Thursday, October 30, 2008 12:03 PM EDT
Details on Ritacco land deal revealed
 Council unseals minutes concerning purchase of parcel abutting the Winnapaug water tank. |
WESTERLY — Declaring they have nothing to hide, Town Council members Monday night unsealed the minutes of executive session meetings concerning the purchase of one lead-contaminated parcel abutting the Winnapaug water tank.
The decision came roughly a week after questions first arose about the town’s decision to purchase the 154 Winnapaug Road property owned by Robert Ritacco, chairman of the Westerly Democratic Town Committee and a member of a number of local boards, and to pay him damages.
Unsealed March 24 meeting minutes reveal that councilors voted unanimously to offer between $250,000 and $275,000 to Ritacco for his 0.79-acre parcel and to leave the terms up to the attorneys.
This vote took place roughly six months prior to the council’s unanimous Sept. 22 vote to transfer $275,000 from the water department fund balance to a land acquisition account. It was later learned the town paid about $195,000 for the property and $80,000 in damages. The sales price was based on a May appraisal that put the property’s market value at $195,000.
Ritacco’s lot was one of nine properties tainted with lead paint flakes from the old Winnapaug water tank and Ritacco was one of four property owners to file lawsuits against the town, which was not covered because of a lead exemption in its insurance policy. The property purchased by the town is vacant and wooded, while the other properties are residential.
On Monday, Town Solicitor Steven Hartford said of the advertised Sept. 22 ordinance, “that ordinance did not authorize the purchase of property.”
He described it as “merely a formality” and an ordinance pursuant to the town charter allowing the transfer of funds. The purchase itself had already been authorized by councilors in the March executive session, he said.
Over the next six months, attorney John Turano, special counsel for the town, negotiated and finalized a settlement agreement, both Hartford and Turano said. The settlement agreement was signed on July 13 by both parties and the town manager, Turano said.
Councilors voted unanimously Monday to unseal executive session meeting minutes for three specific dates, including that March meeting. Councilor Samuel Azzinaro added the council should release any relevant documents back to 2003.
“Whatever’s out there from day one until today should be made public,” he said, joining other councilors in adding they have nothing to hide.
However, both Hartford and Town Clerk Donna Giordano, told The Sun they thought the matter was only discussed in executive session on those three dates. Giordano said a records search had been run on the name Ritacco. She said her staff planned to conduct more searches and to review the meeting tape recordings and release unsealed portions.
Former councilor Patricia Douglas had earlier in the meeting called on councilors: “Don’t release some if the information. Release all of it.”
This includes meetings dating back to 2005 and the tape recordings of the meetings, she said.
Douglas also dismissed comments by councilors at last week’s meeting calling on the solicitor to “re-examine” the ordinance as lip service.
“The ordinance cannot be changed. The ordinance cannot be reviewed. It is final,” she said, adding it could only be undone in court.
“Was the ordinance legal? I don’t think so,” she added. She said weekend real estate listings in a local newspaper did not specify the address for the property sale, instead referring to the property as Chin Hill Extension Lot No. 32.
“The issue is the secrecy that has shrouded this purchase,” Douglas told councilors.
And residents know why, she added.
“All the people in this town understand why and that’s sad,” she said.
The town wrote two checks dated four days apart, one for $196,826 to attorney Charles Soloveitzik for the purchase plus closing costs and one for $80,000 to attorney Vincent Naccarato for the agreed-upon damages.
“So even the checks don’t follow through with the ordinance,” Douglas said, pointing to the ordinance brought to the public on Sept. 22.
Councilor Christopher Duhamel said he would be happy to meet with Douglas.
“Because there’s absolutely nothing to hide,” he said, a point he restated several more times.
“The suit’s settled. This council made an agreement and I’m sticking to it,” Duhamel added.
He said there are no winners when it comes to the tank. While he said he did not think it was a “great” settlement, it was the best the town could do.
As for the Sept. 22 ordinance, Duhamel said, “Is that the right way to go about this? I don’t know that it is... I think there should have been a public hearing. There should have been more public input.”
He added, “There’s nothing the town gains by negotiating in closed session. I’m willing to bring a white hot spotlight on all of this...”
Hartford said “insinuations” and “misstatements” had been made.
He, too, said the town had nothing to hide: “It’s an open book. The town is an open book.”
He said he provided pertinent documents quickly to Douglas and he is proud of his record of providing requested public documents.
Hartford pointed to the meeting minutes as “very telling.”
“They show a Town Council trying to grapple with a very difficult situation,” he said.
He reiterated he was not directly involved in advising the council on the purchase. But he did draft the Sept. 22 ordinance.
“And yes, in retrospect... I think personally it would have been better for the ordinance to have more details...,” Hartford said. “Yes, that ordinance could have been more transparent and, yes, it should have been.”
But, he added, the purchase was made in the best interest of the town.
Hartford made no reference to the executive session vote when The Sun initially contacted him for comment earlier this month. Nor did councilors, including Duhamel, who were interviewed at that time. At that time, Hartford deferred comment to attorney Turano.
On Monday, Duhamel contended that he helped discover the tank site lead contamination and considerable correspondence has since been on the record.
“I’ve been living this since 2003... I’ve been working day and night on these issues,” Duhamel said, adding he has worked with the town engineer, utilities superintendent and town manager on the matter.
He said the town is working to reach agreements with the residential property owners and, added, “we are making good progress.”
Town officials have pointed to a recommendation by Thomas Nicholson, president of technical consultant C & E Engineering of Woonsocket, that it would cost less to purchase the property and remediate it.
Nicholson told The Sun his firm did not issue a report to the town. But he said he was asked for an opinion and provided an answer.
Nicholson said he initially discussed the purchase, “in a broad sense,” around a year ago.
“Let me make it clear,” Nicholson said. “I didn’t recommend buying it.”
He said Westerly officials asked if it would be more cost effective to buy the property and he responded yes, based on Ritacco’s expressed stance.
“He wanted it the way it was before we started,” Nicholson said of Ritacco. “Mr. Ritacco was very vocal about... getting the property back, and I believe he used the words, ‘in pristine condition.”
Nicholson said Ritacco had marketed the property as a salable lot and had received approval for a septic plan.
Contractors will now be able to clear cut the wooded, sloped lot, and fill areas to bring in large equipment. He said this also opens access to several residential properties to the south that must ultimately be remediated.
Nicholson said the state Department of Environmental Management approved a Site Investigation Report, or documentation of the scope of the contamination, which took some 18 months and received four rounds of comments from neighbors. They are now working to prepare nine separate remedial work plans, one for each property. Property owners must sign off on those plans. \
When it comes to how much the town is expected to save on remediation costs by purchasing the property, differing figures have been provided.
Duhamel said the consultant estimated it would cost around $235,000 to remediate the property if the town did not own the lot. With the town as an owner, he put the figure at $130,000.
In the March executive session minutes, the cost to remediate the property was pegged at $100,000 if the town owned the property and $250,000 if it did not, Turano told councilors. He also said that damages figure rises to $260,000 after factoring in 12 percent annual interest.
Nicholson said it is “very, very difficult” to quantify the expected cost to remediate the Ritacco property.
But, he said, based on similar projects, he put the cost at $150,000 to $200,000. The residential properties will vary based on size, geography and contamination. He said they projected two to three years ago it would cost around a half million dollars to clean up all of the off-site properties.
He said that while costs have escalated slightly, “it looks like a pretty good range.”
The town notified nine properties of contamination in 2003. The lead contamination is limited to the top layer of decayed soil in forested areas. No lead he said was found in cultivated, or lawn, areas. DEM regulations require the clean up to take place 6 to 10 inches below grade, Nicholson said.
The option to purchase these residential properties had been discussed in the “most broad sense,” he said. However, any future purchase of property would be “a last-ditch effort,” Nicholson said.
Nicholson said work on the Ritacco property has now been eyed for next spring.
“That will be the first one likely remediated,” he said, adding it will be more cost effective to the town if several properties are packaged for cleanup.
The decision came roughly a week after questions first arose about the town’s decision to purchase the 154 Winnapaug Road property owned by Robert Ritacco, chairman of the Westerly Democratic Town Committee and a member of a number of local boards, and to pay him damages.
Unsealed March 24 meeting minutes reveal that councilors voted unanimously to offer between $250,000 and $275,000 to Ritacco for his 0.79-acre parcel and to leave the terms up to the attorneys.
This vote took place roughly six months prior to the council’s unanimous Sept. 22 vote to transfer $275,000 from the water department fund balance to a land acquisition account. It was later learned the town paid about $195,000 for the property and $80,000 in damages. The sales price was based on a May appraisal that put the property’s market value at $195,000.
Ritacco’s lot was one of nine properties tainted with lead paint flakes from the old Winnapaug water tank and Ritacco was one of four property owners to file lawsuits against the town, which was not covered because of a lead exemption in its insurance policy. The property purchased by the town is vacant and wooded, while the other properties are residential.
On Monday, Town Solicitor Steven Hartford said of the advertised Sept. 22 ordinance, “that ordinance did not authorize the purchase of property.”
He described it as “merely a formality” and an ordinance pursuant to the town charter allowing the transfer of funds. The purchase itself had already been authorized by councilors in the March executive session, he said.
Over the next six months, attorney John Turano, special counsel for the town, negotiated and finalized a settlement agreement, both Hartford and Turano said. The settlement agreement was signed on July 13 by both parties and the town manager, Turano said.
Councilors voted unanimously Monday to unseal executive session meeting minutes for three specific dates, including that March meeting. Councilor Samuel Azzinaro added the council should release any relevant documents back to 2003.
“Whatever’s out there from day one until today should be made public,” he said, joining other councilors in adding they have nothing to hide.
However, both Hartford and Town Clerk Donna Giordano, told The Sun they thought the matter was only discussed in executive session on those three dates. Giordano said a records search had been run on the name Ritacco. She said her staff planned to conduct more searches and to review the meeting tape recordings and release unsealed portions.
Former councilor Patricia Douglas had earlier in the meeting called on councilors: “Don’t release some if the information. Release all of it.”
This includes meetings dating back to 2005 and the tape recordings of the meetings, she said.
Douglas also dismissed comments by councilors at last week’s meeting calling on the solicitor to “re-examine” the ordinance as lip service.
“The ordinance cannot be changed. The ordinance cannot be reviewed. It is final,” she said, adding it could only be undone in court.
“Was the ordinance legal? I don’t think so,” she added. She said weekend real estate listings in a local newspaper did not specify the address for the property sale, instead referring to the property as Chin Hill Extension Lot No. 32.
“The issue is the secrecy that has shrouded this purchase,” Douglas told councilors.
And residents know why, she added.
“All the people in this town understand why and that’s sad,” she said.
The town wrote two checks dated four days apart, one for $196,826 to attorney Charles Soloveitzik for the purchase plus closing costs and one for $80,000 to attorney Vincent Naccarato for the agreed-upon damages.
“So even the checks don’t follow through with the ordinance,” Douglas said, pointing to the ordinance brought to the public on Sept. 22.
Councilor Christopher Duhamel said he would be happy to meet with Douglas.
“Because there’s absolutely nothing to hide,” he said, a point he restated several more times.
“The suit’s settled. This council made an agreement and I’m sticking to it,” Duhamel added.
He said there are no winners when it comes to the tank. While he said he did not think it was a “great” settlement, it was the best the town could do.
As for the Sept. 22 ordinance, Duhamel said, “Is that the right way to go about this? I don’t know that it is... I think there should have been a public hearing. There should have been more public input.”
He added, “There’s nothing the town gains by negotiating in closed session. I’m willing to bring a white hot spotlight on all of this...”
Hartford said “insinuations” and “misstatements” had been made.
He, too, said the town had nothing to hide: “It’s an open book. The town is an open book.”
He said he provided pertinent documents quickly to Douglas and he is proud of his record of providing requested public documents.
Hartford pointed to the meeting minutes as “very telling.”
“They show a Town Council trying to grapple with a very difficult situation,” he said.
He reiterated he was not directly involved in advising the council on the purchase. But he did draft the Sept. 22 ordinance.
“And yes, in retrospect... I think personally it would have been better for the ordinance to have more details...,” Hartford said. “Yes, that ordinance could have been more transparent and, yes, it should have been.”
But, he added, the purchase was made in the best interest of the town.
Hartford made no reference to the executive session vote when The Sun initially contacted him for comment earlier this month. Nor did councilors, including Duhamel, who were interviewed at that time. At that time, Hartford deferred comment to attorney Turano.
On Monday, Duhamel contended that he helped discover the tank site lead contamination and considerable correspondence has since been on the record.
“I’ve been living this since 2003... I’ve been working day and night on these issues,” Duhamel said, adding he has worked with the town engineer, utilities superintendent and town manager on the matter.
He said the town is working to reach agreements with the residential property owners and, added, “we are making good progress.”
Town officials have pointed to a recommendation by Thomas Nicholson, president of technical consultant C & E Engineering of Woonsocket, that it would cost less to purchase the property and remediate it.
Nicholson told The Sun his firm did not issue a report to the town. But he said he was asked for an opinion and provided an answer.
Nicholson said he initially discussed the purchase, “in a broad sense,” around a year ago.
“Let me make it clear,” Nicholson said. “I didn’t recommend buying it.”
He said Westerly officials asked if it would be more cost effective to buy the property and he responded yes, based on Ritacco’s expressed stance.
“He wanted it the way it was before we started,” Nicholson said of Ritacco. “Mr. Ritacco was very vocal about... getting the property back, and I believe he used the words, ‘in pristine condition.”
Nicholson said Ritacco had marketed the property as a salable lot and had received approval for a septic plan.
Contractors will now be able to clear cut the wooded, sloped lot, and fill areas to bring in large equipment. He said this also opens access to several residential properties to the south that must ultimately be remediated.
Nicholson said the state Department of Environmental Management approved a Site Investigation Report, or documentation of the scope of the contamination, which took some 18 months and received four rounds of comments from neighbors. They are now working to prepare nine separate remedial work plans, one for each property. Property owners must sign off on those plans. \
When it comes to how much the town is expected to save on remediation costs by purchasing the property, differing figures have been provided.
Duhamel said the consultant estimated it would cost around $235,000 to remediate the property if the town did not own the lot. With the town as an owner, he put the figure at $130,000.
In the March executive session minutes, the cost to remediate the property was pegged at $100,000 if the town owned the property and $250,000 if it did not, Turano told councilors. He also said that damages figure rises to $260,000 after factoring in 12 percent annual interest.
Nicholson said it is “very, very difficult” to quantify the expected cost to remediate the Ritacco property.
But, he said, based on similar projects, he put the cost at $150,000 to $200,000. The residential properties will vary based on size, geography and contamination. He said they projected two to three years ago it would cost around a half million dollars to clean up all of the off-site properties.
He said that while costs have escalated slightly, “it looks like a pretty good range.”
The town notified nine properties of contamination in 2003. The lead contamination is limited to the top layer of decayed soil in forested areas. No lead he said was found in cultivated, or lawn, areas. DEM regulations require the clean up to take place 6 to 10 inches below grade, Nicholson said.
The option to purchase these residential properties had been discussed in the “most broad sense,” he said. However, any future purchase of property would be “a last-ditch effort,” Nicholson said.
Nicholson said work on the Ritacco property has now been eyed for next spring.
“That will be the first one likely remediated,” he said, adding it will be more cost effective to the town if several properties are packaged for cleanup.
Comments not posted! wrote on Nov 4, 2008 5:42 PM:
" It seems that any comments that I have posted which suggest that Patricia Douglas is right, and which suggest that Councilor Cooke is wrong on the issue being discussed in this article have not been posted, even though I followed all of your rules. I guess The Sun is in favor of transparency and openness, EXCEPT IN THEIR OWN HOUSE. Shame on you. If you can't be fair and post the comments that are void of personal attacks, foul language, etc., then you shouldn't have this blog at all. "
Not a Panacea wrote on Nov 4, 2008 9:02 AM:
" Please don't forget the past councils. Patricia Douglas was THE MOST RUDE person I have ever seen on a council when talking to taxpayers who would "dare" to challenge her. She had no HUMILITY or TACT and would just chew-em-up-and-spit-em-out. I think she took great pleasure in her warped sense of power. Be careful of what you wish for. "
ITS MONDAY NIGHT wrote on Nov 3, 2008 8:32 PM:
" AT THE COUNCIL MEETING. I CAN'T BELIEVE COUNCILOR COOKE! HE IS RUDE, OBNOXIOUS AND HAS A RAGING TEMPER. IF HE CAN'T TAKE IT, HE SHOULD GET OUT! MRS. DOUGLAS IS RIGHT. THE COUNCIL JUST DOESN'T GET IT. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS ARE PERFECTLY LEGAL SO LONG AS THE COUNCIL COMES OUT TO THE PUBLIC AND REPORTS ON WHAT THEY DID DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. QUITE FRANKLY, I BELIEVE THIS COUNCIL IS IN VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW, AND FURTHER, I BELIEVE TOWN SOLICITOR HARTFORD IS AWARE OF THAT FACT, BUT STILL TRIES TO COVER THEIR TRACKS. VOTE NO TO DUHAMEL, COOKE AND AVEDESIAN. VOTE FOR ALL NEW PEOPLE ON THE COUNCIL. MAYBE WE SHOULD WRITE-IN PATRICIA DOUGLAS. "
Avondale Jane wrote on Nov 3, 2008 2:46 PM:
" vote duhamal out also---wait till tuesday is over and see how this town votes out ritacco's team
get ready "
get ready "
VOTE OUT wrote on Nov 3, 2008 2:04 PM:
" THE THREE INCUMBENTS, WHO MUST GO! ITS TIME FOR NEW FRESH FACES. VOTE FOR ALL NEW PEOPLE, EVEN IF YOU HAVE TO WRITE-IN A NAME. DON'T GIVE THOSE THREE COUNCILORS TWO MORE YEARS! IF YOU DO, YOU ARE IN FOR MORE OF THE SAME! "
Greg wrote on Nov 3, 2008 1:36 PM:
" Harry,
I agree but where were Cooke & Duhamel during this whole thing? Chris Duhamel by his own admission orchestrated the whole Ritacco land deal. He loves dealing behind the scenes and he should go on Nov. 4th!
Greg "
I agree but where were Cooke & Duhamel during this whole thing? Chris Duhamel by his own admission orchestrated the whole Ritacco land deal. He loves dealing behind the scenes and he should go on Nov. 4th!
Greg "
Harry wrote on Nov 2, 2008 10:16 PM:
" we need some answers--vote ritacco's team out on tuesday "
Nyb Mijerg wrote on Oct 31, 2008 2:22 PM:
" Too many questions about Ritacco remain. This deal just seems so shady and the fact that our town council and solicitor were involved just begs the question, "why aren't we getting straight answers and why isn't the Sun all over this...could it be online advertsing dollars????" "
Notting Hill wrote on Oct 30, 2008 2:53 PM:
" Everything Ritacco does he is not held accountable for. Maybe the information from his computer was contaminated while on his land, thats why it all got erased. What a joke. How about we pay the guy $275,000 to leave Westerly. He is head of the Democatic committee ? It makes me want to vote all Republican and I am an independent!! "
Compensation For All? wrote on Oct 30, 2008 11:01 AM:
" I guess my question to the other property owners would be, Are you being paid for damages to your property as well or was this just a one person deal? If the money Ritacco recieved was from the a Budget Dept,where is the money going to come from to compensate the other eight land owners or is their property Not As Contaminated as Ritaccos?How do you know to what degree the contamination goes and does it present a health risk later down the road? "
Build A School, Close A School wrote on Oct 30, 2008 9:38 AM:
" How much did they spend building an unneeded Middle School? My daughter started high school this year and can't believe the number of empty classrooms at Ward and Babcock. If they hadn't wasted our money building brand new, they could have done the work they want to do now and they could have left the elementary schools alone. This what we get when we fall for their lies and buil a school "for the kids". Let's be honest..it's really all about the adults! "
Westerly Tax Payer wrote on Oct 30, 2008 9:12 AM:
" You want $30 Million to repair a school
building in disrepair.
You close a school a few years ago,
then build another one.
Now you are closing yet another school
and want another $30 Million.
You people are OUT OF YOUR MINDS!
WE'RE NOT A BUNCH OF IDIOTS YOU KNOW. "
building in disrepair.
You close a school a few years ago,
then build another one.
Now you are closing yet another school
and want another $30 Million.
You people are OUT OF YOUR MINDS!
WE'RE NOT A BUNCH OF IDIOTS YOU KNOW. "
Registered Voter wrote on Oct 30, 2008 8:45 AM:
" We need new people on the Town Council
We need more people to run for T.C.
Get out and vote on Nov. 4th!
WE NEED YOUR VOTE!
VOTE NO TO THE SCHOOL BOND!
VOTE FOR ALL NEW T.C. MEMBERS!!!!!!!! "
We need more people to run for T.C.
Get out and vote on Nov. 4th!
WE NEED YOUR VOTE!
VOTE NO TO THE SCHOOL BOND!
VOTE FOR ALL NEW T.C. MEMBERS!!!!!!!! "
Bertmeister wrote on Oct 30, 2008 4:52 AM:
" It's funny how the minutes became unsealed just prior to election time. I think it's time to run all the councilors out of town! "
DISGUSTED wrote on Oct 29, 2008 10:30 PM:
" Now everything has a bright white hot light on it...why not from the beginning?? What other deals have been made that we are not privy to?? Why would anyone believe anything these people spew out. Those other residents on Winnapaug Road should be up in arms! I, for one, don't trust any of them. They are all just a bit too cozy with each other for Westerly's good. "
Outta Towner wrote on Oct 29, 2008 10:18 PM:
" Sounds to me like these backroom deals initiated the drop in the whole real estate market. Get real folks, the more you talk the more the other eight folks get. It sounds like a fair and equitable deal to me. "
Owner of Contaminated Property wrote on Oct 29, 2008 10:00 PM:
" I own one of the 9 contaminated properties and this has been a very difficult 5+ years. I know for sure that Duhamel and Ritacco had talked almost weekly for a couple of years regarding the purchase of the Ritacco property. Everyone in town better hope that we never have a serious public health issue with our water supply because Duhamel will not be honest. Duhamel will put the health of your families in serious jeopardy before admitting to his mistakes. "
NORTH END TAXPAYER wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:40 PM:
" WHY BLAME RITACCO? IM JEALOUS, I WISH I HAD A PIECE OF PROPERTY BY THE TANK.
IF THE PEOPLE RUNNING THIS TOWN ARE WILLING TO GIVE HIM ALL THE EXTRA MONEY, HE SHOULD TAKE IT!!
LISTEN PEOPLE GET OUT AND VOTE AND ELECT NEW COUNCILS, THIS IS A DISGRACE. "
IF THE PEOPLE RUNNING THIS TOWN ARE WILLING TO GIVE HIM ALL THE EXTRA MONEY, HE SHOULD TAKE IT!!
LISTEN PEOPLE GET OUT AND VOTE AND ELECT NEW COUNCILS, THIS IS A DISGRACE. "
merihew wrote on Oct 29, 2008 5:31 PM:
" I think the question t ask is how much money has the town set aside for the other 8 landowners, who are going to have, I would think, far substantial damages, as they continue to reside in their homes during the decontamination process. I would bet their 'damages' far exceed Ritacco's, since he does not live on his property and will not own it during decontamination. "
Sealed Minutes wrote on Oct 29, 2008 4:44 PM:
" Why were the minutes sealed when they have nothing to hide? All minutes and meetigs should be open for public scrutiny for all issues. If they needed to hide their activities at the time, why did it take public pressure to unseal the minutes?
The tendency to use closed meetings and then seal minutes is a problem throughout Rhode Island. Closed meetings and sealed minutes should be severely limited. Even contract negotiations should be available for public to watch. It's our money, not yours. Stop hiding. "
The tendency to use closed meetings and then seal minutes is a problem throughout Rhode Island. Closed meetings and sealed minutes should be severely limited. Even contract negotiations should be available for public to watch. It's our money, not yours. Stop hiding. "
Avondale Jane wrote on Oct 29, 2008 1:53 PM:
" i like to see all six councilors--and also that quitter FINIZIO---sit in an open forum with mrs. douglas by 11/10/08
they need to all ask questions we all have
maybe the town council president can set it up--like she did napratree point and the dogs.. "
they need to all ask questions we all have
maybe the town council president can set it up--like she did napratree point and the dogs.. "
Frankie 2 shoes wrote on Oct 29, 2008 1:46 PM:
" I guess we'll have to wait till election day. Good deal for the Town? Joe the Plumber is right on the money. "
Re: Joe the Plumber wrote on Oct 29, 2008 1:16 PM:
" YOU are a fool sir. The Town of Westerly paid $275,000 for a piece of property that was contaminated. The contamination involved is a public health hazzard. The Town of Westerly stepped up to the plate, realized their liability in the case and put their best foot forward. Kudos Westerly, the only people who are losers in this whole thing are the people who's property was contaminated through no fault of their own, and of course the people who are ignorant, but they are losers of a different kind! "
Westerly voter wrote on Oct 29, 2008 1:03 PM:
" Can anyone explain why Ritacco's property was resolved first and put above everyone elses property? Specially when the other properties are occupied and his is not? "
Joe The Plumber wrote on Oct 29, 2008 12:23 PM:
" What a disgraceful period in our Town's history. We paid 275,00.00 for a useless piece of property. This requires an Attorney General's Investigation including this so-called Public Works sub-Committee. Although Pat Douglas is on the money requesting minutes of council meetings, the real deals are made at these Public Works subcommittee meetings and in Town Parking lots before and after meetings. Are there any minutes for these meetings??? The sad part is these same people will keep on getting elected. It's depressing to see where we have come in this town. This is what happens when Town Councilor's interfere with the jobs of paid public works administrators and engineers. Everybody wants to be a hero in the eyes of their constituents. "
 | Share your thoughts.... Our TalkBack option has been updated to improve service to our viewers. Some comments made prior to March 26 may not be available for viewing outside of the archives section. Thank you for your patience during this update. TalkBack is an opportunity for viewers to exchange comments regarding online content. Comments are moderated. Please allow time for posting. Comments are not edited. They are either approved or they are not. Comments should be void of personal attacks, foul language, advertisements or impersonations. Please limit comments to 200 words or less. |