The Gavle Goat is dead. Long live the Charlestown New Year's Eve bonfire!

After several safe Christmas seasons, world's favorite goat finds a new way to die

By Will Collette

I first started writing about Sweden's Gavle goat in 2011, the year Tom Ferrio and I launched Progressive Charlestown.

A proud holiday tradition in the Swedish town of Gavle since 1966, local resident build a giant goat (Gävlebocken) made of straw that stands in the town square through the Advent season.

Except when it doesn't.

While a majority of town residents love the goat, a sizeable minority don't. They make it their business every year to burn the goat down. It does make a pretty spectacular bonfire. There's a lively betting pool on whether the goat will survive and, if so, how long. And as the saying goes, a certain amount of alcohol is involved.

Vandals caught in the act usually do three months of jail time. Metro.UK reports "of the 58 Gävle goats in history, 42 have been destroyed."

Each year I wrote about the Gävlebocken, usually in the context of publicizing Charlestown's own New Year's Eve bonfire. Some year's, the goat made it; other years, it didn't.

Due largely to dramatically heightened security, the Gävlebocken made it through the past several years uncharred.

But this year, its luck ran out.

Yesterday, December 27, the Gävlebocken was busted up by high winds from Atlantic Storm Johannes.

Hopefully, the weather will be kind on Wednesday night for Charlestown's annual New Year's Eve bonfire at Ninigret Park. Currently, the National Weather Service is forecasting a cold (20 degrees) and cloudy for Charlestown.

Charlestown's bonfire was started as volunteer effort by Frank Glista who hustled up the lumber (usually from Arnold Lumber) and hand-crafted it himself. Frank carried on this work for years until recently handing it off to former Engineers union leader and current Charlestown Residents United chair Tim Quillen.

The Charlestown bonfire has had its own share of troubles. In 2013, an undisclosed complainant to DEM asked that the bonfire be banned because it created an illegal "municipal waste disposal site." DEM issued a "Notice of Intent to Enforce" which was promptly appealed by then Charlestown Treasurer Pat Anderson.

DEM rejected Pat's appeal and then former Charlestown state Representative Donna Walsh got to work, ultimately getting DEM to rescind its intended enforcement action.

There was a lot going on in Charlestown at that time. Bradford residents were hammering at DEM for its failure to enforce the law on the infamous Copar Quarry on the Charlestown-Westerly line. Town Councilor Deputy Dan Slattery was going on a tear about Ninigret Park, "phantom properties," state acquisition of properties to protect water resources after just completed his campaign to destroy former town administrator Bill DiLibero's career. Planning Commissar Ruth Platner was cranking up her effort to micromanage every business, residence and land parcel in town. 

Banning the bonfire was someone's bright idea, someone who has never stepped forward to take the "credit."  But if you study the history, you can make a pretty good guess.

Secrets From Charlestown’s Own Accounting Archives - Part 1

Piercing the veil of secrecy

By Stephen Hoff

It is time to pull the curtain back on how Charlestown manages the thousands of dollars you pay in taxes each year and the transparency level that they allow us to see.  It all starts at the top with a majority control of the Town Council and runs directly downhill through the Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz who owes his $150,000 a year job to that same majority, as do non-taxpayer third parties who are paid for their institutional support.  

It is classic old style politics where to the victors go the spoils.   However, it can be changed by us bi-annually if we can no longer support the status quo and have individuals willing to serve that share our beliefs.   

This article and other future articles will highlight some of my personal forays into the Town’s accounting and financial practices that I have examined over the past couple of years.  

It is based on 26 separate open records (APRA) requests, several Attorney General appeals, and a letter to the Auditor General of RI regarding the Town’s management’s capabilities and accounting practices that I, as well as our outside auditors, have found to be lacking in multiple ways.   

I began digging in deeper and deeper with each passing month, because it was clear there were serious problems and issues, as well as a fierce resistance by the Town staff to answer reasonable questions freely or to charge reasonable prices for what have been heavily redacted copies of documents if they haven’t been simply denied outright. 

In effect, I have become an unauthorized and unpaid “internal auditor” – and probably an unwelcome one at that - poking around very fertile ground in the hopes of determining what has been going on in Town Hall. 

I do this by simply asking questions and seeking documents and “looking under the hood”.  

However, my access to information is much more restricted than a  “internal auditor” would have. They wouldn’t have had to pay out of pocket for information that is heavily redacted, making my job all the harder as well as more expensive. 

In fact, I think that this is the Town’s motto, “Make it Hard and Expensive and They Will Just Go Away.”  Just so you know, I don’t plan to go away.   

It’s reasonable for you to ask why you should believe what I share with you.  My candid response is that I am not a feeder at the town trough.  I get no payments from the town, am not seeking a job with the town paid or unpaid, and must personally pay for information that I request.  

It also takes hours of my free time and I am only able to scratch the surface because of very limited access to the documents that I attempt to obtain.  

I ask you to trust me as a CPA, a former municipal Finance Director for 15 years, and a former auditor of municipal governments. I hold an MBA in Finance and I believe Charlestown can do better than we have been doing.  And if you have read this far, I bet you think that we can do better as well.   

Treasurer Cover Up - True or False?  The Town employed 2 full time Treasurers at the same time for 5 months during Fiscal Year 2020, both being paid over $100,000 each in base salaries in addition to all their accrued benefits.   Yet, the Town was still unable to get audited financial statements issued that did not overstate UFB by $3 million in Fiscal Year 2020!   True!

 You didn’t know this because the Town Council choreographed a magnificent charade on August 13, 2019 for public consumption that announced that Pat Anderson, the Town’s Treasurer, was retiring.  They even gave her a Certificate of Appreciation on her retirement.  See it for yourself on Town video at their 7 PM meeting.  

Her replacement had already been previously approved by the Town Council.  Little did anyone know at the time that Ms. Anderson continued to be a full time employee of the Town through the end of January 2020 apparently accruing additional full benefits. 

Now that this precedent has been set I have no doubt that future employees leaving town employment with severance benefits due to them will be demanding the same additional severance benefits accorded to Ms. Anderson even if they are not specifically allowed in her union contract.  This was pure and unadulterated deception by the Town Council and the Town Administrator!    

Then, there was the accounting cover up!  The Town had only budgeted for one Treasurer in the budget approved at referendum.  So, how could the Town hide the fact that we still had 2 Treasurers?  Someone came up with the bright idea of charging her 5 months of salary ($43,769.33) to an account outside the General Fund that is used to account for Severance Benefits once an employee has left Town employment. 

Unfortunately, the Town wasn’t savvy enough to realize that she hadn’t actually left Town employment and was still an active full time employee, or they simply ignored the fact.   

Therefore, the Town just charged her salary to this other Fund anyway, which begs the question of who decided to do this and on whose authority?  The Town Administrator perhaps, who oversees the Office of the Treasurer?  

It had to be someone who knew how Town budgets were structured and what alternatives could obscure the truth from being revealed.  There are undoubtedly fingerprints on the documents somewhere in Town Hall that relate to this decision.   

Unfortunately, there was a glitch to the Town’s “creative” accounting, because it was not allowed by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles since Pat Anderson had remained a full time employee during this time.  

Apparently, the auditors forced the Town to reverse where the Town had charged the $43,769.33, and moved the expense back to the Treasurer’s salary line in the General Fund just before the audit was completed in December 2020.     

Unfortunately most people didn’t notice.  However, the accounting looked strange and an open records request revealed what the Town had worked so hard to hide from the taxpayers. Now we all have a much better understanding of the depth of the deception that the Town used to deceive taxpayers and cover up their accounting manipulations.  

 I subsequently obtained a redacted email Letter of Resignation that Pat Anderson apparently submitted on January 21, 2020 resigning effective January 28, 2020 with an electronic signature. 

 When I requested other documents relating to her resignation I was told they would cost me $363.30 to receive.  Doesn’t this sound a bit like a high stakes poker game where for a hefty price I could see what the Town’s hole card was in what I can be assured would be a highly redacted document. 

 I ultimately decided not to pay the ransom of $363.30 just so I could more easily prove that the Town had been lying to taxpayers all along, now that I already knew that they had been.  

 Think about this.  The Town orchestrated an elaborate charade that our old Treasurer had retired with a Town Council ceremony and a Proclamation of her meritorious service, then doubled down on the deception by utilizing improper accounting which might have worked if the auditors hadn’t made them correct it.  

Then, once confronted about it, they kept what actually occurred from becoming public by placing a high enough cost on the details that kept the documents private as of now.  

That is not behavior we want to reward  And if  the Town Administrator played no part in it and was oblivious, then who is in charge and is being ignorant of the deception a defense of the leadership and knowledge that he is paid to provide? 

With all the shenanigans going on with this charade and deception I attempted at a minimum to at least verify that the accounting for Pat Anderson’s severance liability was accurate.  Since the Town is required to maintain a detailed severance schedule for each employee, I requested a copy of the severance schedule to review the calculations for her severance benefit. 

Initially I was given a price of $847.50 for a schedule that had already been prepared and provided to the auditors with no ability to know how much of it would be redacted.  I currently have an appeal pending with the Attorney General challenging the Town’s claimed cost of $390 for providing only a single electronic file (Excel Spreadsheet) of the Severance liability for fiscal year 2020.   

If you think I am the only one trying to get this schedule you would be wrong.  Even our Town Council President Deb Carney can’t get it and she is the top Elected Official in Town.  In an effort to keep this schedule from being provided to her, the three CCA members went so far as to vote to even deny her the right to see these documents. So much for their claim of providing transparency to Charlestown’s taxpayers.  

So, if I can’t get the document and the Town Council President can’t get this same document, then who can?  Something is wrong with the system when only Town employees can see this schedule that documents Charlestown’s $1.3 million liability, all of whom are themselves beneficiaries of the generous severance benefits provided by taxpayers, and that includes the Town Administrator.  

Some may think these are small matters in the global scheme of things. To an extent, they are right. But I am reminded of 1984 author George Orwell’s view that:

"Threats to freedom of speech, writing, and action, though often trivial in isolation, are cumulative in their effect, and unless checked, lead to a general disrespect for the rights of the citizen.”

Town screws up the math on DiBello settlement

$100,000 “Oops!”

By Will Collette

This statement is wrong on two counts - the math is wrong and
the claim this will not affect your taxes is false.

When the Charlestown Town Council announced it had made the deal with one of its colleagues, Councilor Lisa DiBello, to settle her long legal dispute with the town for $450,000, they said that the direct cost to Charlestown taxpayers would be $400,000 after a $50,000 payment from the RI Interlocal Trust, the town’s insurance carrier.

They said that $382,957.82 would be paid out of the town’s Legal Contingency Fund which had been funded by tax dollars for such matters. The remaining $17,042.18 was to come from some other, unspecified source. Read the Town's release in its entirety HERE.

The Council declared that this settlement “has no effect on the town of Charlestown tax rate.”

As more facts emerge, it turns out the Council was wrong on where the money would come from and lied about the effects on the tax rate.

Tonight's Town Council meeting - blow by blow

Live Blog started at 7:13 PM
By Will Collette

Get ready for some excitement!

7 PM and nothing yet, which is odd, because the Council added a 6:30 PM public "workshop" to discuss the town's "Hometown Hero Award" practices.

That meeting did not seem to be broadcast. At least, it didn't come up on my computer. Hope it's not yet another ClerkBase glitch. If it is, this is going to be a very short live blog.

It's 7:10 and still no Clerkbase video. Can't believe they're still in the workshop session talking about the Hometown Hero Award. While we're waiting, here's Charlestown's base contract for Clerkbase. With add-ons, we pay about $20,000 a year. We also pay Tax Assessor Ken Swain extra to serve as the town's informational technology guy.

OK, they're up, officially, at 7:13 PM.

In the Executive Session, they evaluated Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz and found that he's done a great job at doing their bidding. Accordingly, they awarded him a 2% salary increase and increased his monthly travel allowance to $600 a month.

What it costs Charlestown taxpayers to wage endless war against the Narragansetts

And for what purpose?

Camp Davis: the next battleground in the CCA Party's
war on the Narragansetts?

By Will Collette

The Narragansett Indian Tribe has had a hard time with the white settlers since the Great Swamp Massacre in 1675 when Massachusetts and Connecticut militias nearly exterminated the tribe. 

The tribe’s lands were taken and divided up among the white settlers and many of the surviving tribe members were sold into slavery. 

The tribe kept its traditions and identity alive against all odds and, in the 1970s, they fought to win back at least a little of what they lost, by winning federal recognition that they exist and by bringing suit to reclaim nearly the entire land mass of Charlestown. 

That lawsuit resulted in the RI Indian Lands Settlement Act and Joint Memorandum of Understanding that gave the tribe the bulk of its present tribal lands in Charlestown on the pledge they would accept restrictions on that land, among them being no gaming establishments without the town’s approval.

In recent years, Charlestown taxpayers have paid more than $300,000 to the ethically-challenged, controversial ex-East Providence mayor Joe Larisa to serve as “Town Solicitor for Indian Affairs” to fight the Narragansett Indian Tribe on anything the Tribe wants to do. 

He pursues that task with zeal, earning him the label of “racist” by tribal elders and leaders.

UPDATED: With Video: Charlestown Budget passes

Taxes going up, for no particularly good reason, by 16 cents per thousand

By Will Collette

UPDATE: as predicted, only a small number of people came out to vote - 238 in total. By a margin of 146 to 92, they approved the budget with its 16 cent per $1000 tax hike.

A small handful of Charlestown voters are likely to turn out to vote on June 3 (Monday, not Tuesday) to approve Charlestown’s $26 million-plus budget. 

Unless something truly amazing happens, the budget will be approved, largely because the bulk of the voters come from the Charlestown Citizen Alliance’s stronghold in Charlestown’s third precinct, and this is a CCA Party-driven budget.

Why do I make this prediction? The CCA Party’s actual voter bloc is concentrated among elderly, affluent retirees in the southwest quadrant of Charlestown where the high-end beach front property is located.

Statistically, their demographic tends to vote at higher rates than the more working class neighborhoods of Charlestown, especially North of One.

And the CCA Party voter bloc votes solidly for whatever the CCA Party puts out there, even if it’s not in their self-interest, whether it’s goofy candidates or higher taxes.

In this upcoming budget vote, count on these voters to approve a budget that will increase property taxes rates for everyone by 16 cents per $1000 of assessed property value. It isn’t actual budget expenditures that are driving this tax increase, but a decision by the fiscal austerians on the Budget Commission to spend over $3 million from Charlestown’s over-abundant budget surplus on capital expenditures.

Charlestown has a new Town Administrator

Fasten your seat belts

Charlestown's new Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz

By Will Collette

The Town Council voted to hire a new Town Administrator Monday night. He is Mark Stankiewicz, the former Town Manager of Plymouth, MA. 

Stankiewicz will relieve acting Town Administrator Pat Anderson so Pat can go back to the job she really loves, that of Town Treasurer.

Town Administrators (and Managers) are a lot like the coaches of professional sports teams. 

When they’re hired, they’re hailed as the best possible person for the job, as geniuses and as the one to lead the town to greatness.

In time, unless that manager truly is a genius with a consistent, outstanding record who doesn't piss off the Town Council, that changes. The day inevitably comes when it’s time for the Town Manager, or in Charlestown's case, Administrator, to go. When that time comes, nobody mentions how much they used to love the guy – at that point, they’d just as soon forget they ever hired him[1].

UPDATED: Town Council meeting highlights, so to speak

At least it was short

The meeting included some light entertainment

By Will Collette

UPDATE: The Clerkbase video links for the various parts of the meeting went on line earlier today (thank you, Amy) so you can see and listen to the discussions described below and decide for yourself if I exaggerated or made anything up.

The meeting was short – one hour and fifty minutes. Not exactly filled with drama, but it did have its interesting, even funny, moments.

Among the items discussed were red light cameras, opposition to commercial shell-fishing in in Quonochontaug Pond, beach clean-up, a bike path to the beach and paying to send students to charter schools.

No lights, cameras or action

The discussion about red light cameras was brief and part of Acting Town Administrator Pat Anderson’s report. As you may recall, the controversial subject of installing red light cameras at Charlestown’s five Route One intersections with traffic lights was resolved when the Council awarded the contract to a company called Sensys, largely on the company’s claim that they are a “local” company, even though they are definitely not. Click here for Pat's report.

There was a very bad accident two weeks ago at the intersection of Wildflower and Route One (at the Hitching Post and the motels) where a red-light runner smashed into and critically injured Melissa Verrecchia of Coventry. This is one of the intersections where a camera is supposed to be installed.

Planning Commission pulls the plug on Clerkbase

Too much “open and transparent government” apparently

Collage by Lin Collette. More more, click here.

By Will Collette

Since the Planning Commission began its new term after the November 6 elections, its meetings have been blacked out on Clerkbase[1]. It wasn't supposed to be that way – the town has a policy of posting an audio-video recording of all Planning, Zoning and Town Council meetings. The meetings for the Council and Zoning are still recorded and posted.

But Planning is not being recorded on Clerkbase. Not since October. Even worse, when I checked Clerkbase on New Year's Day while finalizing this article, I found the Clerkbase video links for all Planning Commission meetings going back for months are now either absent or don't work. Maybe Charlestown didn't pay the bill.

Now, I get it. It’s one thing for the CCA leadership who control Planning and the Town Council to talk about how much they treasure openness and transparency. It’s another thing altogether to have their actual deeds put up on the internet for anyone to see. Besides, it's easier for the "Voice of the CCA" Mike Chambers to revise history when his CCA buddies destroy the historical record and you can't look back to see and hear the actual discussion..

I guess they got sick of the articles in Progressive Charlestown where we report on some of the crazier things they do – and then provide a link to the recording with the suggestion to readers that they should look and listen for themselves to see whether we’re making stuff up. Click here for an example. Or click here for another favorite. These examples show why Planning probably doesn't want to encourage recording of their meetings.

Lots of questions on this year’s ballot

Along with many candidates, eleven state and Charlestown issues to vote on

By Will Collette

When you go to the polls on November 6, you will be handed a very long and complex ballot. In addition to being faced with choices for President, US Senate, US House of Representatives, State Senate and State House of Representatives, 11 candidates for Town Council and 10 for Planning Commission, there are seven State referendum questions and four proposed charter changes for Charlestown.

Let’s talk about those referendum questions.

Here’s the very, very short version for those of you who suffer from MEGO ("My eyes glaze over"). In my opinion, you should vote YES for all seven state referendum questions. And in my opinion, you should vote NO on all four Charlestown charter revision questions.

Read on if you want to know why I plan to vote that way and why I suggest you might, too.

Attorney Larisa’s cover-up was out of bounds

Larisa’s invoices are town property, not his

By Will Collette

The town released a copy of its contract with Indian-fighter attorney Joe Larisa to me under the state open records law. Without blackouts. Read it by clicking here.

Only a few days ago, I reported that Attorney Larisa decided to black out all details of the work he did for the town in return for almost $300,000 in fees. Almost every page of his bills to Charlestown looks like he was engaged in top-secret, clandestine activities.

There are lots of problems with Larisa’s censorship – invoices are public records and his heavy blackouts wipe out the public’s right to know what it was getting for its money.

But, based on Larisa’s contract with Charlestown, there’s yet another problem.

Larisa stonewalls open records request for his Charlestown bills

Attorney Larisa literally covers up what he did with our tax dollars

This is what Larisa did for YOUR money
To read the rest of his invoices, click here

By Will Collette

Recently, the CCA started drumming up paranoia about their favorite hobgoblin, the Narragansett Indian tribe, playing on Charlestown’s primal fear of an Indian casino in town. True to form, they sent in the town’s paid Injun fighter, town “Special Counsel for Indian Affairs” Joe Larisa, as their front man to make the case that the Tribe just can’t be trusted.

But this time, rather than just let Larisa spew, the Tribe fired back. Two of their leaders even went so far as to call Larisa and the CCA out for racism and propaganda. To read their remarks to the Westerly Sun, click here, here and here.

I was curious about what kind of money we were paying Larisa to fight what has become a nonexistent threat and even an embarrassment. I had an earlier figure that Charlestown had paid Larisa $169,000 for a job that essentially ended when the state of Rhode Island took over the Carcieri v. Salazar US Supreme Court case in 2008. I wanted to get a more complete and recent figure.

So I did what I usually do and on August 8, I filed a request for Larisa’s bills and records of the town’s payments to Larisa from 2007 to the present under the state “Access to Public Records Act (APRA).”

Council finishes its July meeting with a 25 minute silly session

Council disdains MOU as well as open, transparent and professional governance

By Will Collette

It was not Tom Gentz's finest half hour

With no Y-Gate Scandal matters on the agenda, the Town Council met and bumbled through 25 minutes of business left over from their July 9 session.

Playing to a largely empty chamber, the meeting began with comments from Councilor Gregg Avedisian that the meeting agenda was incorrectly constructed. It was set up as if it was a regular Council meeting, rather than a continuation of the earlier July 9 meeting. Avedisian noted that using standard agenda boilerplate was inappropriate.

Town Solicitor Peter Ruggiero agreed, noting that the Council should have the Town Clerk list only those items necessary to complete the Council’s business for the month.

NEWS FLASH - Y-Gate Scandal may be over!

YMCA has another buyer

By Will Collette

According to reliable sources, the Westerly YMCA signed a deal to sell its controversial abandoned campground on Watchaug Pond to an as yet unidentified buyer, but not the Charlestown Land Trust.

Acting Town Administrator Pat Anderson confirms that the YMCA item has been removed from the agenda for the continuation of the Council's July meeting scheduled for next Monday, July 23.

In response to my question about whether the Y would be dropped from Monday's agenda, Pat e-mailed, "Yes. The Y decided to sell to a private developer."

Town admits the Charter Revision Advisory Committee violated the Open Meetings Act

But claims the violation was “unintentional”

By Will Collette

For the second time this week, Charlestown town government had an “oops” event over its compliance with the state Open Meetings Act.

The first time was Thursday. That’s when the judge in Donoghue v. Charlestown ruled that the Town Council did indeed violate the Open Meetings Act when they failed to properly inform the public that they intended to vote on February 13 to pay to the Charlestown Land Trust in the Y-Gate Scandal.

The second time was Friday when Town Solicitor Peter Ruggiero admitted the Charter Revision Advisory Committee (CRAC) violated the law by failing to file the meeting minutes of its final and decisive meeting on April 30.

Reminders for Charlestown residents

Coming up over the next seven days

By Will Collette

Get help for federal problems.

On May 31^st, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is sending his constituent service staff to set up a shop in Charlestown. If you have trouble with a federal agency – e.g. veterans’ benefits, Medicare, Social Security, small business loan, etc. – the Senator would like to make it more convenient for you to sit with one of his staff who can help you with the problem. 

His staff will be set up at the Cross Mills Public Library on Thursday from 5 PM to 7 PM. To ensure they have enough people on hand, they’re asking you to RSVP for Thursday, May 31st

Duck and Cover.

CRACed CRABs finish crunching the Charter

Chewed it up and spit it out

By Will Collette

One of the great achievements of the Charlestown Charter Revision Advisory Committee in its final days is they finally realized they were calling themselves by the wrong name all along. From the beginning, they had called themselves the Charter Revision Advisory Board – even though I pointed them toward the section of the Charter that actually gives them their name. In the end, they realized I was right.

So how can you expect a group that apparently didn’t even look at the section of the Town Charter that defines their role (as well as give them their name) to read and understand the rest of the Town Charter well enough to make intelligent suggestions to the Town Council for Charter changes to send to the voters in November?

So much to do, so little time

On the agenda: Y-Gate and the Budget, Deputy Dan's Revised Ninigret Plan, Planning's Power Grab, Charter Changes, the Boston Post Cane and at least 16 speakers

I want MORE!

By Will Collette

Next Monday, May 14, there will be another episode of Charlestown’s long-running soap opera also known as our Town Council. VP Deputy Dan Slattery noted that there are 16 speakers already listed on the agenda and the usual array of contentious issues, so in all likelihood, there will be a second round to the May meeting on May 21^st.

Monday’s meeting will bear only a passing resemblance to the agenda posted on Clerkbase, since most of the agenda items have been juggled to accommodate various speakers and guests. First up, for obvious reasons, will be 99-year old Edith Mashl who will receive the “Boston Post Cane” as Charlestown’s oldest living resident.

Also on the agenda – Deputy Dan’s transmogrified Ninigret Park MOU, a first official look at the Charter Revision Advisory Committee’s final proposals for charter changes, beach passes, the first reading of a major Planning Commission power grab, Pat Anderson’s contract as acting Town Administrator and the formation of a search committee for a permanent (well, as permanent as usual) Administrator, the Edwards Lane affordable housing project, the police officers’ contract, and a bunch of other stuff.

Plus, ahem, the Town Budget, which includes some disposition of the issue of the $475,000 Y-Gate expenditure. That is listed as the 11^th item on the revised agenda.

UPDATED: It comes down to the Town Council (or the courts) to make final decision

Charlestown Bond Counsel Calls for Separate Vote on Y-Gate $475,000

By Will Collette

As the week comes to a close, there is at least a partial answer to the question of how the $475,000 gift of taxpayer money to the Charlestown Land Trust will be handled.

On Friday afternoon, Acting Town Administrator Pat Anderson e-mailed me to report that Charlestown’s Bond Counsel recommended placing the town’s $475,000 purchase of the conservation easement that is essential to the execution of this scam (my opinion, not hers) on the June ballot as a separate warrant item on its own merits.

Town Council meeting – color commentary

A very bad night for Deputy Dan and the town council majority

Deputy Dan plays "Three Resolution Monte"

By Will Collette

Last night, my colleague Tom Ferrio, in keeping with Progressive Charlestown’s proud tradition, gave you a rundown of the Town Council’s second “regular” meeting for April. While Tom gave you the who, what and when, I get to give you the “why,” plus my own snarky commentary.

The main event of the evening was Deputy Dan and his posse having to saddle up and high-tail it out of town with their proposal for Charlestown to give up its rights to use Ninigret Park.

But before getting into that, let me begin by congratulating Patricia “Pat” Anderson on her appointment as acting Town Administrator. She is stepping into a hard job in the wake of Town Administrator William DiLibero’s resignation triggered by the CCA’s “Kill Bill” campaign of character assassination.