Ready or not, here’s a few of my observations regarding the Attleboro municipal election of November 8th, 2011.  

1) Political brochures and similar election paraphernalia should only be allowed to be distributed if the candidate or campaign worker actually hands it to you. Let’s ban leaving it hanging on your front door handle, crimped in your screen door, or tossed inside your front porch or breezeway. Most of it ends up going the same route as those free newspapers that are strewn out car windows onto your front lawn, driveway or sidewalk. We have enough of a litter problem already. Perhaps Mary Ann Draine from the board of elections could comment further.  

2) Political signs on private and public property are supposedly not to be closer than 7 feet from the street. I saw plenty of signs in violation of this ordinance. We should also limit the size of them. Nothing looks worse than a gigantic, obtrusive political sign. It certainly cheapens the neighborhood. I have no doubt that Doug Semple could offer his input, as the city’s building inspector.  

3) Political signs at polling places also need to be examined. I vote at the LaSalette Shrine and encountered a literal maze of signs as I was trying to negotiate my way into the driveway of the parking lot, so much so that I could barely find my way in. Once in the lot,

I experienced an even bigger explosion of political signs, campaign workers and candidates (and their vehicles) quite unlike anything that I’ve ever seen the like of. As mentioned in a recent letter (Abundance of signs posed risks in city, November 9th Sun) add the earlier sunset time and the fact that the lot isn’t too well lit to begin with and it created a public safety issue for drivers, especially after dark. Even worse, people barely gave you enough room to drive between them in your attempts to find a parking spot. Voting should be a civic-minded and pleasant experience, but almost became an angry one for me after that obstacle course.  

4) Negative campaigning is a fact of life, but it took an even nastier turn than usual with targeted mailings this year attacking just about every group on the ballot. I get enough trash in my mail already, so if candidates want to continue distributions of this type, please address all further correspondence to “Recycling Bin” c/o my address.

I know that we probably can’t control the third-party or anonymous stuff but let’s think about what a candidate can send out with their name attached to it. We can’t infringe on their right to free speech but can consider the content of what they say in determining if they’re worth wasting a vote on. If a person stops just short of liable and slander in a campaign flyer, you can get a pretty good idea of how they’ll serve as an elected official. With all of these things contributing to the circus-like atmosphere of this year’s municipal election, the actual voting was almost overshadowed.

Maybe our city council needs to take a look at these and consider new or fine-tuned ordinances, or maybe just some better enforcement of election laws. It makes it a fairer playing ground for everyone.  

 Sincerely, Mark C. Ambrose

Attleboro, MA 02703

I opened my Attleboro city utility bill recently and after picking my eyeballs up off the table and putting them back in my head, made a side by side comparison to the one that I received last quarter.

I realized that it was almost double what I had previously paid for water and sewer costs. The likely culprit: watering my lawn for one hour a day.   

When I bought my house I agreed to do my best to keep the property looking nice. That would include watering the lawn, one would think, but with bills like this it no longer makes sense. It’s easy to see why many lawns in the city aren’t kept up or watered. It just costs too much money. I might just spray-paint it green, next year.   

I often hear the Mayor say that he’s a ratepayer, too. Maybe this water and sewer bill seems affordable on his salary, but it’s not on mine. I’d be interested to know why these rates continue to go up and exactly what the administration is doing to protect homeowners from this continued burden.     

Mark C. Ambrose

Attleboro, MA 02703

I fail to see the point in the Sun Chronicle continuing to allow people to write letters endorsing their favorite candidate(s) in any upcoming election.

The process is really pointless when you think about it. I say great things about my candidate, how he/she is best at everything (kissing babies, hugging animals, able to leap small buildings in a single bound) except for actually governing, and you’re so convinced by my personal opinion of the person that you go and support them on election day.   

In reality, they may in fact be a bad person with a shadowed past who steals candy from small children, but we’ll never know that for sure unless we actually meet this person and get to know them. There is of course no time for this process as these letters usually go onto the Opinion Page one week or less before the election, giving most of us no time to actually confirm the illusions of grandeur portrayed in these carefully written free advertisements.   

There are plenty of well-written letters with timely and intelligent content submitted to the paper every day that belong on the Opinion Page. Instead, they’re bumped back a few days by these hollow attempts at swaying the electorate to their friend or family member on the ballot.  

Sincerely,  

Mark C. Ambrose

Attleboro

At a time when state budgets have been cut to the bone and municipalities throughout the state are facing Draconian cuts in education, services and social programs, there are still ways to alleviate some of the pain. 

One current program, the Massachusetts Municipal Solar Tariff enables towns and cities across the state to purchase discounted solar energy with no up-front costs.  Unfortunately, this initiative has been remarkably successful and only a small fraction of the approximately 200 megawatts of solar power allocated remain available. 

This program has single-handedly enabled dozens of cities and towns to purchase solar power at a savings of 10-15% (and more, in some instances).  The beauty of this program is that it does not even require that cities erect solar panels on roofs of existing structures, or even on land in their own town.  As long as the solar power is generated within the service area of their local utility, they can qualify.  Consequently, for townships, where roof structures may be inadequate and/or installation of solar panels not practical or feasible…this does not preclude taking advantage of this cost-saving and job-creating effort. 

We would urge those municipalities that have not taken advantage of this program to do so immediately.  We would urge people throughout the state to contact their local mayors, selectmen, and legislators and encourage them to request this discounted solar power.  In addition, based on the success to date and the tremendous need, we feel the state should extend the Massachusetts Solar Municipal Tariff by an additional 200 megawatts to enable many more towns and cities to take advantage of it. 

This one initiative helps each town and city save thousands of dollars a year without spending a cent; prevents layoffs at the local level, creates hundreds of local jobs throughout the state, is beneficial to the environment by reducing carbon emissions, and helps reduce this country’s dependence on foreign oil.  We hope that all residents of Massachusetts will join us in calling for the continuation of this most worthwhile state action. 

Joseph P. GraceCEO
Seaboard Solar

www.seaboardsolar.com

I fail to see what the big deal is if the usually unchallenged positions of City Clerk, Treasurer and Tax Collector become appointed positions as objected to in a recent “news” story by a candidate in the fall election (Elect officials, candidate for city council argues, 8/17 Sun).

   The average person in Attleboro can’t even name three people on the city council or school committee now, so why would you want to continue wasting the time and money of having to keep putting these non-political positions on the ballot every two years?

   If Jonathan Weydt is looking to make a name for himself as an up-and-coming politician, he needs to go after something a little more meatier than this. How about talking about the important issues in his district? Most Attleboro voters just don’t care one way or the other (and also have never used the word “usurping” in their lives).

Mark C. Ambrose

Attleboro, MA 02703

At the first candidate’s forum that was held at the South Attleboro American Legion on June 29^th, there were many issues where Mayor Dumas and I had differing points of view. However, there was one thing that we both agreed on and even sealed with a handshake: we both agreed to run a clean campaign.

To me that means that neither I nor anyone on my campaign committee will make disparaging or degrading remarks or spread rumors about any candidate running for office. I assume that the Mayor’s handshake means he agrees to the same standards.

I have not nor will I break that agreement and I heartily urge every other candidate in this election race to do the same. 

Ronald M. Churchill

Candidate for Mayor

 I guess that I can understand the Mayor getting so worked up over the “slush fund” story (Attleboro elections warming up, 7/27/11 Sun), which claims that the City of Attleboro has been overcharging the financially independent water and wastewater departments for city services (which is ultimately felt by city water and sewer taxpayers in the end).

   Not only are his credibility and reputation at stake here but also the fact that he’s in line for that big pay raise in 2012, if re-elected by the voters. You may recall that this was the pay raise that his office lobbied for and that was approved by all members of the city council at that time except for Councilors Conti, Felos, and Thibodeau.

   I can’t blame the guy for wanting a $16,000 raise, especially since it could be pretty tough for him to find a job outside of City Hall that’ll pay him $101,474.76 annually. It would also mean that his-hand chosen administrative assistant and staff would also be out on the street. Such are the perils of the political life, I guess.

   “Creative accounting” information like this can be good for the taxpayers to be aware of. What goes on behind the scenes in city government can and does affect our bottom line as ratepayers. And what exactly are enterprise accounts and what’s the proper legal use of them? All homeowners and business owners pay taxes and have a right to know this, where the money is going and how it’s being spent. We’ll see how this “slush fund” story plays out between now and Election Day.

Mark C. Ambrose

Attleboro, MA 02703

Words (that can be printed on this Opinion Page) can’t even begin to express my frustration and disappointment upon reading of the recent vandalism at St. Stephen’s Cemetery (“Vandals hit city cemetery”, 7/29/11 Sun). It’s obvious that the caliber of people capable of this act aren’t the same who would read an editorial page, but I still had to vent. My hope is that these would-be felons are caught (hopefully) by bragging about it to the wrong person and then prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

When the sanctity of a grave site isn’t respected anymore, there’s a definite problem with current-day society.

Should we now have to install security cameras to protect cemeteries? I can’t imagine that this is a question many have ever had to think about before this incident.

Sincerely,

Mark C. Ambrose

Attleboro, MA 02703

To the Editor:

On behalf of the Greater Attleboro/Taunton Coalition to End Homelessness (GATCH), and United Way of Greater Attleboro/Taunton (UWGAT), I would like to thank all of the sponsors and volunteers that helped to make the first Attleboro/Taunton Project Homeless Connect event a success.  Bristol County Savings Bank was this year’s major event sponsor, and Princess House Inc. also helped to support the event.

The event was held on April 13, 2011 at the La Salette Shrine Welcome Center, our venue sponsor.   Project Homeless Connect is a national initiative which provides access to services for individuals and families who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless.

Approximately 80 individuals came to the event and were able to receive access to services in the community.  Transportation shuttles were provided by Community-Car-A-Vans, Inc., and bus passes were donated to us by GATRA.  Breakfast was provided to each guest by the Attleboro Area Council of Churches.  Dunkin Donuts on South Main Street provided donuts and coffee for our guests and volunteers.  Lunch was provided by Olive Garden, and beverages were given to us by PepsiCo.

Thirty nine federal, state, city, and non-profit agencies attended the Greater Attleboro/Taunton event to provide their services.  Copier Resources, Inc. supplied photocopiers for the day.  The Massachusetts Department of Transportation assisted 19 individuals to obtain Massachusetts identifications.  People need to identify themselves in order to access many of the benefits that are available to help them remain in stabilized housing, access shelter, or to receive food at some local food pantries.  Through the generosity of the Attleboro and Taunton Rotary Clubs, the Greater Attleboro District and Taunton District St. Vincent dePaul Societies, along with an anonymous donation, we were able to pay for the identifications. 

This event would not have been possible without the support that we received from both the Attleboro and Taunton communities. Sensata Technologies, Inc. employees took the lead on designing the space and setting it up.  Wal-Mart employees were available to work the event, as well as, break the room down at the end of the day.  Wal-Mart also provided backpacks for each of the guests filled with essential items.  There were so many other volunteers that came out on that day to make this event a success. I would not want to chance leaving anyone out, so I will not list them individually, they know who they are, Thank You!!

Project Homeless Connect was a true testament of LIVING UNITED to make a positive impact in the lives of the individuals and families in our community.  The non profit/corporate partnership that was evident during the planning and on the day of the event enhanced our communities. 

Sincerely,

Melissa A. Vanhorn

Community Impact Coordinator UWGAT

On behalf of GATCH

 Countdown on the Council:  

I’m wondering what people think.  

Do you think it is ok to have booze on city property?  Or should it always be limited to private gatherings on private property?  

The request has come before the council from the Friends of Capron Park to waive the ordinance that limits booze being on city property for a fundraiser that would benefit the zoo.  What this, in effect, could do is to open the doors to other groups to request similar gatherings on city property.  What do you think?  Is this a good idea?

I’m not decided on which way I would vote at this time.  On one hand I can see how it’s a good thing to have fundraisers that benefit a group or cause that benefits the city.  On the other hand, I do think that this would set a precedent and it would be difficult to say “no” to another organization.

Another question I have is:  Do we have to include alcohol in a gathering in order to make money and sell tickets?  What do you think? Is alcohol necessary to every single event in order to make that event a success?  If it is, are we sending the message we want to send to our children if we behave like it is?

Your thoughts are important to me.  Please let me know what you think.

 Sincerely,

Cherie Felos

Attleboro City Council, Ward One