.

All Boards

Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
Posts awaiting your approval 0
Bob Gray July 06, 2014 at 08:29 PM
Asbury Street, Hamilton near the tennis courts.....
Fay July 07, 2014 at 10:22 AM
Upper Asbury Street by Patton Estate.
I. C. Hugh July 07, 2014 at 04:51 PM
Welcome to the digital tour of Hamilton. Mr. Gray found the sign in the pic. Isaac :-))))
William Dery July 07, 2014 at 08:39 AM
Once again Jen, the approach is flawed. Not all of us underestimated the pool. Only those without Read Morebackground in construction or those who spun the effort. You people are doing the same thing you did with the pool. There because there is nobody on the “team” that has a practical approach. The design was given in to 100% wish list generated by people who only want what they want. I it very easy to get gross costs of the turf since there are many of examples easily obtained. After you have discerned what the gross cost is going to be, the next question is where is the money going to come from? ( without low balling it as you did with the pool). If in fact you can identify the source and availability than and only than spend money for a schematic design. The present suggested cost of a turf field at the high school is 4 mill. A number which Sean did not want to give up at the SC meeting ( we are getting really tired of these games) Once the BOS has determined money is available ---than proceed. I suggest that the BOS step back and take a long look at all the programs being proposed across the board. AS I understand, it is some 35 million which is approximately $.60/10 mill on the tax rate or $2.10 increase. That is unacceptable. The amount of money you are planning to spend on recreation is exorbitant. No Matter how nice they are. WE CAN”T AFFORD IT. Scott, Jen, and Mark have smarmily screwed up Pierre, the pool, Aerobic digester and about to with Patton by politely stuffing the Planning boards with your cronies. A really good track record and justification for the towns to go into business. If you have ever wondered why our tax rate is out of sight just look in the mirror.
Jay Burnham July 07, 2014 at 03:14 PM
Jennifer… You initiated your comments with an objection to EiE using the Patch and FacebookRead Morea s a “forum for our viewpoints”. That issue was addressed in my original reply to you. Moving on… If, as you say, Gale Associates “do not hold themselves out as experts in aquatics”, why in the world would you insist, as you have stated, that they provide an estimate for the cost of a pool in their report? EiE has a reputation of confirming the veracity of every statement and posting and blog we publish. And so I challenge your suggestion that the “meeting summary” posted above is in any way “confusing”. Every sentence in the post is factual and for you to suggest otherwise is not surprising. You have made similar claims before when you have disagreed with the facts that others, opposed to your viewpoint, have made public. The facts are not confusing, but your spin on them is. Lastly, your suggestion that blame should be forgotten is understandable, considering your own culpability. But to forgive and forget issues that involve the public trust and public policy can only lead to a repeat of the same sort of poor planning and decision-making (ie: the pool)… and that is not acceptable. EiE has sought compromise and offered suggestions and recommendations, encouraged community input and even supported a Blue Ribbon Committee examining the pool issue, for a year now. Do we need to restate those recommendations for you? Are you at last willing to seek compromise? If so, I am pleased to hear it and I’m sure we all look forward to a respectful dialogue and resolution. Surely enough time, effort, and taxpayer dollars have already been wasted.
Jay Burnham July 10, 2014 at 04:43 PM
One last comment, Jennifer. To characterize Gale’s expertise as limited to “turfRead Morefields& rdquo; is grossly misinformed. Gale Associates has planned, designed, permitted, and administered construction of over 300 athletic and recreation facilities in the past 15 years which include grass fields, turf fields, running tracks, tennis courts, basketball courts, playgrounds, stadium seating, athletic lighting, skate parks, concessions and restroom buildings, golf courses, gymnasiums, spray parks, and POOLS. It's true that they are not pool SPECIALISTS, but like most engineering firms, they typically engage one of the 5-6 pool consultants as a sub-consultant when involved in a pool development project.
Jennifer Scuteri July 04, 2014 at 09:33 PM
Jay and Bob, Respectfully, I believe we benefit as a Community when we are carefully deferential to Read Morefacts. As you watched the BoS meeting, you know that by the time the applicant came before the BoS, for our separate review and consideration, two additional candidates had submitted applications. These two other applicants had strong backgrounds and experience and chose to start their evaluation process at the BoS level, first, which might be the more common practice. While it was a difficult decision, our job is to recommend the strongest applicant, which I believe we did. If the Planning Board had all three applicants to consider when they made their initial choice, my sense is that their decision may have been different. Your statement that we “turned down the PB’s choice of Associate” is not accurate or fair. This implies that the Planning Board in fact made a choice among applicants, when in fact no choosing occurred (as there was only one applicant before them).  If you feel that we did not make a good decision, then please, post the applications /resumes of each applicant. I believe there will be agreement that our vote was both appropriate and responsible. We are lucky to have so many interested applicants. This is a real positive and let’s makes that our focus. Thanks.
Bob Gray July 05, 2014 at 06:55 AM
Jennifer, when additional candidates suddenly popped up the proper and respectful way for this toRead Morebe handled would have been to let the Planning Board review the candidates and send the BoS their selection. Even this would have been a slap in the face for the already voted on and approved candidates. What would the BoS like to see happen? Keep waiting for applicants to come in until "the right fit" applies? The whole procedure used makes the BoS look like they wanted to put "their man" onto the Planning Board.
Leigh M Keyser July 05, 2014 at 09:42 AM
The board of selectmen need to remember that their"show" is on cable TV and that manyRead Morefolk s in town do watch the programs, and at times, make us wonder why did we vote to elect some of the board members, as they continue to carry on "their" own agenda and one that does not benefit town business or rules or town operating procedures. Its time that these elected folks maintain the thinking that they told everyone when they were asking for our vote. Election day is coming and folks have memories of your actions.
See more »