The leader and webmaster for the Billerica Watcher’s Group has recently put up a post trashing Jeff Parenti (sorry readers, you will have to join the BWG to read our modern day Mr. Ed and his nonsensical suppositions and rants on this topic) and his column regarding Town Meeting Reps reluctance to cut spending in the face of many of them ranting and raving over how much Billerica does not have a revenue problem, but a spending one. He does this, knowing that Jeff Parenti, TMR-Precinct 5, has long ago left the BWG Listserv because of Mr. Ed’s self-appointed mealy-mouthed, moronic, megalomaniac of a messiah of Billerica.
I’ve recently left for the same reason as Mr. Parenti; the failure to have an honest and civil dialogue with this person based upon fact and not personal circumstance. But that is neither here nor there; so, let’s get to the meat of the matter:
- Mr. Ed states that Jeff singles out TMR Ralph McKenna for criticism. I think it is self-evident that Mr. McKenna singled himself out with a very stupid and callous statement; even if it was intended as a joke (which I doubt). He suggests (without having a clue of course) that Mr. Ralph McKenna, TMR for Precinct 7, may have been joking when he stated that his water meter was broken and that he was under-paying his water bill. It would seem a fool’s joke considering that Billerica could come back at any time, like Brockton is doing, and charge retroactively for unpaid/under-charged water and sewer use. Is Mr. McKenna a fool? I haven’t met the man; so, I can’t answer that question, but generally it takes a fool to show up in office show up railing about fiscal responsibility while stating that he is acting irresponsible in his private decision making – such as avoiding paying his fair share for water use.
- He follows that by accusing Jeff of putting words into Mr. McKenna’s mouth about wanting more while wanting others to pay for it. In fact, Mr. Parenti was highlighting the fact that in spite of all the bluster and charts demonstrating that the town has a spending problem; not a revenue problem, that none of the usual advocates of cuts were to be heard at Town Meeting. The general agreement among Town Meeting representatives seems to be to leave the broken meters broken, so long as I am receiving a benefit. Don’t spend to correct a known deficiency even though that deficiency is costing the town nearly $1,000,000.00 a year in estimated lost revenue and additional losses through fines as punishment for not remaining below MDEP’s 65 gallon per day per person mandate. Will it take a leak on the private property of a BOS or Town Meeting member and an excessive bill before the issue becomes significant? What does that tell you about these civil servants and their alleged dedication to safeguard the rest of us who live in Billerica without political pull…you know…your average citizen?
- Mr. Ed farts loudly as he wonders how Jeff would feel if he suddenly found himself unemployed with looming rate increases. Since Jeff is not on the site to answer this question, it is nothing more than self-serving rhetoric. Ed doesn’t tell anyone that this is his position, precisely. Instead, he opts to make himself appear the Robin Hood of Billerica to the poor, when, in fact, he is merely serving his own narrow, selfish and deceitful agenda. Mr. Ed doesn’t consider the possibility to cut town wide spending by department by less than 5% to fund the new meters.
- He discusses MDEP requirements and knows that there are mandates that cannot be exceeded. He knows that faulty meters are present within the system and that there are many on the verge of failure due to age and chemical induced corrosion as a result of water treatment techniques. He knows that there may be other leaks in the water system itself that are contributing to an inaccurate picture of overall use of water by citizens and businesses, and yet this horse’s mouthpiece advocates for continuance of this lost revenue potential. Why? Perhaps, he is gaining by having his water/sewer costs kept artificially low, while others, like myself and Mr. Parenti end up paying for it through higher water bills, property taxes and other fees? Why else would someone advocate leaving a broken system broken with an estimated annual loss of $1,000,000.00?
- Ed not so deftly shifts to the recently hired water use consultant. The town water use consultant has been directed by the Board of Selectmen to come up with a “compassionate” plan to get water/sewer rates into balance, as opposed to a just and fair plan. This is the same approach the Board of Selectmen took when it came to deciding appropriate fees for hookup and other sewer projects by multi-million dollar corporations which have been obscenely under charged for decades. Perhaps they never gave it a thought that lowering the corporate tax rate might inspire more businesses to set up, even if they have to pay the hook-up fee, knowing that they are going to be treated fairly over the long haul. I don’t know what is in their heads, but sometimes I swear I can here crickets and echoes at various town meetings.
As to compassionate billing for under paid water usage, we all saw how well “compassionate conservatism” worked under President Bush. Why would anyone with a brain think that compassionate billing for water and sewer will work out any better for the town overall than compassionate conservatism worked for the nation? I’m surprised with this sort of ideology and philosophy that Ed and some town leaders haven’t proposed a town day of prayer to fix our infrastructure by faith. Faith won’t work and neither will shirking responsibility to maintain essential infrastructure. Ed misses the point that government is here to serve the town as a whole; not just the impoverished, or those on some special version of the dole. His vision of corrective action seems to equate to waiting for the smartest kid in the class to dumb down to the level of most intellectually challenged before advancing any form of curriculum. If that’s the case, rent, buy or go see the short film 2081, based upon Kurt Vonnegut’s short story.
- He then makes it sound as though the Town Manager, Town Meeting and the Board of Selectmen are all in agreement to hold down raising water/sewer rates to reasonable and accurate levels. Not true. The Town Manager made clear that he feels the Board of Selectmen are acting with political cowardice when he “dressed down” Selectman Correnti – appropriately, I thought, for failing to meet the needs of the entire town in order to grandstand for a chosen few. He was correct; Selectman Rosa, Lombardo and Correnti were not, in my humble view. But, if the town ever gets in the position where it needs to do retroactive billing to survive or to keep the water and sewer flowing, we’ll see just what a favor Moe, Larry and Curley did for their fellow citizens.
- In the end, Mr. Ed asks the question: “So what facts does Jeff have to support his comments and Finger Pointing at others?”. Fair being fair, I ask the same of Mr. Ed. From my seat in the stadium, I’d say Jeff did offer facts and support his comments and so called “finger pointing”. Mr. Ed did not.
- One other thing, Mr. Ed, the word you love to put into capitals, TAXPAYERS” means one who works and adds to the tax collections; not one who sucks from them. Taxes paid under those circumstances are not really taxes; they are a token repayment of money given without any further responsibility of the taker.
If you are going to attack a columnist on your very tainted and self-serving mailing list; you should at least be sure he reads your listserv messages. At least have the courage to alert the columnist, either on his blog or in a rebuttal to his Billerica Minuteman column by writing the paper’s editor, that you take issue with his column or work. But, then again, for some, it’s easier to hit, run, and hide in a biker bar discussing the lifestyle of the military and combat even though the self-proclaimed expert never spent a day in service. He is either a draft dodger or a person who had so little love for his nation that he couldn’t bring himself to do even a single tour of duty in military service either during peace or war.
It’s a lot easier to win arguments with people who are not present or to whom you will not directly address than it is to actually have to defend and support your idle claims in pseudo-confrontation. It’s just as easy to toss a lot of junk in the air hoping that no one will notice that you never answer a question or reveal who you really are unless forced to do so. I feel sorry for you, but not enough to let you get away with lies and slanderous remarks unchallanged.
For the record, I was sent a copy of your dirty little diatribe about Jeff by several people on your list. It’s seems you aren’t quite the King you think you are or even a third the leader you try to portray. Just remember the closing phrase from Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part II: “Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown”
The quality of your thinking reminds me of the closing verse to Randy Newman’s “Short People” song:
Short people got nobody
To love
They got little baby legs
That stand so low
You got to pick ‘em up
Just to say hello
They got little cars
That go beep, beep, beep
They got little voices
Goin’ peep, peep, peep
They got grubby little fingers
And dirty little minds
They’re gonna get you every time
Well, I don’t want no short people
Don’t want no short people
Don’t want no short people
‘Round here
Sleep well, Napoleon!
Jeffrey R. Parenti, P.E. said:
Rick-
I would like to debate Ed on his message board, Billerica Watcher’s Group. It’s a great forum if only because there are several “higher-ups” in Billerica leadership that are members. It would be nice if we could have a civil conversation. Maybe the readers might learn something from each of us.
But you and I know that’s not possible. And that’s too bad. Communities advance by sharing new (and sometimes radical) ideas. We would do much better if people felt more comfortable expressing their opinions. More forums like this site would help.
Jeff Parenti
--Rick said:
I tried having that sort of debate as well, but King Edward decided to play the role of “Longshanks”; so that left me with “Wallace” until the discussion got to the point where it was obvious that I was allowing myself to engage in bickering instead of dialogue. But, then, you know that all too well because he did the same to you a while back. As to “higher-up”; you never know. Sometimes forces much less severe than nature can change the landscape. Patient persistence can rule a time frame.
--Rick said:
PS: There is another of Ed’s minions who half agrees with you. She agrees changes are in order but feels that your claim regarding money cut by Town Meeting is money saved. She states quite directly that the money has to go elsewere to be spent to “keep the budget balanced”???
At any rate, it’s heartening to know that Ed, and his minions, still have no compunction about slandering and criticizing former members; who he/they know are no longer part of his e-mail servlist or reading the boards. I happend to get several commentaries via several “concerned” people who apparently prefer reading the list than speaking out on their own behalf. But all is not lost. There is a reader named “Gardevant” or something to that effect, who has done a fairly good job in one missive of calling Ed’s fuzzy logic into question. I apologize for the misspelling of this reader’s list name, if any. But, he’s put up a couple of good postings and does a much better job of holding his temper and sarcasm than I do (which is why I’m better in the trenches than I am behind some bully pulpit).
Focus said:
In my opinion, I would prefer you focus on your points, versus trying to “one-up” this other person. It appears your focus is on slamming this person’s comments, and frankly has the appearance of some sort of agenda (this “agenda” was not clear, to me, in the writing). If you aren’t worried about some apparent “crown” [and who's wearing it], then the writing style should be comments, regarding a particular article, editorial, etc.; meaning your editorial should be about the essence, the political ties a person has, the monies they received from lobbyist, who knows who, etc. and not taking stabs at someone else’s comments. In my opinion, the “stabs” have no context.
I read many editorials from a variety of people, and you can certainly tell who uses the phone, spends time in coffee shops, volunteer in the community, listens to neighbors, and actually reach out to ask questions — versus those who live in the six figure world and the money tree in the backyard. I appreciate those who spend some personal time getting accurate information.
Question regarding the “short-people” song/Napoleon reference? I had trouble understanding …What is the issue with short people? Who is short that you do have issues with? What it the height-limit/restriction on what is considered short?
And as a side note, it is painful to put in comments in the Minuteman.
--Rick said:
I appreciate your opinion. In this case, the “one up” context grows out of a mail Listserv that I recently departed. The person who is the object of the Listserv attack, known to the list owner/manager who wrote the hatchet piece, has been off the listserv for months and has no way of reading the hit or responding to it. Others on the list know that I won’t hesitate to challenge Mr. ED, and so, they forwarded me his missive in full context, and I used that to formulate my response, primarily to Listserv members, but to other readers as well. Mr. Ed is big on promises and short on keeping them. He will help keep all citizens of Billerica informed (but only through his words and through his rather narrow and personally hypocritical prism). He maintains his Listserv is censure free; yet censures when he can’t respond without revealing his own baggage and issues.
As to the other things; have you read Jonathan Swift or other authors who use satire and sarcasm as tools? Let me help you out here:
Mr. Ed is a talking horse from the 50s and 60 television era. In my opinion, the owner/manager of the Billerica Watcher’s Group is a horse’s ass; words come out of his mouth, but the only thing of substance is back-dropped from his polar opposite end. (Sarcasm)
Shakespeare’s quote “Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown” is from Henry IV, and it is a message to the self-styled Messiah of Billerica (para 1), Mr. Ed, that people like him have been around for centuries proclaiming themselves as the be all and end all of everything. Most have ultimately lost their heads; all have lost their crowns. Mr. Ed proclaims his site does not censor; yet, he’s censored no less than four postings of mine – only one of which was in direct response to his attack on me. The implication I was sending to him is that he is showing great weakness and setting himself up for a fall.
As with the use of Mr. Ed and Shakespeare, I find it fun to use pop-culture references when I write satire or sarcasm. Be there no doubt about it, that the main body of ideas expressed in my missive are the facts and are only slightly bitten by sarcasm through the use of the persona, Mr. Ed. The remainder is where the satire lies and the message to Mr. Ed springs eternal (or at least as long as I am alive to keep this blog active).
He is, in my opinion, a grubby little tyrant on the order of a Napoleon (hence my reference to the “Napoleon Syndrome” that I thought would be clear to a toad; nay, a nematode! But, apparently, I overlooked some in the audience and for that I do apologize.
“Sort People” is a Randy Newman satire song. You can google it for its significance, but as it is tied into the Napoleon reference, I think the mission and the objective of use that song is quite clear. It is the anti-anthem to any would be King and a just warning to Mr. Ed that he and his writings are not as insulated as he may think. Again, “heavy is the head that wears the crown”.
I do agree with you on one point – the “stabs” have no context if this is all you know about Mr. Ed and his listserv; which is why I posted a link to that listserv message of his that provides the context. One only needs to be a member of the Billerica Watcher’s Group to read it. Even in battle, I’m sending him new recruits. So, Laddie (or Lassie), to quote MacBeth; “Lay on McDuff”. If you want context, then read his missive. If you want to take shots at me and my writing, feel free to not gather the context and remain here with poison pen. To paraphrase the Great and Exalted Princess of Pain, the Dutchess, Fergie: “Big boys don’t cry – it’s personal) Cheerio!
--Rick said:
After reviewing your remarks a bit closer, I missed the following the first time around:
“I read many editorials from a variety of people, and you can certainly tell who uses the phone, spends time in coffee shops, volunteer in the community, listens to neighbors, and actually reach out to ask questions — versus those who live in the six figure world and the money tree in the backyard. I appreciate those who spend some personal time getting accurate information.”
Perhaps if you read the Listserv (if you haven’t yet been a member), you’ll find similar statements by Mr. Ed that parallel this exactly. So, aside from being a subscriber to both my blog and comments section of this blog, who are you Mr./Ms./Mrs. Focus, and what is your true agenda?
Focus said:
I’ll try to clarify….I can tell the commentaries of those who “parrot” boards, departments, etc (of town or city hall) versus those who make phone calls to check and validate. The other point I was trying to make was those believe that people have $10 here, $20 there, $50 over there. I can quickly identify those who have “pounded pavement”, or talked to neighbors/friends, etc. about their financial situations. I hope that explains it.
--Rick said:
Thanks for your clarifying commentary.
Tony said:
I too would prefer discussing the issue. I watched the last Town meeting and how things went with the budget along with water meters. With the school budget so big, TM can only vote the final amount. They do not have ability to cut wasteful positions or get rid of the sick leave buybacks. On the town side, you only get the dollar value for that line item. It does not give you details on what each department has for staff, how much they make, and what the benefits costs for each employee. For departments like water, sewer, and road, TM does not have the technical knowledge if their is any place for cost savings. You hear many times that it is the administration’s job for that. Why is there still two different dispatchers for fire and police? What aren’t flagmen used for smaller streets? Why do I get a color brochure about water in the mail? Can’t a postcard or email pointing me to a online version suffice? Just more waste.
For the water meters, not enough details were provided to justify the overall cost. The town states they have a problem with water usage, but has no idea where. Have they tracked water usage by the town or the fire department yet? Do they have meters on the main line to see if one part of town is using more than calculated? Could there be a leak in that part of town? I glad it was not passed. I do not need my taxes going up anymore.
--Rick said:
The point of Jeff’s article was not a focus on just Town Meeting, but on how people love to rail against spending; yet, when the the budget is up for review by The Town Manager, FINCOM, Town Meeting, etc., the department head proposals are seldom if ever cut. When there are opportunities to make cuts, they go by the board because of insufficient technical understanding of individual departments. If this is truly the case, then why have a budget charade to begin with? Budgets are never voluntarily cut; they are only cut by force.
Town meeting felt it had sufficient knowledge about water/sewer to go against repairing/replacing meters that are obviously well beyond their life expectancy and failing as evidenced by a good deal of unaccounted water usage. For a Town Meeting member to joke or brag about underpaying his water bill and using that as a basis for voting down the measure is inexcusable behavior during a discussion on that matter.
It’s easy to say that not enough details were provided to justify any cost. That’s especially true when no amount of detail will be enough for a yes vote by any particular TMR. That’s statement doesn’t necessarily make it true.
We know we have leaks. We know that we are exceeding DEP guidelines for water usage even with a secondary water ban in place from the very start of the season. A look at all of the burned lawns speaks to the fact that residents are complying with the ban; yet, we haven’t dropped our usage. So where is the water going? How much of it is lost through leaks? How much revenue is being lost because of faulty meters or faulty meter readings? Some have estimated as much as $2,000,000.00 a year is being lost due to failure to properly charge and collect for water and sewer services, but the number can’t be tied down until the meters have been replaced. This sounds like a very convenient game of catch 22.
When it comes to the collection of fees, the Town Manager was correct in “publicly dressing down” Selectman Correnti and the others for political cowardice. There will be no JFK “Profiles in Courage” awards going to that group this year.
But, then again, this is only one voter’s opinion.
Tony said:
A replacement of meters will resolve any that may not be reading correctly, but it will not identify if there are any leaks or other losses. Currently the town can only measure water out at the plant. They should add meters to the main lines in each section of town to get a better understanding of where the water is going.
--Rick said:
I believe that was part of the plan. If home meters were reliable, a comparison of one area’s usage to another’s may also help identify potential leak sources. But, with meters 5 years beyond their life expectancy all that can be relied upon is that the readings will only get more unreliable with time.
Tony said:
I do not believe the town has the ability to do a comparison of one area’s usage to another’s. This would require meters on the main lines. From the presentation I saw watching TM, they stated the measurement was at the plant on what water goes out. No mention of measuring a particular part of town.
--Rick said:
You are correct in that an actual meter comparison cannot be made with our current configuration; however, a manual or computerized review of average useage by area can be made and graphed using a simple spreadsheet sorted by area and average water useage over a period of time. It’s not ideal, but could be used to get a rough idea of trends that may expose unusually high loss zones, but again, it’s only helpful if the meters are reliable – and they are not. Engineering a more precise water flow tracking system is easy enough if there is a will to do the work and fund such a project as they allegedly do with water pressure zones for fire hydrants.
--Rick said:
I nearly forgot. If a debate on the matter is truly desirable; it should occur on Jeff’s website with Jeff’s participation. He is the original author of the article on spending to which I refer. Yet, not one comment from his listserv attacker can be found on Jeff’s site, or in the comments section of the Billerica Minuteman; even though, Jeff’s Blob and the Billerica Minuteman provides a section to do so. Curious, yes?
Jeffrey R. Parenti, P.E. said:
To say that taxpayers are not able to participate in the budget process is not accurate. You don’t even have to be a TMR. Start at the library — head to the reference librarian, and ask for all the budget material available. You’d be surprised how much you can learn, starting with the budget book. Second, make some calls to department heads. Ask how much they are spending. Nothing is secret because it is taxpayer money. If a head is not forthcoming, complain to the town manager; they all work for him. Third, attend the FinCom subcommittee meetings. They are all announced and open to the public. FinCom welcomes input from taxpayers — it’s one of the main reasons the committee exists. Yet these subcommittee meetings are almost never attended. Fourth, ask your favorite FinCom member. I did. I learned that 80% of our money is spent on people. I had no idea it was that high.
On water meters, they are past their useful life and must be replaced. All mechanical devices eventually break — sorry, that’s life. We can can either pay $6M now or $8M, $10, or $12M later. What’ll it be? Sure, we can ignore the broken meter problem if we like, at our own peril, just like you are free to ignore the old, leaky roof on your house. (Although a smart homeowner tight on money would borrow the cash and get that roof fixed before water causes more costly damage inside.)
It would be great to host this debate over on the blob (cantgetherefromhere.wordpress.com), but I’ll take intelligent debate wherever it grows.
Jeff Parenti
--Rick said:
There you have it, folks. Nothing is hidden and nothing is sacred. If you want the truth, it’s there for those willing to put in some effort. If you want garbage, let all of your answers come from self-proclaimed experts and don’t bother fact checking. Town fiscal matters are really as simple as that. Please, take advantage of Jeff’s knowledge and willingness to share information from an insider’s perspective (albeit a recent insider). If you wish to pursue the issue here, you are welcome; I have an endless stream of bandwidth and this site never has a commercial – it is all furnished by me. The point is that you can either get properly educated on such matters, or you can choose to be indoctrinated by those who would sway your opinion for their personal reasons, rather than the town’s interest.
I just recently shifted to semi-retirement; so, my income has noticeably dropped and I’d like to preserve every penny I can. However, some expenses cannot and should not be avoided. Some fees should and must be raised. That’s life in the average speed lane. We will always be faced with a pay me now or pay me later choice. For that reason, one should always keep in mind this immutable economic fact: Today’s dollars are always cheaper than tomorrow’s dollars, and understanding that principle, make an educated albeit difficult choice.
A great example of the need to keep proper adjustments in services and costs is reflected in the current debate over sewer and water fees for businesses wanting to tap into the system or expand their use of it. Billerica has been providing sewer hookups at the lowest cost anywhere since 1989. None of that went to influence a business’s decision on setting up shop here as opposed to Wilmington. Ask yourself why this company chose Wilmington over Billerica? Better yet, ask their PR people. Obviously, the lowest water and sewer hook-up fees in the area had nothing to do with that decision. So, what are we missing that others such as Tewksbury, Reading, North Reading, Stoneham, Burlington and many others are not? The significant item to focus on is who in leadership is seeking answers or providing some insight to that question.