myDedham - Recent Comments

Savings = Good

jonathan — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:18:26 GMT

I'm glad that significant savings can be realized under the system proposed by Mr. Keegan. However, I am glad that the Board of Selectmen did not accept changes to the service.

I think more public input is needed before a decision to change is made. Waste management affects every past, present, and future resident of the town. It is important to gauge community response as a way to assist in exploring all options. The old adage of two heads being better than one can usually apply.

That said, I don't want us to be forced to use a single container for trash. The existing number of containers (or fewer numbers but equal volume) along with coverage for other large items (non-hazardous like a couch) seems suitable. At the same time, I'd love for more and better recycling methods to be made available.

From my work in public libraries I see how much can be recycled but that doesn't seem to have trickled down private homes in Dedham and nearby towns. A significant push to make recycling more accessible for residents, young and old, seems to be quite beneficial. As Dave25 said, we could "sell the recyclable materials, back which some towns are doing, in order to realize even more cost savings." I'm all for that.

Near 50%

cebonvini — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:18:11 GMT

At our household, we use a regular trash barrel for recycling (labeled of course), a blue bin, and a milk crate for newspapers. We've found that I only put trash out with the recycling (one barrel) every two weeks.

I agree with the posting below ... we need to be aware of what we buy and think of its disposal.

One question comes to mind .. what does one do with batteries? And with the new compact light bulbs, how will we dispose of those toxic things?

Of course, I have talked to my neighbor across the street several times about recycling. They put out three barrels of trash a week. How two people generate so much trash is beyond my small brain to wrap around.

Recycle More

liz — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:03:21 GMT

Yes we need the resources to recycle more. But keep in mind the ultimate goal should be to use less.

West Roxbury is doing it

Brian — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:47:18 GMT

West Roxbury City Councillor John Tobin has a press release on his website announcing that every residence in that neighborhood is going to be getting a 95 gallon container to place all their recyclables in. What struck me from it were the following lines:

Often 50 percent of household trash is recyclable. The current 14-gallon recycling bins are too small for all the recycling in a household. ...
The "Recycle More" program yielded a 50 percent increase in tonnage in the Jamaica Plain/Roslindale pilot and a 150 percent increase in the South End. The "Recycle More" program not only provides environmental benefits but saves City resources. For every ton of trash residents recycle, the city saves $70 on residents' trash disposal fee.

I know that at my house we have two blue bins, and they are always full by the end of two weeks. We could certainly recycle more with a larger container.

One more

Brian — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:38:48 GMT

In January of 2007 the Riverdale School's crossing guard was arrested for dealing drugs, albeit not anywhere near the school. Today she was sentenced to 1 1/2 years in jail.

Summer Intern

pete briquette — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:21:51 GMT

So in the year 2008 when we are sending Computers to ten year old kids in Africa who have the ability to operate them, a SUMMER INTERN is needed to instruct DEDHAM TOWN GOVERNMENT employees on how to use them. In 2000 I sold my house on Court Street yet in 2008 on the Assessors Page I am still listed as the owner there. "Just a clerical error" said the Assessor, "it will be taken care of". I can only hope that this SUMMER INTERN will instruct The Assessor on how to "Just do it already".

you're right

dj — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:48:08 GMT

I apologize. You are right. I was going to the Park and Rec section and clicking on playground programs. There is no link but only the mention it will be up.

Parks and Rec savvy on the Internet????

dedlady — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:33:29 GMT

I downloaded the playground schedule on June 24th (last week). It has been up on the website since the first day of playgrounds. It was and is on the very front page of the entire web site(under forms) and on the menu on the playground page. The announcement stating the playground schedule would be posted on the 23rd is whats up on the site. It looks like the announcement was correct.

I use the Recreation site almost daily. I would rather have a department give too much information and run the risk of occasionally having old content than playing it safe and just have one page with contact info that never changes. The recreation site has hundreds of pages of up to date information. Lets knock the departments/boards that need to be knocked ...not the ones that are truly making an effort to get the information out there.

I hear P&R may also have online registration by the fall. That will be a very big help.

Parks and Rec savvy on the Internet????

dj — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:58:48 GMT

I agree with you 100% but I was surprised at your statement that there is "...an assistant Parks and Rec Director who knows the website inside and out..."
My son has been attending the playground program for over a week - the one the Dedham Times posted the schedule in their paper this past Friday. I went onto the site to print the schedule instead of cutting it out of the paper and was met with the same info that has been there since the program started "The playground activity schedule will be available on Monday afternoon 6/23 on this site."

I hope they can get in the habit of putting everything online or people in town are going to continue to miss things. Word of mouth is not a thing of the past - it has just changed from stay-at-home parents talking over a fence to people talking over the internet.

Phase 99

cebonvini — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:59:19 GMT

Disclaimer: I am a proponent of a Senior Center and the son of the Late JoAnn Mucciaccio, once Director of the COA for 28 years.

First to address the above posting.

Leanne is a great proponent of the Senior Center and my hats off to her (and the many other) for putting in long volunteer hours to help those in our great town. As with any quote in the media, I suggest everyone take them with a grain of salt, as in full context I'm sure her statement is only for the betterment of our citizens.

It is pure guess work exacly why it failed in the greater scheme. We can all ponder that for years. Use what ever justification you want, in its simplest terms, it was a NO vote. Read into it what you want.

Dialog? After more than three years of the Site Committee, more than a thirty years discussed within the COA Board/Selectmen, and in the BPCC for almost a year, I have to question just how much "open a dialog and identify beneficial programs" or "The Town needs to determine the needs and then design a suitable accessible building." can there be?

Library? There are numberous volumes of literature specifically for the aged, many of which are not housed in the DPL. The same argument could be used for our Schools. Why have libraries at the schools if we have two public libraries already?

There have been many ideas floated on this board, none of which are new. Sorry, but they have all been discussed.

Over 15 years ago a proposal was put forth to Town Meeting for a 10,000 square foot building for less than a million dollars. Hind-sight ... hummmm.

No solution will satify all. More than half is all that is needed, which obviously this did not.

I will put my one dig in here: Where were the Selectmen, our great leaders of our town? As usual, letting some other group hang out to dry. Leadership ... pfff .. NOT!

Lets take a look at our current situation.

The COA is located at Traditions, 2500 square feet with no bathroom or kitchen facilities, and only eight parking spots. The town get this space not only free but the town actually taxes Traditions on that space (they have filed abatements and have been rejected). The town does not purchase any vans for the COA, they are all bought through donations. Nearly half the staff is paid through grants.

I try to look at this in a more economical way. If the town can keep those seniors in-town paying taxes, the benefit to the town is greater, as they do use less services per tax dollar.

If you find yourself on vacation in our state, or anywhere else, take a moment in the town you are in and ask to see their Senior Center. I own in Plymouth, New Hampshire, a town of about 6000 people. They have a lovely 18000 square foot senior center.

I know the proponents will move forward and I hope you will join them! Good things can come from working together. Please join in!!!!

dead-ham

kei-o-lei — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 02:12:35 GMT

A border guard was minding his business, when a new immigrant-to-be appeared at the border, wanting to cross.

"Before I enter this new country, tell me, what are the people like in your country?", asked the immigrant.

"What were the people like where you came from?" replied the border guard.

"Oh, they were selfish grasping people that fought with each other and looked out only for themselves," the immigrant exclaimed.

The border guard responded, "You will find the people here much the same," and the immigrant walked away.

A few hours passed. Another immigrant approached.

"Before I enter this new country" asked the new immigrant-to-be, "tell me, what are the people like in your country?"

"What were the people like where you came from?" replied the border guard.

"Oh, they were wonderful caring people; I mean, we had our differences, but we always seemed ot work things out," said the immigrant.

The border guard responded, "You will find the people here much the same," and the immigrant walked away.

Dead-ham, good luck in your travels :-)

Don't let the door hit you...

Eric C. — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:02:20 GMT

Wow, all I can think of to that is, "goodbye and good riddance." My initial reaction was to post a reasonable and well-thought-out retort, but given the attitude just demonstrated I'll save the words for someone more open to valid disagreements and debate.

This town is nauseating

dead-ham — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:23:08 GMT

For as long as I remember there have been people in this town working diligently to see a senior center become a reality in this town. Also for as long as I remember there have been imbeciles in this town who apparently do not appreciate having amenities available that would be for the greater good of this town. Maybe there are seniors that wouldn't use the senior center but there are many seniors that would benefit from the services provided at such an establishment. There's a lot of people who seem to want this town to be some place with a sense of community, and building a senior center would only enhance that. This town is a disappointment. I hope that those that voted No for the senior center find themselves needing all those wonderful amenities that could have been provided by one by the time they are geriatric. I will definitely not be residing in this town by that time, and probably will be in a town that recognizes the needs for others and not just their own selfish ones.

OK

kei-o-lei — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 22:27:52 GMT

Well, hindsight IS 20/20, and it's easy to opine that a cheaper proposal would have received more votes.

But TM didn't "drop the ball", unless by that you mean that TM should only pass proposals that would also be passed by the electorate.

The message I got at TM was that the supporters of the Senior Center wanted the bigger building, that they felt they needed to be responsive to cost criticisms by developing a cheaper smaller alternative, but that they REALLY WANTED THE BIGGER BUILDING.

As a TM member I was prepared to decide on the bigger building that night but was not sure that the smaller building was a good idea for a number of reasons(e.g., hwo would that affect programming; would we just be back in a fe years with an additon).

And that alternative did not address the other criticisms of the proposal (e.g., location, affordability, not as important as other Town priorities).

Said differently, the cheaper alternative was a lesser proposal in many ways . . . no wonder it didn't pass.

But I digress: saying that a less expensive option would have recived more votes is erudite observation of the obvious .. but a good try, though :-)

High five

Dave — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:09:55 GMT