Dear Editor:
There has been some recent controversy about an email from the Rosendale Town Supervisor that I forwarded to my colleagues on the Town Board to keep them in the loop. The forwarded email related to the proposal to share municipal services with the Towns of Marbletown and Rosendale at the site of the former Rosendale Elementary School and contained a cost estimate provided by David O’Halloran from the Rondout Valley School Board.
I erroneously sent this email to Fawn Tantillo, the deputy clerk of the Ulster County Legislature; she is part of the staff of Chair of the Ulster County Legislature. Immediately after sending the email, I contacted her office to indicate that the email was sent in error and asked her to delete it. I was completely shocked that the email was forwarded to others and even more shocked when the email became the subject of a political flyer. Ms. Tantillo’s behavior represents a breach of ethics, and just plain bad manners. To contemplate that this was done without the consent of her boss is unfathomable.
The proposal to relocate some Town services to the Rosendale School is just a proposal that the three town boards are considering. The proposal presents the opportunity for more space and considerable operating and capital expenditure savings, but also presents significant challenges in the greater distance that many of our townspeople might have to travel to enjoy services that are now provided in Accord. The Town Board does not have the information to prepare a full financial analysis and is certainly not in any position to make a decision; indeed, no decision has been made, contrary to the spurious allegations that Ms. Fantillo and her unethical colleagues are spreading. Before the Town Board does make a decision about whether or not to participate in the shared services agreement (which will only be adopted if there are tax savings), you can be assured that a full and transparent discussion with all residents and stakeholders will take place and that all facts will be honestly presented.
Sincerely,
Carl Chipman, Supervisor
Town of Rochester
If you lie down with dogs, you will get up with fleas.
you should have immediately sent an email stating that it was sent in error. Then you would have had proof of your request to delete and possible grounds for legal action.
He aligned himself with the Bernardos years ago and now plays the victim of their politics.
He knew what and who he was getting involved with, now he takes issue with their political style because he is on the receiving end of it.
He’s a crooked pawn in all of it — in other words–he’s Davy’s mole doing Davy’s work.
I’ve never aligned myself with anyone or have I been anyone’s pawn. I really resent those false statements. I examine every issue I tackle by gathering information and then making an informed decision based on that information with the intent of doing what is best for our Town. Not because so and so wants something. I always try to listen to all stakeholders but that doesn’t mean I make everyone happy. When someone disagrees with me, I always argue the issue instead of attacking the person. Many times I have had differences with the Bernardo’s as well as with O’Halloran. That does not mean that I should attack them. When we agree on something like VLTs for the Hudson Valley Resort and the Pinegrove Ranch, it isn’t because of Dave O’Halloran wanted it. I supported VLTs because it would benefit the 2 largest private employers in our Town and would help create jobs. Same thing with Bernardo. Whether you like her or not, she is our legislator and the chair of the legislature. I have to work with her regardless of any personal feelings for the best interest of the Town. O’Halloran is the chair of the GOP. I discuss issues with him and also with the chair of the Dems, Zali Win. That is doing my job as I need to know what the effects of our decisions are on the various stakeholders.. Other have tried to bring me into the middle of their disputes and I have resisted doing that and it has caused me to create some enemies of my own. This is why some of this nasty stuff is happening to me. People assume that if I’m not with them I’m against them or if I’m not attacking their opponent then I’m against them.
Calling me a crooked pawn is really unwarranted. I’ve never taken or stolen a thing. I don’t even charge the town for mileage on my vehicle like other employees and elected officials do. Doing what is right for the taxpayers in our Town is always in the forefront of my mind.
Carl I think you have been great for the town, although I disagree with the anti-fracking and pro-gaming stance, I see you have studied the issues, speak your mind, and do what you think is best. You certainly have lowered the taxes under your control; all towns should be as fortunate, to have a Supervisor as honest and fair as you have been; you certainly can count on my vote.
Great pat on the back for yourself Mr. Supervisor! Glad you like yourself….
Working with O’Halloran, Bernardo and Winn sure sounds like playing politics.
Politicians may not play football, but all of them ‘play’ politics. If the back pat is making honest points then it is justified, but if the pat is used to lie; to hustle the uninformed, then the pat on the back is bullshit. Do you think Carl lies, tell us how, or are you just a monger full of malarkey?
And to the other shadow dweller; what has Carl done that you do not like, talking to other political entities does not count. If you have proof he is up to no good, say it, we’re listening, otherwise your mouth is taking up where your ass leaves off.
You will see–Can’t wait for the Town of Rochester Republican Caucus! Be there one and all.
http://www.dailyfreeman.com/articles/2013/01/02/news/doc50e378e6a52e5285152839.txt
Carl, according to what you have told several reporters (refer to link above) it’s a done deal. You keep pinning yourself in to a corner…
4:47
To quote Carl’s words directly from that article;
“So we’re looking to garner savings, but if it doesn’t garner savings we’re not going to do it in the first place.”
Chipman sees Rochester making less use of the building than Rosendale and Marbletown.
“If we do this, and it’s still an ‘if,’ we’d have to look and see what our needs are and if we’re really going to get cost savings on it,” Carl said.
So 4:47, I guess it comes down to what ‘if’ means, or does that muddle your intent?
4:47, thanks for offering the link to the January 2 Freeman article; maybe you thought nobody is going to check it out? Or you forgot its content in the six months that passed by? Because it definitely contradicts your statement that Carl Chipman said it’s a “done deal”!
Chipman said:
“So we’re looking to garner savings, but if it doesn’t garner savings we’re not going to do it in the first place.”
“We’re not going to do it…” cannot mean “it’s a done deal!
Chipman is consistent, as he recently said on June 19, 2013, in Freeman:
“There’s no dealing that’s going on.” (…)
Chipman expects it will be “at least two months before the Rochester Town Board has the financial information necessary to make a decision.” Done deal? Read the articles again!
Did anybody read this article in Freeman?
http://www.freemanonline.com/articles/2013/06/18/news/doc51bfc0aea29c8249745673.txt
Carl is very clear regarding the cost savings:
“We have to decide first how the numbers are going to work out for us… We have to see if there’s a cost savings for us, especially since we have to move very far to move certain things down here.”
IF… IF… IF… Let’s stop jumping to conclusions…
I noticed that the school board in regards to this lease, rental or whatever have been very quite. My opinion is there is some legal issues with a town entity renting space to another. Carl you’ve just stated that this move is only a proposal. 6 months ago it was nearly a done deal! This is not albany. Small towns shouldn’t be making deals behind closed doors.
I NEVER SAID IT WAS A DONE DEAL! It took several months just for the district to propose some numbers. There never has been a deal made behind closed doors.
NEVER?????
Talks out of both sides of his mouth and the middle too!
I’ve been very clear all along that we are investigating what possibilities could exist at the Rosendale School. It’s as simple as that. It’s all about trying to explore providing services at lower costs to the taxpayer in the most effective and efficient manner. I would be remiss in my responsibilities if I didn’t try to find better ways to do things. I really don’t know what the extent of our involvement at the school will be or if we will even be involved at the school. It was a lot of work just getting some numbers from the school district and ironing out who is responsible for what so that a cost analysis can be done. Then an informed decision could be made. It’s quite clear that you are adding your own machinations to this discussion due to being biased against entertaining any use of the building and therefore the facts placed before you do not matter.
-“If the district goes to sell it they aren’t going to get fair market value for it at all,” Rochester town Supervisor Carl Chipman said. “So this way we’re taking something that’s been bought and paid for by the taxpayers and still using it for the benefit of the same taxpayers.”
-“What would probably play out is to take what’s in our community center, which is code enforcement, planning and zoning, and move that to Rosendale, as well as move the courthouse. That would allow me to close to buildings that I have right now,” Chipman said. “The busiest departments that have the most traffic from people are the town Clerk’s Office, the Assessor’s office, and my office,” he said. “That wouldn’t move.”
Carl!
I respectfully disagree with you. These were your quotes on January 2, 2013. Today, to say that this is just a proposal when back in January you said knowing what town agencies would be moving to Rosendale must have took some planning back in 2012. A question- Has anybody from the school or town boards asked for a legal opinion through the State Comptroller’s office how this proposed contractual lease agreement would be legal?
This is what agencies could easily be moved. / But what will the costs be? Are two distinct non-conflicting statements.
All you have to do is read the whole article and not cherry pick quotes. What was mentioned in that article was a possible scenario and not a done deal which was clearly stated further in the article. It’s amazing how one read what one wants to read into something but not read the entirety of what is there. Also municipal school re-usage has been done all over the state and the Office of the State Comptroller has lauded these projects. There is a major push at the state level for sharing and consolidation of services. This effort was largely begun during Governor Spitzer’s time in office. Quite simply what is being proposed in Rosendale is a sharing of space.
So if i understand you correctly, the office of the state Comptroller is of no issue regarding the school dist leasing this facility to a town entity. What was the result by the Dyson Foundation, $10,000 grant?
Was there ever a $10,000 grant????
It’s the Carl Chipman show! Carl spend more time on town business and forget this internet bullsh*t
To 9:27,
It seems Carl is making himself vulnerable by spending time talking about and clarifying town business here on the internet because twits like you got the nerve to chastise, criticize, and tell him what to do, why do you feel so insignificant that you have to make others feel that way too?
Carl, thanks for taking the time, I’m sure there were many readers who gathered insight over the difficulty and potential possibilities that has to be weight out before a decision is reached. It would be very informative to see more of our local elected develop the thick skin needed to talk to their town and each other, openly on the web. Hopefully, static from the fearful would eventually fall by the wayside.
Transparency is a key to the 21st Century.