Saturday, July 30, 2011

Another Kick In The Charter

Kenneth M. O’Brien

In their ongoing rush to re-establish the controlling interests of our corporate overlords, the Clickolla led town council of Casellaburg has scheduled another palace coup.

As you are most likely aware, the town mangler has been seeking a doctor to replace the resigned member of the Board Of Health, Dr. O’Leary.

In the meantime, however, the new ruling majority has begun preparing for the reestablishment of a five member BOH without waiting to amend the charter.

On Tuesday night, August 2nd the subcommittee on Education and Human Services will meet at 7 p.m. Chaired by councilor Denise Clemence the subcommittee will first vote to approve the appointment of citizen members Monique Manna and Roger Caouette.

They will then move to another agenda item. That will be to recommend to the full council the appointments of Robert Checkosky and Dean Cook to the Board of Health, each for a three-year term.

Once a compliant MD has been settled upon, the Clickolla regime will have returned to a five-member Board ready to drop any opposition to Casella’s plans or other regime endorsed health-related issues

36 comments:

  1. Suggestion? Ask the Chairman for a copy of Cook's resume. He's not an MD. I believe his resume online states that he's got a degree in Biology from Salem State, not exactly Ivy League. She always asked for it; Raciel, demand the same from her! Ann Beinema is a nurse, with an actual degree. Checkosky's is good for nothing. Nothing!

    ReplyDelete
  2. As an afterthought, check and see if both have paid their taxes? See Marketti's site if you need explanation. Just ask Clemence about HER tax lien.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Its about time. The Town council should fixe the bogas Roberts Rule of Order mess that Logan and Lazo did last year. They should ask Dr Oleary to come back too. Than get rid of the Queen Ann and her Joker and the BOH can get back to being a BOH. Way to go

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is nothing more than an attempt to make what is supposed to be an independent Board a tool of Casella.

    There is no requirement that a town have a doctor as a member of the BOH. This is only required of cities. Special legislation was passed that stated that Southbridge, with the exception of laws related to bylaws, was to be treated as a town. Thus, despite the fact that Southbridge has what the AG has determined to be a city form of government, there is no requirement that a doctor be on the BOH.

    Nevertheless, the town mangler has repeatedly stated that he wants to nominate a doctor to the Board.

    Dr. Kenny Hasija, who has served this community for about forty years, has applied and indicated his strong desire to serve on the Board. Why hasn’t he been nominated?

    Anybody who doesn’t see that this is an attempt to return to the good old days of Clayton Crapisle needs their head examined.

    The town attorney’s opinion put forward on the issue of a five versus three-member BOH is ludicrous. If you follow his logic to its inevitable conclusion, he is arguing that town bylaws can trump the Mass. General Laws. REALLY?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Cook ISN'T a doctor. How does that sole Clark's dilemma?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The BOH should be an elected position because it is too important to people's health to have politics being played in cronyism appointments.

    Trust the people to get it right or fix it next time. The current town officials have already proven that they can't be trusted but will never allow the people to vote for BOH members. They will never give up that perceived power so we will have to fix it next time by voting them out.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To elaborate upon my earlier comments as regards the opinion of the Town Attorney on this matter, allow me to quote from his opinion of June 16, 2010:

    “Although the Town Charter in paragraph 4-3-1 makes reference to a “three member board of health”, paragraph 4-3-2 clarifies that “The town manager shall have the power to appoint, subject to confirmation by the town council, such other members of boards and commissions as are authorized by the General Laws, this charter or by-laws and for whom appointment is not otherwise provided” (Bold font is for my emphasis). Essentially, paragraph 4-3-2 qualifies the language of paragraph 4-3-1 to allow the Board Of Health by a provision of the Massachusetts General Laws, a provision of the Charter, or a Town By-Law. I believe that this is a proper reading of the Town Charter. Consider the following possibility. If the State Legislature enacted a law that required all municipalities to have a Board Of Health of no less than five members, what would we do in Southbridge? If we were bound with a strict reading of paragraph 4-3-1, we could arguably be stuck with a Board of Health of three member that would then be out of compliance with state law.”

    As I argued at the subcommittee meeting on this matter, such a contention is outrageous. The doctrine of preemption provides that the laws of superior governmental jurisdictions override those of inferior governmental entities. That is why the U. S. Constitution trumps state constitutions.

    The Charter contains the specific, legally obligatory term “shall” as regards the appointment of a three-member Board of Health.

    If the state mandated the appointment of a five-member BOH then that law would trump the Charter.

    However, under the Town Attorney’s logic, if the state law mandated that we shall have a five-member BOH we could still institute a by-law that provided for a seven member BOH and that by-law would trump state law.

    If the EHS subcommittee wants to vest their authority upon this rationale, all I can say is that I worship the quicksand upon which they walk.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This mess calls for an "all hands on deck" for Tuesday. If you are reading this now, please show up Tuesday to prevent this tragic display of incompetence and irresponsible behavior!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Relax people, Doctor Logan resolved the unlawful board of health issue in the last session, and the council simply does not have the authority to appoint two people to a board that has only one available space.

    The Council that stacked the board before did it one person at a time. For many years there were three members, then Mr. Tremblay was appointed leaving us with four members. Then years later AFTER Dean Cook had identified himself as pro-landfill expansion, he was appointed right before the site assignment to ensure the poorly conducted site assignment.

    I hope that the council tries to stack the deck again though, because they KNOW that they are breaking the law, and it will be sufficient to have a recall election. I doubt the council is foolish enough to appoint anyone other than Doctor Kenny.

    ReplyDelete
  10. How do you think you're going to get a recall when you can't get enough people motivated to vote for your people? Alot of big talk. Beer muscles from boneheads. Shaking in our shoes. Later.

    ReplyDelete
  11. What do you mean? We helped get Davis Langevin and Darlene Marcucci elected-two people wise enough to vote against the landfill expansion when the served on the Council before.

    The last Council broke the law in order to loot the landfill enterprise fund, and they might try to break the law by unlawfully appointing extra members to the board of health.

    The good news is that the board of health is under the authority of the state ,and even if the town council tries to stack the board of health to protect Casella, the board of health does not have to seat unlawful members. The next person the council appoints, which should be a Doctor, will obviously be seated,and extra members can sit in on a meeting like anyone else, but they certainly will not be allowed to vote-that would be illegal

    If they want five members, all they have to do is change the charter. The winning side doesn't get to break the law and appoint people to a position that does not exist ; )

    ReplyDelete
  12. Raciel, don't fall for this. Do you actually believe they are stupid enough to break the law openly? When this board stacking was done before nobody knew what was coming-this is very obvious. The last time they appointed Rene Tremblay as a 4th member / alternate, then the fifth person, Dean Cook, only right before the site assignment.

    I suspect that this is like the false claim on here the other day that bags of trash were not being picked up. People are just trying to push your buttons. Focus on the chloramines please.

    Appointing two members to a board where there are not any seats available would be such an open disregard for due process that you should rejoice. My concern is that Mr. Clark is ignoring Doctor Kenny's desire to serve on the Board of Health, and that they will pressure Rinaldo to resign and replace him with the second Clark marionette.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Don't fall for this." Unlike the false garbage bag story, this one's on the agenda; take a look.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Maybe they know something we don't know? EHS is an important committee meeting for sure, and concerned citizen's should attend, but getting rid of Rinaldo is also on their agenda, which sadly makes room legally for two appointed puppets.

    This is why it is important to show support for our current board of health-less than two dozen people in Southbridge are aware of what they went through with all the o'Liary obstructionism.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Is it safe to put a non-Christian from another country on our board of health?

    Also the Doctors are not a good idea because they have an agenda-they tried to stop the landfill plans in the past, and they will harass Casella and make them go by every wacko environmentalist guideline.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It's so easy to spot posts on your site, Mr.O'Brien, that are obviously not written by people that feel that way. They are written by anti-landfillers to try (very badly) to incite other anti-landfillers. See the previous comment for an examaple. One needn't be a PhD to spot them. People are smart enough to see it but the person doing it is not.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The RATS are trying to preserve the landfill for the next 30-40 years. The people that have been challenging the landfill expansion are not anti-landfill-we are only trying to protect ourselves and our family from the risks of bringing in 405,000 TONS of trash a year into town until our landfill gets used up. The contract says 35 years, but they are using our landfill up in ten and claiming that the trash isn't increasing-not hard to do when you are running the scales!

    People that are trying to defend their health do not need to be incited with the 'Wealth of the few over the health of the many" policies of Mr. Clark.

    Mr. Clark has been openly defiant of environmental laws, unless he needs to use DEP as an excuse to push the Charlton water expan$ion, and has been heard at town hall stating that he is "not required to appoint Doctors to the board of health", and that "the Doctors tried to stop the landfill expansion", so although I agree that Mr. Clark bringing in numerous Evangelical Churches on Main Street does not mean he is prejudice against non-Christians, he is certainly deeply concerned about the influence of real Doctor's on the board of health, so the comment by annon939 are not as absurd as anon948 suggests.

    Maybe 20-25%% of the town wants to expand the landfill, and I am somewhat humored that there are characters that will go to any length to discredit the uncomfortable truth of Mr. Clark and his cabal of landfill lovers.

    Mr. Clark has nominated a former landfill company (not casella) employee ( Mr. Cook) and one of the former Town Councilors that advocated for the introduction of C & D waste under Mrs. Chandler, and he appointed these two obvious landfill lovers over a Doctor with over three decades of service in our community-it is outrageous, and is reason enough to remove Mr. Clark for incompetence.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "See the previous comment for an examaple. One needn't be a PhD to spot them. People are smart enough to see it but the person doing it is not."

    Anon948, you might be correct that the post you referred to sounds like it is from a Colbert report admirer, but what I don't understand is why you are smart enough to see parody, but naive enough to believe that bringing a billion pounds of rotting garbage into our airspace is acceptable or is in any way worthy of consideration.

    ReplyDelete
  21. It's over, give it up. I don't like it either, but by the time anything happens with this so-called lawsuit, the landfill will be filled. You have to know when to hold them and know when to fold them. It's time.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The lawsuit that will stop the landfill expansion and ensure the clean up isn't even being filed until September. The current lawsuit already succeeded because the board of health is in agreement with what has been alleged and the case delayed the intake of out of Town MSW until late last year. The Rats lawsuit does not ask that the landfill be closed, it asks for a legitimate site assignment.

    The Federal lawsuit hardly even involves the Southbridge town government, except they will likely be an interested party. The issue has always been protecting us from the health risks-if out of town trash and contaminated soil suddenly discontinued tomorrow, we'd still have a terrible mess to clean up, and the money isn't there. The Federal or state government allowed that mess, let them pay to clean it up.

    These last few years have only been the 7th Inning stretch.

    If justice prevails, the intake of out of town trash and debris will be severely limited, we will have the landfill for local use, and the Federal government will provide sufficient funds to isolate the risks.

    ReplyDelete
  23. A few days ago I posted this!

    Anonymous said...
    cart man did strike back today. Casella was under orders to not pick up trash not in containers. NOt only did I see trash being left behind one worker said that they were being watched and couldn't take it.

    No warning to the public, no education of the new enforcement, just another take that citizenry approach.
    July 28, 2011 11:50 PM

    I stand by that statement as those words were a direct quote from a Casella worker.

    However I feel need to correct those that are saying not picking up garbage bags and or that this is false.
    - this is you ANON 7/31 5:34AM

    Anonymous said...
    "Don't fall for this." Unlike the false garbage bag story, this one's on the agenda; take a look.
    July 31, 2011 5:34 AM


    TRASH is very different from garbage. You go on believing what you want to.
    I never said garbage I said TRASH.

    For the record it was boxes and other cardboard from two differerent neighbors that was left behind. Believe what you want to but when you see it for yourself on a non recycling week perhaps then you'll believe me.

    Not that it matters to me, other than disliking my words being twisted, but the record has now been set straight.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Trash and garbage are both called MSW, but cardboard that can be recycled is not considered trash or garbage.

    If they didn't pick up cardboard, that is probably because by law it has to be recycled. If it is covered with spaghetti sauce or something, then it is in the MSW category.

    Were plastic bags with regular garbage left behind? If so, that would be a new policy, and would be Darth Clark or Mr. Morin striking the public unfairly, causing a public health issue.

    People have different terms for our waste, but garbage is food waste, then there is yard waste, and trash is other disposables that can't be recycled, unless it is construction waste or toxic waste. You'd think our recycling co=ordinator would have taught us the terms that are used so we'd understand their more complex demands.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Have you nothing better in life to worry about? What a wasted life, worrying about trash versus garbage.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ha, I am not worried at all. When logogogue originally explained what happened, some of us were concerned that people's waste wasn't being picked up-which is a public health threat.

    Despite what the Council and the Health director were claiming on Monday that just bags are a violation of the By Laws, they were wrong once again. Clear bags are allowed, and they should know better before scaring people.

    The Realtor tells me that our house won't sell because of the smell of the garbage that comes from the landfill. She could smell it really well-we can't smell it as much because the hydrogen sulfide has ruined our ability to smell, even when away from home.

    These waste definitions are very important, because it is the way that the DEP and the waste industry deliberately manipulate words to sneak in these piles of putrefaction into towns like Southbridge with the support podunk town managers that are primarily concerned with their next resume and short term budget concerns.

    Our Council and board of health may not have approved thousands of tons of fluff with its abundant vectors, but if they told us they meant trash with rodents and vultures, maybe our leaders would have made the right choice?

    ReplyDelete
  27. fluff & vectors? LOL that happens all the time when I am doing my geometry homework my fluffnutter drips marshmallow on the diagrams.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Fawn Fullofitowski. LOL.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Fitzgerald, why are you obsessed with JP?

    Sure looks like a man crush to me.

    Yup.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I dunno, Comic Book Guy always had sort of a je ne sais quoi about him, don't you think?

    ReplyDelete
  31. John P. FitzgeraldAugust 2, 2011 at 4:46 AM

    Fat chance. Love how you people twist and attack. Oh well, im checking out of here. It's devolved into moronic conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Fitzgerald it has been moronic ever since you started putting out bad dope about good data.

    You attack people-and for things they have not even said, so it is apparent that you do love to attack and twist. Maybe if you play nice, people wouldn't come up with theories about your obsessions?

    ReplyDelete
  33. John P. FitzgeraldAugust 2, 2011 at 11:57 PM

    Give me an example of where I attacked someone for something they didn't say?

    ReplyDelete
  34. 1. You made false claims about rinaldo for hiring his Sister. She hasn't even been paid since last August, so she has essentially been a volunteer and deserves our praise.

    2. You claimed JP stated that people were on the take, he has never said such a thing, and I have personally heard him ask people to refrain from such talk.

    3. You have also dissed Ann B, who deserves the Kennedy "Profile in Courage" award for attempting to do something about the corruption within the board of health, such as the minutes being changed by staff after being approved by the board.

    ReplyDelete
  35. John P. FitzgeraldAugust 4, 2011 at 8:36 PM

    You are an idiot. A confused one at that. Cite where I said ANY of that shit on this site? You are a blowhard, who can't and won't prove anything.

    Jackass.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You or someone in your home.

    ReplyDelete

All comments subject to moderation. All commenters must use their own name or a screen name. No comments labelled as "Anonymous" will be published. To use your name or a screen name select "Name/URL" from the drop down menu. Insert you name in the "Name" space and leave the "URL" space blank.