284 replies to this topic

[Frankie811]

Frankie811, on Oct 17 2006, 06:32 AM, said:

All the polls show this one too close to call. But I believe Sheldon Whitebread is actually 1 or 2 points ahead.

Make that 7-8 points ahead.    So I'm coming outta da Branch Ave Stop & Shop this afternoon and who's standing there shaking hands? Ralph Mollis    and Patrick Kennedy.    Of course I avoided them completely. Or did they avoid me?  

Edited by Frankie811, 27 October 2006 - 04:09 PM.

[gregw]

Frankie811, on Oct 27 2006, 06:08 PM, said:

Make that 7-8 points ahead.    So I'm coming outta da Branch Ave Stop & Shop this afternoon and who's standing there shaking hands? Ralph Mollis    and Patrick Kennedy.    Of course I avoided them completely. Or did they avoid me?  

Funny. I was at the Branch Ave. Stop & Shop earlier today and missed all this. It seems that Patrick owes Mollis for some reason. Before the primary, when Mollis was in a tight race against Guillaume, I got a recorded phone call from Patrick saying what a great guy Mollis was and that I should vote for him. Didn't work--I voted for Guillaume, but it made me wonder why Patrick has gotten so cozy with Ralph.


Vote Whitehouse and Fogarty!!!

[runawayjim]

so i've been going over the sample ballot for the election (which are now available on the secretary of state's website, by the way).  i noticed a whole section of providence-specific questions (my ballot is 6 pages long!).

they're all for amendments to the providence home rule charter.  anyone have any idea where i can find this to read over it and actually figure out what the amendments would change?  some of the questions are easy to figure out, but others are not.

[yossarian]

runawayjim, on Oct 27 2006, 10:43 PM, said:

so i've been going over the sample ballot for the election (which are now available on the secretary of state's website, by the way).  i noticed a whole section of providence-specific questions (my ballot is 6 pages long!).

they're all for amendments to the providence home rule charter.  anyone have any idea where i can find this to read over it and actually figure out what the amendments would change?  some of the questions are easy to figure out, but others are not.

I happened to be at the council committee meeting (on another matter) when those amendments were discussed.  In addition, I work with someone who was on the charter review commission, so if you have a question as to a specific amendment ask away, either here or with a PM. I'll do my best to explain the purpose of the amendment as I understand it.

Edited by yossarian, 28 October 2006 - 06:40 AM.

[Cotuit]

yossarian, on Oct 28 2006, 08:37 AM, said:

so if you have a question as to a specific amendment ask away, either here or with a PM. I'll do my best to explain the purpose of the amendment as I understand it.

It would be fine, and helpful to ask here. I have to take a look at the ballot myself.

[webbage]

The sheer fact that we (as in Republicans, but not me as I'm not 18) will be forced to vote for Chaffee to try to keep a majority disgusts me. The fact that the RNC endorsed Chaffee instead of Laffey also annoys me.

[Lone Ranger]

webbage, on Oct 29 2006, 06:40 PM, said:

The sheer fact that we (as in Republicans, but not me as I'm not 18) will be forced to vote for Chaffee to try to keep a majority disgusts me. The fact that the RNC endorsed Chaffee instead of Laffey also annoys me.

See?  Like I said before, Mr. Chafee is a Republican a Democrat can vote for.  

[runawayjim]

webbage, on Oct 29 2006, 06:40 PM, said:

The sheer fact that we (as in Republicans, but not me as I'm not 18) will be forced to vote for Chaffee to try to keep a majority disgusts me. The fact that the RNC endorsed Chaffee instead of Laffey also annoys me.

did you really expect the RNC to endorse someone who would have had no chance of beating the democrats?

[runawayjim]

The following are questions i asked about the providence specific questions with yossarian's answers.

[quote]Question 10 - it says starting 2011, does that mean cicilline and council member won't be able to run for a terms beyond the specified limit or will they be "grandfathered" in and be able to run for another term after? i'm in favor of term limits, i'm just curious about that one.[/quote]

Nobody would be completely grandfathered, the issue is whether once 2011 comes around would terms already served be counted. And the answer is, nobody knows for sure. The language is deliberately ambiguous.

[quote]Question 12 - i have no idea what this one means. is it just talking about consultants hired by the city, meaning the city council can vote on what their salaries are?[/quote]

No. The council already determines the salaries of all employees of the city (like most legislative bodies they hold the power of the purse). This is mostly about the council's ability to hire its own counsel (i.e. a lawyer), when there is a dispute with the mayor. Normally the city solicitor represents the council. However, since most solictors are beholden to the mayor, when a seperation of powers type dispute arises, the council needs its own attorney. Currently the charter requires a two thirds vote of the council to hire a consultant, this would require a simple majority.

[quote]Question 13 - what is the retirement board?[/quote]

It oversees the City's pension system, including disability pensions. On pensions that can be contested, like disability, the board votes as to whether to approve. The purpose here is 1) to substitute someone other than the mayor since he never has time to go, 2) same idea with council designee. The two extra people are intended to shift the balance of power on the board away from labor union designees. The last point is the real impetus behind the amendment. The idea being that the City would see fewer disability pensions approved.

[quote]Question 17 - is the fiscal year currently arbitrary[/quote]?

No, its fixed by the Charter. The problem is that the present fiscal year does not line up with state's budgetary cycle. This creates a problem because the City depends heavily on aid from the State. Therefore, under the present system the City has to pass a budget before it knows how much it will be getting from the General Assembly. The amendment would allow the council to fix the problem, by moving the start of the fiscal year until after the assembly is done. There was a proposal to put new fiscal year directly in the charter amendment itself. The problem with doing that is the transitional year. The only danger of the amendment is that theoretically the council and the mayor could monkey around with the fiscal year to address budgetary issues in a given year.

[quote]Question 18 - i can't figure out that wording, i know what it's talking about, but i don't know what it's asking.[/quote]

Just clarifying when the time to override a veto, approve an appointment starts. Currenlty the charter does not specify.

[quote]Question 23 - does the civic center authority do anything or do their duties fall under some other party now?[/quote]

The City sold the Civic Center to the State.

Edited by runawayjim, 30 October 2006 - 07:48 AM.

[Dan Halen]

If you vote YES on question one, I will personally hunt you down and give you the beating of a lifetime.

I'd like to think the most UP members are savvy and educated enough to see through the harrah's propaganda...but you never know.

[matt]

Dan Halen, on Oct 30 2006, 11:39 AM, said:

If you vote YES on question one, I will personally hunt you down and give you the beating of a lifetime.

I'd like to think the most UP members are savvy and educated enough to see through the harrah's propaganda...but you never know.

Well, thats nice.

[Carter711]

Healey serious about eliminating job he’s running for
http://www.projo.com...2D.3f9215f.html

This guy is a riot.  And he has a point - What official purpose does a lieutenant governor really serve - particularly in a state as small as Rhode Island?  Is it really necessary?

[runawayjim]

vote healey

i think this guy's awesome.

[dgreco]

runawayjim, on Oct 30 2006, 06:23 PM, said:

vote healey

i think this guy's awesome.

I saw him on TV tonight, he was original... Anyone else watch the debate tonight, I find chaffee so hard to look at and hard to listen to.

[Gusterfell]

Chaffee struck me as very nervous in tonight's debate.  I think he knows he's in trouble.

[dgreco]

Gusterfell, on Oct 30 2006, 08:51 PM, said:

Chaffee struck me as very nervous in tonight's debate.  I think he knows he's in trouble.

I agree, one thing that bothered me a little was everytime Chaffee brought up something negative about Whitehouse he would turn around and say its not about that lets talk about Iraq, which makes me feel like he is hiding something... Also I thought it was awesome when Jim Taricani got all over Chaffee about
plunderdome.

[runawayjim]

dgreco, on Oct 30 2006, 08:55 PM, said:

I agree, one thing that bothered me a little was everytime Chaffee brought up something negative about Whitehouse he would turn around and say its not about that lets talk about Iraq, which makes me feel like he is hiding something... Also I thought it was awesome when Jim Taricani got all over Chaffee about
plunderdome.

that's one of the things that i don't like about whitehouse (aside from the fact that he's probably killed more trees than chafee with the 3 mailings i get from him a day for the past week, half my trash has been whitehouse pamphlets).  he keeps bringing up iraq and all these republican things that chafee is just plain against and it has shown in the way he's voted.  chafee was the only republican to vote against the war, why is whitehouse trying to use the war against someone who is on the record as being against the war?

[Lone Ranger]

Carter711, on Oct 30 2006, 12:49 PM, said:

Healey serious about eliminating job he’s running for
http://www.projo.com...2D.3f9215f.html

This guy is a riot.  And he has a point - What official purpose does a lieutenant governor really serve - particularly in a state as small as Rhode Island?  Is it really necessary?

That's fantastic, I love it.  Guy just got my vote.

[yossarian]

Lone Ranger, on Oct 30 2006, 09:12 PM, said:

That's fantastic, I love it.  Guy just got my vote.

My two cents on the Lt. Governor's race:

As to the merits of abolishing the Lt Gov's job, I don't think it makes a lot of sense.  One you need someone to be on standby in case something happens to the Gov.  Two the policy portfolios now attached to the Lt. Gov position now give the office something to do.  Those portfolios, health care and emergency preparedness, are in my mind two of the most signficant issues facing the state.  Futhermore, if you really want to improve the funciton of the position, do what Mass, a number of other states and the feds do: have people vote on a ticket of the gov and lt. gov, instead of seperately.  

With respect to Healey, if you're not from here I am sure he seems "cool" (or whatever term the kids are using now).   However, he's been running since I was in high school, so at least for me the act has gotten a little old.  In addition, he has no chance of winning.  While I am generally hestitant to make the "don't throw your vote away" argument, I think it applies here because the race between the mainstream canidates promises to be very close.  It also stands to be very important down the line.  If Charlie loses (which the polls suggest) who ever wins this race is likely to be their parties' nominee for the governor in 4 years.

As to those mainstream candidates, I'll put in my plug for Senator Roberts.  She is by far the most knowledgable RI pol I have ever met; the very epitome of a policy wonk.  Given that most of that expertise is in health care, I think she could do wonders for the state.

[Cotuit]

yossarian, on Oct 31 2006, 09:09 AM, said:

As to those mainstream candidates, I'll put in my plug for Senator Roberts.  She is by far the most knowledgable RI pol I have ever met; the very epitome of a policy wonk.  Given that most of that expertise is in health care, I think she could do wonders for the state.

Taking into account how little I actually know about her, I rather wish she were running for Governor. I'm certainly hedging my bets and lining up Elizabeth for '10.