Van Slyke’s “commitment” to apple pie and motherhood is not enough to make up for fiscal mismanagement.

Van Slyke must answer for CCA’s glaring financial blunders that she helped to create

By Will Collette

Loving animals and nature is not this election's key issue,
but money management is

The Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA) retread candidate Bonnita B. Van Slyke in the December 2 town council special election just issued a piece in the CCA blog that reprises her promises to support a broad array of environmental issues, the same ones she covered at length in her big, fancy mailer.

Her two opponents, Democrat Jill Fonnemann and Republican Laura Rom, also believe in protecting our environment – clean water, healthy ponds and streams, dark skies, and all our critters and birds. Jill is especially strong on animal protection. The candidates differ on how to achieve our goals, but don’t differ on the goals themselves.

So let’s stipulate that all the candidates love our town and its beautiful environs. And dogs.

The real difference between Van Slyke and her rivals comes into sharp relief when you look at her record on how to manage the taxpayers’ money. Van Slyke makes two “promises” that are belied by her actions and omissions.

Van Slyke pledges “to provide open, honest, responsible leadership” and commits to “manage our town’s administration and budgets effectively” which she failed to do during her previous time on the Town Council.

Bonnie B. left the Town Council in 2022 at the height of Charlestown’s worst financial scandal in a generation, a crisis where she was one of the key architects and led the cover-up and misinformation campaign.

And in her own writings for this special election, she still is.

In 2022, Charlestown learned that under the total control of the Charlestown Citizens Alliance, Charlestown had not only achieved the dubious distinction of having the highest administrative costs in the state but that this CCA-controlled administration had “lost” (they say “misallocated”) $3 million for two years. The “$3 million oopsie.”

Van Slyke was the CCA’s principal spokesperson leading the cover-up and disinformation campaign to deny there was a problem and, failing that, blame someone else while refusing reasonable requests for an outside, impartial review.

Van Slyke pushed – and still pushes – pumping up the town’s surplus (“Unassigned fund balance”) beyond any reasonable need. The $3 million oopsie grew out of the accumulated pockets of cash the CCA had squirreled away in the town budget often used to finance Planning Commissar Ruth Platner’s shady land deals.

Van Slyke praised and defended ex-Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz even though he failed at his #1 job which was to take care of the money. Instead, he presided over ending legal public access to records about the town’s finances and shady land deals and allowed the $3 million to get lost. Then Stanky and ex-Budget Commission Chair Dick Sartor did their own self-audit and of course found themselves blameless.

Van Slyke consistently obstructed every effort by then minority Council member Deb Carney to bring in an outside forensic auditor to find out what really happened and to fix it.

And did I mention that according to the RI Public Expenditure Council, Charlestown’s administrative costs peaked as the worst in the state per capita during the final year of CCA's reign? We're right there at the very bottom of the chart. Here's what RIPEC found (and note that the CCA NEVER even acknowledged this data, never mind acted on it):

Voters threw out the CCA in 2022, electing four of five Charlestown Residents United (CRU) candidates, leaving the CCA with only Susan Cooper to wave their flag. Cooper dropped out in 2024 and voters replaced her with another CRU candidate, giving CRU a 5-0 supermajority.

Stonewall Stanky, Charlestown's cover-up king

After the 2022 election, one of the first orders of business was what to do with erstwhile Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz, executor of the CCA’s clamp down on public records and failed money manager. Right up until Stanky’s exit, Van Slyke praised his feckless performance as masterful and condemned the CRU for driving out this superhero.

The facts showed that Stanky’s only talent was his loyalty to the CCA, but even that turned out to be phony. It turns out Stanky had already lined up a new job in Berkley, MA even before the 2022 election which the CCA was expected to win.

While clueless Van Slyke and the CCA were campaigning to save his job in 2023, Stanky was already out the door and was simply trying to get the biggest severance package he could. Incidentally, Stanky only lasted six weeks at the Berkley job before moving on to mess up Pawtucket’s finances.

Then in 2025, Van Slyke and the CCA repeated the process when the CRU decided not to confirm CCA-aligned Budget Commission chair Dick Sartor – a central figure in the CCA fiscal meltdown – to another term on the Commission. Sartor failed at his job to provide oversight over Charlestown’s finances and teamed with Stankiewicz to run the cover-up of the $3 million oopsie.

The CRU wanted him out but naturally, Van Slyke wanted him retained. Ever the champion of incompetence.

Since the CCA was booted out of office, the CRU-led Town Council has done a great job of cleaning up the mess the CCA left. And to see exactly what the CRU did, see what the state's chief auditor found. 

According to the Rhode Island Auditor General, in their first year in office, the CRU-led Council improved Charlestown’s financial management in the following ways:

Raised more revenue. 

Under the CCA, revenue was $28 million. Under the CRU, this increased to $30 million.

Lowered expenses. 

RIPEC flagged Charlestown’s highest in the state expenses which were $31.2 million, more than the revenue collected. Under the CRU, expenses dropped to $29.8 million.

Increased the town’s savings. 

This is the unassigned fund balance (UFB) that the CCA criticized the CRU for failing to increase. In fact, according to the Auditor General, the CRU raised the UFB by 17% from the CCA’s $5.3 million to $6.2 million.

Improved pension funding. 

Funding to cover future pension costs rose from the CCA’s $8.3 million level to $8.8 million under the CRU.

Reduced Charlestown’s debt by a LOT. 

Under the CCA, Charlestown’s debt was $7.9 million. Under the CRU, debt dropped to $6 million, almost 25% less.

Erased the deficit the CCA left behind. 

According to the Auditor General, the CCA left behind a DEFICIT of $3,266,029. The CRU erased that deficit and ended FY23 with a SURPLUS of $157,666.

This table on page 16 of the Auditor General’s report gives the detail:

Not once has the CCA acknowledged these hard facts, sticking instead to Bonnita Van Slyke's false narrative that the CCA was infallible. Oh, she also loves her dog.

Election started today (November 12)

Early, in-person voting has started at Town Hall. If you plan to vote by mail, ask our Town Clerk Amy Weinreich for a mail ballot application. If you've already applied, your ballot should be on the way.

Generally, special elections like this draw almost exclusively from those who pay attention to politics. Turn out is usually very low, maybe a thousand if we're lucky. A three-way race like this is especially hard to predict. 

The CCA will spend from its huge treasury built on non-resident cash to send you fancy mailers telling you Charlestown needs to go back to the good old days when they ran things. The financial facts shown above tell a very different story. 

Democrat Jill Fonnemann is pledged to support the CRU’s sound financial management for a better, more prosperous Charlestown. Let's move FORWARD, not backwards. 

New budget goes to Charlestown voters on June 2

CCA chimes in on Charlestown proposed budget

By Will Collette

Charlestown voters will have the final say on the town’s proposed $30 million+ budget. This new budget increases town expenditures by around 1.5%, compared to a 2.39% inflation rate for the past 12 months.

Under this budget, Charlestown’s tax rate is projected to increase from the current $5.78 per $1000 in assessed property value to $5.93. That’s an increase of 2.6%. Hopefully, this will be offset for permanent residents by a planned Homestead tax break if – fingers crossed – we get General Assembly approval and can swiftly pass a town ordinance. That might be overly optimistic, though.

Even at $5.93, Charlestown’s tax rate since the Charlestown Residents United won control of the Council continues to be lower than it was during any time in the past 50 years. Your actual tax is the tax rate times the assessed value of your property. Those assessments are also at an all-time high.

The all-day financial referendum will be held from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Monday, June 2, at Town Hall. Mail Ballot Applications are available on request at (401) 364-1200 or by e-mailing Town Clerk Amy Weinreich at arweinreich@charlestownri.gov.

I have been watching the reaction from the Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA), Charlestown’s past rulers who were kicked to the curb by Charlestown Residents United in the last two elections. Their reaction was pretty muted compared to the kinds of rants we’ve seen from the CCA over the past 15 years.

They kvetched a little about plans to create a new home for the Parks and Recreation Department in Ninigret Park. What a concept! At its April 14 meeting, the Town Council set aside $75,000 as a contingency to pay for any needed design or engineering work. One plan is to convert the existing gatehouse into office space. If that is impractical (i.e. if repair work is too expensive), Plan B is to build a new building.

That plus improvements to existing facilities in the Park bother the CCA. Frankly, anything in the Park bothers the CCA who have fought against any and all projects, except of course, “Faith’s Folly,” their over-budget asphalt abomination of a bike path. If anyone other than CCA founding member Faith Labossiere had proposed laying down that much asphalt anywhere in town, CCA Leader and Planning Commissar Ruth Platner would light her hair on fire.

The CCA groused a little at the Town Council’s refusal to continue small grants to the Charlestown Land Trust and Community 2000. Both organizations are currently well-funded and well-endowed.

According to the Charlestown Land Trust’s most recent federal IRS-990 filing, they hold more than $2.76 million in assets, although I believe the true value is far higher, given that their acreage includes lots of prime property. The Land Trust has long and deep ties to the CCA.

More relevant to whether the town should contribute to them is another fact included in their IRS filing. The CLT only spends about 65% of what it raises. They reported an income of ~$80,000 but only spent ~$52,000.

Community 2000, a scholarship fund, reports similar data in its IRS filing. It has an endowment of $2.3 million. They only spend 60% of what they raise. In their most recent tax filing, they raised ~$228,000 but spent only ~$137,000.

While I have no quarrel with the mission of either of these two organizations, I think their own tax data show they don’t need Charlestown taxpayer money.

But here’s the kicker: The CCA makes the claim that “The Council also eliminated funds designated for the Charlestown Land Trust ($1,500) and for Community 2000 ($1,000).”

In fact, there was NO MONEY designated to be removed. Like so many of the CCA’s fiscal complaints, this is imaginary. While this is small potatoes compared to the CCA’s many other fiscal gaffs, it shows that the CCA just doesn’t seem to learn that you can’t make this shit up and get away with it.

The CCA’s sharpest critique was aimed at the Town Council’s decision to fund this year’s budget increase from the town’s bloated unrestricted fund balance.

During the CCA’s reign, increasing the size of the town’s fund balance became an obsession to the point where it seemed as if no amount of “rainy day” reserves was enough. The old Budget Commission Chair and controversial former town administrator Richard Sartor continually pushed to put more cash into reserves. Among other things, Sartor pushed for Charlestown to pay cash for capital projects, as if using bonds to fund capital projects was a mortal sin. Maybe Sartor never had a mortgage.

The CCA concedes that even after taking out this year’s budget increases, the unrestricted fund balance still meets the minimum levels (23-33%) they themselves forced on the town. Their complaint: if the town continues to tap the fund balance in the future, this might reduce the fund balance below their comfort level.

They also think the current Town Council doesn’t have adequate plans for future capital projects.

Deputy Dan Slattery

Again with the irony. Since at least 2012, the town Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) has been a CCA obsession, especially when their former President Deputy Dan Slattery served on the Town Council. I wrote about that obsession in detail HERE.

If you don’t want to read it, here are the Cliff Notes: State law and the Town Charter both mandate municipalities to have five-year capital improvement plans. For some reason in 2012, Deputy Dan wasn’t satisfied with the result and tried to make this a big deal even though CCA leader and Planning Commissar Ruth Platner denied the Planning Commission had no role to play. Her Planning posse only dealt with birds and bushes, not buildings and bridges.

After Deputy Dan left, the CCA seemed to lose all interest in the capital improvement plan. If anything, they seemed to see it as an impediment to spending money on shady land deals or any of a number of other crackpot schemes they came up with, often on the spur of the moment.

Prime among them is the 2019 CCA-controlled Council decision to spend a $3 million surplus on a a “community center” in Ninigret Park. This scheme came out of the blue with no plan, design or actual budget for a new building that no one either asked for or wanted. It wasn’t in the approved Ninigret Park Master Plan nor the existing town Capital Improvement Plan. For good reason, taxpayers voted it down.

The CCA makes no mention of the September 2024 Rhode Island Auditor General’s report that shows in hard numbers that the new CRU controlled Town Council has cleaned up the fiscal mess left behind by the CCA.

The contradictions and hypocritical comments from the CCA are par for the course, but I still wonder why they chose to make them. They had to know they would be fact-checked.

One thing did surprise me in the CCA’s remarks on the budget. This year’s town budget reflects a 2% drop in Charlestown’s share of the cost to run the Chariho School District. That’s a savings of ~$287,000.

The saving is entirely due to a drop in the number of students going to Chariho from Charlestown. Why doesn’t the CCA take credit for this? After all, the drop in students is due to the relentless 15-year campaign by the CCA and its founder and leader Ruth Platner to drive families with kids out of Charlestown while ensuring that new families don’t come in.

Charlestown finances and taxes – Your choice on November 5

Do not let the crowd that messed up, lied and then covered up get back into office

By Will Collette

The CCA's 2024 campaign slogan

There are many reasons why Charlestown voters should reject the effort by the Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA) to regain control of Charlestown. I hope to cover them all before election day.

But for starters, let’s talk about the biggie: Can you trust the CCA to manage your money?

In 2020, the CCA proved it can’t be trusted with taxpayer funds. The lead evidence was the “$3 million Oopsie.” This was a grave problem that the CCA called a “misallocation.” 

$3 million in town funds went walkabout, unnoticed by the CCA financial brain trust of ex-Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz and ex-Budget Commission chair Richard Sartor for almost two years. The error was finally spotted by the town’s ex-auditor and duly reported.

This sparked panic within the CCA as they first tried to find a word other than “lost” to describe the screw-up. They settled on "misallocation." Their word, not mine.

Next, they searched for someone to blame since as we all know, the CCA is always right. They ended up scapegoating the auditors who found the problem. 

Then they tried to distract and minimize the problem using laughable analogies. Ruth Platner compared it to parking your car in the wrong place. Bonnie Van Slyke came up with some story about a ladder that I've never quite understood.

Finally they fell back on that old “Hey, how about that low tax rate?” tripe.

During all these machinations, they had their pet Town Administrator Stankiewicz use every trick in the book to avoid disclosing town financial records that would have brought some disinfecting sunshine to this issue. The CCA also blocked even a public discussion of the need for an outside financial review and instead let Sartor and Stanky review themselves.

Two years later, the CCA and especially their mouthpiece Council candidate Bonnita Van Slyke are now denying there was ever any problem, claiming their political opponents made it up. I wish I was that clever.

Van Slyke personally attacked me for even raising the issue, saying my reporting hurts the reputation of such a stellar personality as Stankiewicz.

The $3 million oopsie was and is a flashpoint in 10 years of CCA financial shenanigans. Before the “oopsie” went public, the worst abuses were questionable land deals promoted by Planning Commissar Ruth Platner who is now running for Council. Ruth never met a piece of undeveloped land she didn’t want to buy, regardless of price, using your money of course.

Time and again, she pushed deals where owners (often CCA affiliates like the Sachem Passage Association) would be paid far more than the land’s assessed values, often based on appraisals that relied on fictitious conditions. Stankiewicz helped by clamping down on the release of public records on these corrupt deals.

“But the tax rate!”

The CCA ran Charlestown from 2011 to 2023.
 Source: Charlestown Tax Assessor

To hear the CCA tell it, the only thing that matters to taxpayers is the property tax rate which they claimed was ultra-low, due to their genius. That, plus providing virtually no municipal services and relying on rising property values to buttress the tax base.

First, a few facts: under the CCA, the tax rate went up pretty consistently as the table to the right shows. 

After the voters gave the CCA the boot in 2020, the tax rate has plummeted to its lowest level in decades, going from $8.17 when the CCA was booted to the current $5.78.

But the tax rate is only half the equation. What you actually pay in taxes is the tax rate multiplied by your property assessment. 

Assessments have skyrocketed due to shorefront purchases by rich New York and Connecticut folks who discovered Charlestown is way cheaper than the Hamptons.

Their multi-million-dollar purchases drove up property assessments generally to the point where Charlestown has become even more unaffordable and we all pay taxes based on property values that we are unlikely to ever appreciate when we eventually sell our homes. 

The most recent reassessment increased the taxable value of our home by 65% to a level I can't imagine in my wildest dreams ever getting should we sell. Unless you’ve got a shoreline property, your assessment probably does not reflect market reality.

Even Van Slyke found that out when she tried to sell her waterfront Arnolda estate for $3 million but ended up having to settle for $2 million.

An economy out of balance

This East Beach Road property was assessed at
$1,967,700 and just sold for $3.65 million.

The CCA left the current Council majority from Charlestown Residents United (CRU) a large and complicated mess to clean up.

Actions have consequences. The CCA’s decade of reliance on rich people buying beach property and tourists flocking in during the summer has skewed our economy. 

While those beachfront owners pay a large portion of town taxes, they plus tourists triple the town’s population during the summer.

We have to provide – and pay for – a town infrastructure needed to accommodate them. Other seaside towns have the same problem and have chosen to resolve this tax inequity through homestead tax credits. 

These credits cut the property taxes of permanent residents to offset the cost imposed by visitors and temporary residents. While Homestead credits are working well in Narragansett, South Kingstown, Newport and North Kingstown, the CCA adamantly opposed a Democratic proposal for a Charlestown Homestead Tax Credit.

The CCA also turned a blind eye to tax rip-offs by Charlestown’s two “fake” fire districts – Shady Harbor and Central Quonnie. Between them, these homeowner associations (HOAs) in disguise own hundreds of millions of dollars in prime beach property and pay little or no property taxes.

We are long past the time to strip the fire district designation from these associations that do not provide actual fire protection. It’s insulting to real fire fighters and a tax rip-off. While state legislation may be needed to completely resolve this embarrassment, Charlestown should immediately begin taxing their properties at real value.

They’ll sue of course. As The Public’s Radio South County Bureau Chief Alex Nunes has chronicled, fake fire districts from Bonnet Shores to Watch Hill file lawsuits anytime anybody challenges them on any issue. I believe this is a battle worth fighting and one I believe we can win.

We could easily fund a Homestead Tax Credit by making the fake fire districts pay their fair share of taxes.

We could also fund a special tax credit for fire fighters who nol only deserve our praise and thanks, but might also help alleviate the shortage of volunteers. Rep. Teresa Tanzi (D) got the General Assembly to pass legislation authorizing a fire fighter tax credit in South Kingstown.

Some other problems in the Charlestown economy

The real tax question is tax fairness, not the tax rate. Affluent Charlestown property owners can use fake fire districts and loopholes in conservation law to cut their taxes while the CCA blocks tax credits for working families.

Charlestown needs to diversify its economy and not simply rely on minimum and sub-minimum wage jobs servicing tourists and part-time residents. The people needed to provide those services can’t afford to live in Charlestown. The CCA has made it even harder by making Charlestown the only mainland Rhode Island town without RIPTA service.

Contrary to CCA claims, Charlestown does not need an overly large budget surplus. Paying cash for capital investments, including the CCA’s shady land deals, just jacks up taxes.

For years, the CCA has known about mis-zoning – properties undeservedly designated for uses that lower taxes. Planning Commissar Ruth Platner promised to fix this problem in 2012. Twelve years later and she hasn’t done it. Yet she wants you to elect her to the Town Council.

Choose wisely in November. The CCA candidates are no longer simply listed as "independents" (as if they ever were). Most CCA candidates are co-mingled with the CRU slate as either Democrats or Republicans although none of them carry town party endorsements. 

Watch your mailboxes for campaign flyers. If you want to prevent a return financial mismanagement, DON'T vote for the CCA candidates and instead cast your votes for the CRU slate.

The Charlestown Citizens Alliance Listens, but only to itself.

Can you trust the CCA to manage Charlestown's money?

By Will Collette

Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA) candidate Bonnita Van Slyke continues to try to change the history of the CCA’s financial mismanagement that led to its ouster by Charlestown voters in 2022.

It’s like trying to argue with Donald Trump over crowd size – no matter how much evidence you present, Van Slyke will continue to deny the fact that CCA malfeasance “misallocated” or misplaced or lost $3 million dollars and that this fact only came to light after almost two years.

The CCA’s immediate reactions included:

·       > Checking the thesaurus to find a word other than “lost” to describe the missing money.

·       > Directing their revered former Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz to use every trick in the book to prevent public disclosure of town financial records.

·       > Looking for a scapegoat to blame, anyone other than themselves.

·       > Thwarting all efforts to get an outside independent review including blocking inclusion of the issue on the Town Council agenda for discussion.

·       > When all these measures failed, Bonnie and her colleagues now pretend the problems never existed.

So Bonnie keeps writing letters to the Sun to try to sell the CCA platform of lies. Maybe Van Slyke thinks if you repeat the same lies often enough, you can make the public believe them.

Her most recent letter repeats most of the “whoppers” (her favorite word) from her earlier letters, focusing this time on her claim there were multiple outside reviews.

There weren’t.

The error was found, and reported, by the town’s former auditor. Rather than an outside review, Town Administrator Stankiewicz and recently ousted Budget Commission chair Richard Sartor reviewed themselves and found themselves blameless. Instead, they blamed the auditor who found the $3 million “misallocation.”

The CCA hired another auditing firm, Marcum LLP, just before the new majority took office.

Marcum’s review confirmed the serious systemic problems that Sartor and Stankiewicz overlooked. Unfortunately, the CCA’s pick overcharged the town and was also nailed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission that fined Marcum LLP $10,000,000 because, the SEC charged, "Marcum prioritized increased revenue over audit quality."

Here's what Marcum found:

The new Charlestown Residents United Council majority was left to clean up the mess.

The CCA took control of Charlestown in 2010. Their last year
of control was 2022. Tax rates only tell half the story because
your actual tax is based on the rate as well as your property's
assessment. Chart created by the Charlestown Tax Assessor.

But hey, says Bonnie, it’s all good because the tax rate is low – not acknowledging how the rate dropped from $8.17 when voters booted the CCA to its current 2024 $5.78 rate under the new Council leadership.

Apropos of nothing, Van Slyke cites a 2021 community survey where most residents said they were happy with Charlestown. Of course they are.

But Van Slyke and the CCA don’t get that in the only community survey that matters – the 2022 General Election – Charlestown voters ended the CCA’s decade of control.

Thank you, Bonnie, for reminding voters about the most important question in the November 5 election: Who can best manage Charlestown’s money?

The CCA was responsible for Charlestown's 2022 financial crisis

CCA Council candidate Van Slyke wants you to forget what they did

By Will Collette

The Charlestown Citizens Alliance, for reasons known only to themselves, are trying to boost Ruth Platner's favorite puppet, ex-Town Counciler Bonnita Van Slyke, candidacy to return to the Council.

She and I are dueling in the Letter to the Editor pages of the Westerly Sun, something I'd rather not do. Generally, I'm content to watch the cranks bang away at each other. 

But Van Slyke's recent efforts to re-write history to canonize ex-Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz and now ex-Budget Commission chair Richard Sartor as well as erase the financial screw-ups that cost the CCA the 2022 election demanded a response.

Tenacious deep-digging by Steve Hoff and Council President Deb Carney uncovered years of financial mismanagement by Sartor, Stankiewicz and the CCA Council majority. 

Van Slyke's position was that both Stankiewicz and Sartor deserved to continue in their jobs because they were there a long time and, hey, how 'bout that tax rate? Bonnie says everything was fine and nothing happened because...low tax rate.

How do you argue with Charlestown Citizen Alliance Council candidate Bonnita Van Slyke when she just makes stuff up?

My rebuttal letter to Van Slyke's rebuttal appears below. No doubt, there will be another Van Slyke letter, then another and another as we find ourselves in an Escher's Loop. Unless someone else wants to get into this game of ping-pong. 

At some point, I'm going to get bored with this and simply stop. But for now, if Van Slyke wants to keep reminding voters how badly the CCA screwed up the money, then fine. That really worked well in the 2022 election.

Here's my letter to the Sun:

I challenged Van Slyke’s glorification of former Budget Commission Chair Richard Sartor and former Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz. I argued both should have resigned after facts revealed they mismanaged Charlestown’s money for years.

Van Slyke says there was no mismanagement. She ignores the expansive cover-up where Stankiewicz used every trick in the state open records law to delay, deny and black out public records showing the extent of that mismanagement.

Here’s how that worked. You ask for public records. You are stalled until the last possible hour when you receive an astounding price quote for the cost of retrieval and review. Nothing happens unless you agree to pay. If you pay, you get page after page of documents almost completely blacked out. You can appeal but that takes adds more delay.

After a struggle, the truth did come out – at least enough to verify the “misallocation” of $3 million, as Stankiewicz called it and some of the underlying problems.

But not all. That’s why many Charlestown residents called for an outside review, including a forensic audit, to get to the heart of the matter.

Van Slyke and her CCA Council colleagues refused to even placean outside review on the agenda for discussion and had Sartor and Stankiewicz conduct a self-audit that of course found them blameless. Later reviews found serious systemic financial management issues. Van Slyke says they came out clean every time only showing she didn’t read them.

Van Slyke repeats her lie that poor Mark Stankiewicz was “forced out” by the new Council majority when records show Stankiewicz had lined up a new job in Berkley, MA months before the 2022 election while Van Slyke and her CCA colleagues still assumed they were invincible at the polls.

Bonnita declares I have no right to raise these issues because it hurts Sartor’s and Stankiewicz’s feelings so the Democratic Town Committee should silence me. Maybe the CCA can control what its followers say, but not the rest of us.

For a decade, Sartor, Stankiewicz and the CCA Council majority failed their primary responsibility: properly manage the taxpayers’ money. They claimed – Van Slyke still does – that everything was fine because Charlestown has a low tax rate.

Van Slyke wants to return to the Council. The CCA wants to regain the majority on a campaign crafted from a tissue of lies. They will say or do whatever they can to win.

In 2022, Charlestown voters pierced the CCA’s fog of deception and voted them out. On November 5, I hope they will do it again.

Slyke of hand, again

Van Slyke defends Budget Chair who helped mess up town finances

By Will Collette

Sartor is outta here

On July 8, the Charlestown Town Council appointed two applicants to fill the two vacancies on the Budget Commission; returning Commission member, Gregory Plunkett and Michael Marcylenas, who holds a bachelors degree in Actuarial Mathematics.

This has mightily angered long-time Budget Chair Richard Sartor’s patrons, the Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA PAC). Their leading scribe Bonnita Van Slyke penned another one of her fact-challenged missives praising Sartor to the heavens and condemning the CCA’s archenemies, Charlestown Residents United (CRU), which holds a 4 to 1 majority on the Council.

When Van Slyke was still on the Council (she’s hoping to make a comeback), I wrote a series of “Slyke of Hand” articles taking apart Van Slyke’s numerous false or ridiculous claims, mostly about town finances. Here we go again.

She wrote the broadside reprinted below. The parts in blue are the exact words attributed to her (I don’t know if she actually wrote it). The parts in bold red are my fact-checking and rebuttal. Here we go.

Silencing A Voice Of Experience On The Charlestown Budget Commission

Bonnie Van Slyke 

On July 8, the current Charlestown Town Council majority got rid of a highly qualified and experienced member of the Budget Commission, Dick Sartor. Mr. Sartor had applied to be reappointed, and he was not. This sacking of Mr. Sartor was carried out by a Town Council majority that says institutional knowledge, and qualifications, are of utmost importance in government.

Sartor’s institutional knowledge and experience is that of screwing up. That does’t entitle him to another term. Read on for specifics.

Mr. Sartor was, until July 8, the chair of the Commission. He had served admirably on the Commission for almost 20 years. He has a bachelor’s degree in business administration and a master’s degree in public administration. He has over 40 years of experience in town and city management, and he served as Charlestown’s Town Administrator in the early 2000s. He is skilled in budgetary preparation, planning, and evaluation of fiscal proposals.

The Budget Commission advises the Town Council on budgetary matters. The reason the Council’s action is so completely mind boggling is that our town has seen its Town Administrator of 10 years forced out by this Council majority, has had two Town Treasurers leave, and is now on its third auditing firm—all since November 2022.

Van Slyke (CCA photo)

WHOA! What an incredible pack of lies. Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz was NOT forced out. In fact, he had lined up a new job months BEFORE the 2022 election, but milked months of extra salary from the taxpayers.

Stanky began his new job as Berkley, MA’s town manager on his last day in Charlestown in February 2023. He lasted six weeks.

Van Slyke knows all this but repeats the CCA lie because the truth makes them look like chumps.

Then, over objections from top financial officials in Pawtucket, Stanky got a patronage job as Finance Director from Mayor Donald Grebien even though he admitted he was “no finance guy.” His Charlestown experience certainly showed that.

In Pawtucket, Stankiewicz has helped Mayor Griebien get a close to 50% pay hike and a massive corporate welfare scheme for a planned $137 million soccer stadium heavily subsidized by taxpayers all while Pawtucket’s schools are having trouble paying their bills. Stanky is still a political stooge but on a much larger scale.

And Bonnie misses him.

Incidentally, Stanky took Irina Gorman, one of those failed Town Treasurers mentioned in Bonnie’s letter, with him to fill the same job in Pawtucket. Further on, I deal with the auditors.

Mark Stankiewicz was a terrible town administrator. How terrible? CLICK HERE. Among his worst offenses was covering up the Sartor and CCA “$3 million oopsie” as well as the CCA’s shady land deals.

He kept his job because he did exactly what the CCA told him to do, even if it was unethical or illegal.

Were it not for Dick Sartor’s experience and skill at the helm of the Budget Commission, the town would not have been able to develop the 2024–2025 budget on time this past June. There was no draft budget; there was no audit of the previous year’s finances; and there was little to no institutional knowledge in the Finance Department.

The problems Van Slyke complains about were caused by Sartor and the CCA and the mess they left behind. The CCA, Budget Commission, Charlestown’s long-time auditor and Stankiewicz failed to spot a “$3 million oopsie” – a misallocation of funds that remained unnoticed on the books for almost two years.

Instead of acknowledging the “oopsie,” Sartor and the CCA looked for ways to try to cover it up and explain it away. The scapegoated auditor quit.

The CCA hired another auditing firm, Marcum LLP, just before the new majority took office. Marcum’s audit confirmed the serious problems that had escaped Sartor’s and Stankiewicz’s attention.

That was helpful, but Marcum's over=billing practices were unacceptable. The CRU majority fired them. Shortly after that, the US Securities and Exchange Commission fined Marcum LLP $10,000,000 because, the SEC charged, "Marcum prioritized increased revenue over audit quality.".

In producing this year’s budget, probably his last, Sartor also allegedly committed an unforced error by leading a discussion of raises for the town’s unionized workers.

This violates the terms of their contract – you ONLY discuss terms and conditions within the collective bargaining process. Teamster Local 251 notified the town it will file charges of Unfair Labor Practices (ULPs) with the NLRB. (Agenda Package at page 207). With all of Sartor’s vast knowledge and experience, that’s a rookie mistake.

With Mr. Sartor at the helm of the Budget Commission, Charlestown was the first town in the state to develop a written Fund Balance Policy, which was based on an independent evaluation of the risks the town faces.

Sartor pushed Charlestown to maintain a fund balance (surplus) far in excess of what financial experts consider prudent even for the most generous “rainy day” fund.

Sartor said he wanted to give the town the option to pay cash for major capital projects (roads, bridges, buildings, etc.) instead of issuing low-interest municipal bonds.

Now unless you studied financial management under William Shakespeare (“neither a borrower or lender be” – Polonius in Hamlet), that’s a stupid policy.

Regular people take out mortgages and car loans for household capital costs and don't pay cash. So do normal municipalities. But Sartor’s modus operandi called for a needlessly large surplus that increases taxes.

In good part because of Mr. Sartor’s service, Charlestown is one of the most solvent towns in the state, has been able to achieve a tax rate that is among the lowest in Rhode Island, and has, at the same time, provided excellent government services to taxpayers.

For the 1000^th time, the CCA harps on the tax RATE while ignoring the other key factor in determining what you pay in taxes. That’s the property ASSESSMENT.

Tax rate X property assessment = what you pay in taxes.

Charlestown’s tax rate actually went up under the CCA. It stayed relatively low because it was propped up by rising house prices. Average residents still saw steady increases in taxes, but hey, says the CCA, “how ‘bout that tax rate?”

After voters booted the CCA in 2022, the tax rate fell to $5.74 and is expected to go up by only four cents under the new budget. Now, if the CCA was still in power, they’d take credit for the drop and would ignore the role rocketing assessments played in causing the drop.

Sartor’s only role was to trumpet the CCA’s false narrative that only the tax rate matters. If that’s the case, the CRU’s 2023 tax rate at $5.74 beat the CCA’s peak rate of $10.21 by almost half.

The loss of Mr. Sartor’s knowledge, experience, and institutional knowledge is unfortunate. One can only wonder why the Town Council majority would remove Mr. Sartor’s practiced eye from oversight of the town’s budget.

"Practiced eye?" "Oversight?" how do you spell "oopsie?" Richard Sartor vehemently opposed a proposal by Town Council President Deb Carney to commission an outside forensic audit triggered by the “$3 million oopsie.” Instead, Sartor and Stanky did the review themselves and, of course, found themselves blameless.

One last item that is part of Sartor’s legacy. Under him and the CCA majority, the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council (RIPEC) ranked Charlestown as having the highest administrative costs in the state. Details HERE.

If Sartor was an honorable man, he would have taken his fair share of blame for Charlestown’s financial chaos and $3 million oopsie and resigned. Instead, tapes of Budget Commission meetings show Sartor was much more concerned about protecting his image, minimizing the problems in public perception and assigning blame to others.

Important Charlestown biz at two Town Council meetings this week

 

Fellow Charlestown Residents, We have two important Charlestown Town Council meetings this week, on Monday and Tuesday. The first Town Council meeting of July will held on Monday, July 8, at 7:00 p.m. in the Town Hall Council Chambers.   The full agenda for Monday's 7 p.m. meeting can be viewed here. Topics of interest include: Possible appointments to the Budget Commission to fill two term expirations. Applications have been received from Michael E. Marcelynas, Gregory J. Plunkett, and Richard J. Sartor. (The applications may be read starting on page 201 of the agenda packet.) Discussion of possible properties for affordable housing initiatives (starting on page 233 of the agenda packet). Discussion of a initiating creation of new plan of action for the Town to better communicate information of public interest (starting on page 237 of the agenda packet). On Tuesday, July 9, at 7:00 p.m. in the Town Hall Town Council Chambers, the Town Council will hold a Public Hearing to consider eleven proposals to amend the Town Charter. Some of these are significant, such as putting elected Town Council and Planning Commission members on 4-year staggered terms. Others are to provide clarification or to conform with State laws. The Council may vote to include some or all of the proposed changes on the ballot for public vote in the November election. The list of proposed changed can be read in the agenda packet here. We hope to see you there. With Thanks, Tim Quillen, Chair Charlestown Residents United Paid for by Charlestown Residents United P.O. Box 412 Charlestown, RI 02813 Visit our Website

Charlestown Residents United | PO Box 412 | Charlestown, RI 02813 US