes. Most new businesses fail. Most experiments fail. Things fail. That's life.
The writing is on the wall. So bring on the finger pointing Shay and Odum and whoever else. I'm glad the city spent ten thousand dollars to run fiber up to my house, but I'm sure I'll end up paying for that myself. And to be honest, I'm not that much of a geek. I'm still running coaxial cable into my high def flat screen, and the computer I'm running is made out of balsa wood and duck tape. It doesn't know cable from fiber. Neither do I.
When I first got Burlington Telecom hooked up, the bill started out at $100 even per month. Now it's crept up to $120 somehow. If Comcast offers me a better deal, I have no compunction at all about jumping ship.
“This is a partisan witch hunt. If I wanted to hide something, why would I put it in the budget? I’m not going to be scapegoated because you can’t read a budget," Leopold added.
Yes. Yes. Exactly. Jonathan is pointing out the city council's weakness. The council does not employ its own budget analyst and it isn't necessarily made up of highly educated people. But the world isn't going to dumb it down for you, council. Time after time you get rolled by the administration, for fear of betraying just how ignorant you really are. The council needs to vote itself the resources necessary to do their job right. You are the civic counterweight to the administration. In fact, it's really the council that calls the shots. Most select boards in Vermont hire the town manager.
This is more than just about politics. It's about civics. I want to see the city council stop sucking. Double pension for Keleher to the tune of a half million dollars! Approved because the council doesn't know what it's voting on! I'm glad that they took at least this pitiful symbolic step, voting 8-6 to suspend Leopold. Although sadly, I have to agree with the mayor that that shouldn't happen. The thought of a Progressive mayor ordering a taxpayer funded paid vacation to an already very rich man makes me nauseous.
Also from Blurt, I guess the council passed this:
The board of finance shall prepare a request for proposals to engage an auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of BT's finances and operations;
The City Council president shall appoint an ad hoc committee to review BT's governance structure and recommend changes; and
The administration shall present refinancing strategies, and other financing options, for BT to pursue. They must present those to the ad hoc committee and the board of finance by no later than November 16.
I guess an audit is necessary, but unfortunately that won't be free. I suggest Tim Nulty do the audit. Bill Keogh, if you're reading- I would be happy to serve on the ad hoc committee if we would really wrap up work by November 16.
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING CONTOIS AUDITORIUM, CITY HALL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2009 7:00 P.M.
1. AGENDA 2. REPORT: Mayor Bob Kiss, Jonathan P.A. Leopold, Jr. CAO & Burlington Telecom General Manager Chris Burns, re: Update on Burlington Telecom (oral)
* * * * EXPECTED EXECUTIVE SESSION * * * *
3. ADJOURNMENT
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING CONTOIS AUDITORIUM, CITY HALL THURSDAY, OCTOBER 22, 20097:00 P.M.
1. AGENDA 2. PUBLIC FORUM: Re: Burlington Telecom 3. ADJOURNMENT
Burlington Free Press reports the entire council, except for Ed Adrian, approved going to the Public Service Board to "relax" the rule that forces Burlington Telecom to pay back money borrowed from the taxpayers within 60 days, a rule they had apparently been violating anyway.
Good on Ed Adrian for casting the one correct vote. Boo to the rest of the council for acting like sheep on this one. What's up with my supposedly 'fiscally conservative' representation from ward 7? Why do we bother electing Republicans if they are just going to vote however Jonathon Leopold wants? Anybody can wave a flag. It takes a little more than that to actually protect the taxpayers from a bad deal.
John Briggs at Burlington Free Press is reporting on a discussion at the city council about raising the pay for some city employees. I can see it maybe for a couple of really highly skilled and essential engineering positions- if we're not able to fill them now, but I would be highly skeptical about raising pay for anyone else. Especially Leopold! God no!
When I was on the city council I researched what city councils of comparably sized cities pay themselves, because I felt a civic imbalance between the compensation and resources of the mayor and those of the city council. I'll look in records later to see if I can find that info- but I remember Burlington city councilors made far, far under the average- which I think was around 15K. And this was back in 1996 when I was able to live on $8/hr.
If the city council votes to heap even further resources onto the city's executive branch, while continuing starve itself- the body of the people's most direct representatives, they will not be serving the long term interest of Burlington.
They got a little money this year and people got upset because the Dems hired a lawyer with it. I say good for them. The council should have some back up. God knows the mayor does.
I love Bob Kiss. I think he's doing a great job. But institutionally, the council is supposed to be the civic counterweight to the mayor. In practice- the council gets rolled by the mayor every single time.
Fox News reports Clarance Davis has withdrawn from the race for council president, allowing Bill Keogh to be elected council president by acclamation.
Here's a link to the Free Press story by Tim Johnson. I wonder why Briggs didn't write it. I hate linking to the Free Press, because they remove the content after a certain amount of time, but I am today because of these great quotes from Clarence Davis (bold font emphasis added by me)...
"...In its initial meeting last Monday, the newly seated council deadlocked 14 times between Davis, P-Ward 3, and Keogh, D-Ward 5, before adjourning. Each candidate had seven votes: Keogh had support from the council’s Democrats, Davis had backing from three Progressives, two Republicans and two independents.
How the partisan ice jam melted was unclear. Keogh said there was a flurry of phone calls and e-mails over the weekend. Davis said he slept on the decision Sunday night and concluded Monday morning that he would pull out. He said he notified his supporters throughout the day.
“Burlington comes before my personal wants,” Davis said after Monday night’s meeting. “I made the decision that I would not extend this any further.”
In other business Monday, Davis and Paul Decelles, R-Ward 7, were elected unanimously to the Board of Finance..."
This has got to come as a serious blow to Bill Keogh. The guy was born in 1930 and has just been soundly defeated in the wisdom and maturity departments by a much, much younger man. A man who, by the way, could have used "council president" on his resume for a lifetime longer than Bill will.
Congrats to Paul on getting on the board of finance. You better have staff take better minutes than they have been. Don't screw up like Kevin Curley and give Leopold three pensions or something.
I am so late with this endorsement. I didn't really feel right about openly supporting Bob before I had actually published my interviews with all the candidates. I realized that would be weird when Eva Sollberger asked me if I had an endorsement at the Seven Days debate, just minutes after Kurt and I had agreed to meet. I actually had the stink of responsibility on me this election. I promised Eva I'd eventually make an endorsement and here it is...
...But first: Let's dispense with the pleasantries and get the city council endorsements and predictions out of the way. No graphics for the city council races. Sorry kids. Quick and dirty. Here we go.
Note: Ward Three- David Cain: Listen dude, you do not want to join the city council and have your first newborn baby in the house at the same time. Bad idea jeans. I know that as a rule it's wrong to bring up a candidates family as a reason to support his opponent, but this may be a valid exception. I'm not trying to sound sexist, but you should be there for your baby. Plus, you may be a touch over-ambitious. You're already an engineer and a lawyer. Simma-Donna. You're still young. And what the hell is "UC-La?" I've heard of Pepperdine!
Note: Ward Seven- Eli Lessor-Goldsmith: You must keep your promise to live-blog from city council meetings.
OK. Now the mayor's race-
Prediction- Only a fool would pretend to know how this one will go down. I will say this, though. I remember running into Richard Sugarman up at UVM the day before Town Meeting in 1993. He was frantically scrapping around, looking for Clavelle votes in a panic.
A national change-election in 1992 preceeded a Burlington change-election in 1993. Same for 1980 nationally and 1981 here. Obviously 2008 was a national change-election. So if it worked out that way here in Burlington for 2009, there would be precedent.
But it doesn't have to be that way.
Bob Kiss has done a very good job in his first term. When it comes to what counts- the budget, taxes, streets, sidewalks and basic city services- his challengers don't go there. They go after vague concepts like "leadership."
Peter Clavelle left a mess behind for Bob Kiss to clean up and a couple of live grenades with their pins pulled to boot. Joe McNeil's insane sexual misconduct and Brendan Keleher's corrupt personal raid on the pension fund jump to mind.
If Kiss loses, I think he'd have a right to contemplate the twisted irony of a universe that would give Clavelle fifteen years as mayor and him only three. Which is to say, I think Bob Kiss is a better mayor than Peter Clavelle was. Kiss created a rainy day fund for the city. Wisdom. Quiet wisdom.
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Don't be fools Burlington. Stick to the devil you know. Dance with the one that brung ya. Don't change horses mid-stream.
And yes. Everybody hates Jonathan Leopold. Everybody thinks Leopold has too much power, or is the one really running the city. But let's remember people. The whole CAO system is new. I think we will have some of the same complaints with the next CAO too. I mean you slip in a brand new position right below the mayor and above everyone else, and sure people are going to see the person in that position as running the city. The CAO system is stupid. The mayor is the CAO. I don't understand why having someone who wasn't elected helping to do the mayor's job is a good thing at all.
But let's face it also. Leopold is Bob's main problem. To be honest I wish he's fired him a year ago. Absent that, they could have at least manufactured some public disagreement for show, so that Bob could have been seen as putting Leopold in his place a time or two. No need to have a real disagreement even, but it would have helped this mayor a lot to have invented one for public consumption. Play a little "good-cop" to Leopold's "bad-cop." But no. He didn't. So here we are.
Bob is my first choice. He's the best. And if we toss him out we're a bunch of fools who when full of bread, forget about bread and think only of circuses. Are we so petulant as to stomp our feet and complain because Bob Kiss is not a fire breathing dragon, or clown juggling bowling pins?
The entire nation is crumbling around us, but Burlington is still pretty good. We have good leadership now. We're going to toss out, the oldest, wisest, smarted, most serious person in the race? The one with a track record of doing a pretty damned good job?
We can't be that stupid. If you're reading this on election day and you're still making up your mind, I urge you to vote for Bob Kiss as your first choice for mayor today. Do it because it's in the best interest of our city.
Yes. Yes. You want to know my second choice, and all of that. Stupid IRV. Fine. My second choice is Dan. Dan F. Kennedy Smith. If we're going to change, then let's really change. I'm talking Camelot. I share a generational connection with Dan. He speaks in terms of solar power and regional planning that allows people to walk places instead of drive. I get that. His learning curve would be huge and he'd have all these developers crowding around him trying to tell him what to do, but I still like him. I think he would be very engaged and he would excite a lot of interest in local politics, which can only be good for this blog. Plus, it was Dan's campaign that got me started doing all my interviews with the mayoral candidates. They reached out to me, and once I had interviewed Dan, I was stuck. I had to interview everybody else too. So you can thank Dan Smith for that.
I toyed with making Kurt number two, but nah. Kurt's number three. Andy's number four. Regardless of what may actually happen today, this is what I see. I see Marcellus Wallace telling both Kurt and Andy "You came close, but you never made it. If you were going to make it, you would have made it before now."
Again- the pictures may not accurately predict what's going to go down tonight. But what the hell. I have to give you people something. You're good readers and you deserve it. During this election you have given this blog your clicks and comments more than ever before, and I'm very grateful.
Thanks for reading BurlingtonPol.com. Visit often!
Yes, yes. The big news of the day. Leopold tells Briggs Andy's got a conflict of interest between his roles as a board of finance member overseeing Burlington Telecom, and as a lawyer for Vallynet. Andy becomes irate, starts calling Leopold a liar, says he talked to Leopold about this nine months ago and they agreed it was no big deal. Leopold says he remembers the conversation but they talked about something else. Says he learned about Andy and Valley net just last week. Briggs doesn't bother to ask the next obvious question- how did Leopold learn last week.
Here are my findings in this case:
1) It is improper for the Leopold as the chief elections official of the City of Burlington to engage in a blatant political attack like this. This is not the first time Leopold has displayed this kind of improper behavior. 2) It is improper for the Leopold as the Chief Administrative Officer of the City of Burlington to respond to a perception of a conflict interest by dropping a dime to the press. 3) Andy Montroll obviously felt a little guilty about his job with Valleynet or he wouldn't have brought it up to Leopold. 4) There is no legal conflict of interest in this case vis-a-vis the city charter. There is some theoretical moral conflict in that Andy might possibly share some BT trade secret with Valleynet. 5) If Andy felt there was any possibility of a conflict of interest, or appearance of a conflict of interest, then he should have gone to the full board of finance and the city attorney. Not doing so was a display of poor judgment. 5) Andy displayed poor judgment in going to Leopold alone without any recording or witness. Whom did he think he was talking to? His friend? 6) Bob Kiss is Jonathon Leopold's boss. 7) As recently as February 1, Andy Montroll was willing to consider the possibility of keeping Leopold on as CAO if he won the election. It's true. You'll read it in my interview with Andy. 8) John Brigg's should not just print any old thing that he hears. 9) As a general axiom, if we are paying attention to this, then there is something else that we're not paying attention to. I'm a lot more worried about whatever that other thing is.
This story has no legs, and I don't intend or expect to spend any more time on it.
Can you tell us why Dan Smith is your #1 choice? Is it because he has a website? Is so wouldn't that make Montroll your #2 automatically?
December 21, 2008 6:48 PM
Anonymous said...
I want a fresh perspective in city government. He's young and has some real world experience...especially around jobs and the new green economy. Plus, I like how he's an Independent.
Andy will probably NOT be my second choice. I supported Hinda Miller back in 2006 and I was really disheartened by the fact that he never lifted a finger to help her. Really made me sad. Kurt will probably be my second choice and then Andy. I won't vote for Kiss. He's a weak mayor and has no leadership skills. Leopold is really the one running the City.
He's young and has some real world experience...especially around jobs and the new green economy.
Can you expound on that? What experience are you referring to? Can Smith claim credit for helping to create jobs?
Leopold is really the one running the City.
You've touched on Mayor Kiss's Achilles's Heal. I wish he'd have fired Leopold before election season. Now it would just look like a desperation move.
I still like Kiss because I think in terms of the big picture stuff things are tending in the right direction. The new zoning law seems to be more good than bad, and street maintenance has been improving. The agreement Kiss got on UVM's payments to the city was outstanding.
But I would agree that we've seen enough of Mr. Leopold.
I don't know why you would expect Andy to support Hinda. She wasn't a good candidate and I'm still grateful to Kevin Curley and Lisa Lindahl for sparing us "Mayor Jogbra."
Dan Smith has potential, but his candidacy does not remind me of 1981, as I've heard others say. That's seems Orwellian to me. Kiss is the candidate who most resembles Sanders in policy.
December 22, 2008 6:43 PM
Ivan Jacobs said...
I'll give Dan Smith a look when he talks details - That's not due to happen for a month or two. I'm so sick of this empty rhetoric of buzzwords like "change""youth""fresh" and "energy".
Mr. Smith was INCREDIBLE on the Charlie & Ernie show - very slick - but then I realized he didn't say anything about anything. That's understandable at this point in the campaign, I guess.
I'm also still trying to figure out what GBIC (his "real-world experience") is all about and what their affiliation is with the Chamber of Commerce. I'm not a huge fan of the Chamber.
Hinda was/is kind of a right-winger, good on Andy if he didn't support her, though I didn't notice that.
Is Jonathon Leopold using Burlington Telecom to spy on his political opponents? Are BT subscribers like me subject to having our internet use monitored by the municipal intelligentsia?
It's unlikely, but it's not impossible I suppose.
Don't forget- Festivus comes earlier this year as the Dems and Progs have their airing of grievances Thursday night at Seven PM at the Main Street Landing Film House in a forum hosted by Rodney King.
OK, let's talk about what happened with Tim Ashe in this election. Looks like he won after some potential shenanigans. From Nancy Resmen at the Burlington Free Press November 5, 2008...
Corrected count gives Ashe sixth Senate seat
Tim Ashe of Burlington, who ran as both a Democrat and Progressive, will take a seat in the Senate, he learned Wednesday after a night of uncertainty.
An incorrect number in Ashe’s vote count for one ward had put Ashe in seventh place in the Chittenden senate district race. There are just six seats.
After the vote tally was corrected Wednesday, Ashe moved up ahead of Democrat Denise Barnard of Richmond.
Huh. Was that a block quote or did I just reprint the whole article? Man that was short. The Free Press piece does go on to report the "corrected" tally...
The six Chittenden senate winners and their vote counts are as follows:
Doug Racine, 44,675 Ed Flanagan, 38,927 Ginny Lyons, 35,801 Diane Snelling, 32,322 Hinda Miller, 31,395 Tim Ashe, 28,048
Yes. Quite. I voted for Tim Ashe, by the way, and no other senate candidate. And even though the ballot box in my ward (Seven) was illegally broken into three times last year, I'm confident my vote was counted "correctly" by Ben Pacy and Jonathon Leopold. And even though the people of Ward Five didn't have enough ballots during the primaries, I'm confident Ben Pacy and Jonathon Leopold counted the Ward Five ballots "correctly" as well. Why? Because according to the comment string at that Free Press article online, the trouble seems to be in Ward One this time.
11/5/2008 7:37:26 PM dcross wrote: That's an *awfully* big swing for one ward, especially since it would have to be people who voted for Ashe and not Barnard (another D). I'd be amazed if there weren't a recount. Recommend (4) New post Reply to this Post Report Abuse
11/5/2008 6:29:37 PM jimmmy wrote: There is certainly something fishy going on in Burlington. I spoke with an election official from Ward 1 who said that he didn't trust the folks he was working with. Recommend (2) New post Reply to this Post Report Abuse
*****
So as I've been predicting since I first met her and learned about her candidacy, Kesha Ram (pronounced "Kay-Shuh Rom") has taken out Chris Pearson in her bid for a seat in the legislature from the student-heavy Chittenden 3-4 district. Kesha is a tough competitor who knows how to spin.
I think Obama joked the she would replace Welch if he didn't watch his step or something. Funny, but as a constitutional lawyer he must realize you have to be twenty-five to serve in the US House. Kesha is twenty-two. That was how old I was when I was elected to my first and so far only elected office. That was as a Progressive city councilor from Ward Three from 1995-1997. I digress.
Good job Kesha. I knew you wouldn't get Dave, though. Zuckerman is pretty dug-in. And that makes sense since he's a farmer. If the Progs had run Zuckerman for governor, he'd have bloody well done better than 21 percent by golly. Bummer for Gaye Symington though. She stopped me in the mall on Monday but I had such a cold I couldn't shake her hand because I didn't want to get her sick. I told her "good luck tomorrow" but that was just to be polite. I knew Douglas was going to win. How could anyone not have known that?
Also in the mall yesterday I ran into a current candidate for mayor who is not the current mayor. I told him if he wants to win he should attack Leopold, not Kiss. He didn't seem into that. He seemed more into focusing on Kiss and specifically focusing on what he hasn't done as opposed to what he has done. This is a weak strategy. If you can't go after anything Kiss has done wrong, you're not going to win. Serving three years and just not doing enough good stuff, is not enough reason for an incumbent to be kicked out. Just ask Jim Douglas.
If I were running for mayor I'd make a huge deal out of election integrity, if that wasn't already apparent.
Any-hoo. I got up at Five AM and I couldn't go back to sleep so I thought I'd blog. Oh one last thought. I'm already feeling the benefits of an Obama presidency. I made a $20 bet with a woman at work a couple months ago that Obama would win and yesterday she paid up. I tried to refuse twice in good humor, but she insisted. So a big Kramer Boo-yaaa for me. My co-worker was happy to lose the bet. President-Elect Barack Steve Obama. You gotta love it.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Click Sticker to get one.
Yours free with Paypal donation of any amount.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars,
the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury,
shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States,
than according to the rules of the common law.
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses
yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your
teeming shore, Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed,
to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
-Emma Lazarus, 1883
--------------------------
Church Street Energy System
--------------------------
Powered by
"The Medium is the Message."
Whatever things
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis ligula lorem,
consequat eget, tristique nec, auctor quis, purus. Vivamus ut sem. Fusce aliquam nunc vitae purus.
Whatever things
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis ligula lorem,
consequat eget, tristique nec, auctor quis, purus. Vivamus ut sem. Fusce aliquam nunc vitae purus.
Junktique's New Site
Junktique's Old Site
Jessica Sklar
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyNJbNbmUUkmfGLaBuqicz0Zvqt-1zb2AzXdfm1qMXh8AfpmG9leXo0dm_wo-26BNSQz0sc5nzPl7NU4PdQjb1wqbgKf1-A7vG2K8EsV40igIcBQahcPJFPCUfHFy3aSWN2yi8qg/s1600/henry%2527s.jpg")
8 Comments