Connecticut
Post posts about what is happening in the State of Connecticut.
Amity AstroTurf Referendum Exit Poll
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Tue, 09/24/2013 - 06:56The Amity AstroTurf Referendum is today, and I've set up a simple, unscientific exit poll using Google Docs. If you live in Bethany, Woodbridge, or Orange, please consider filling out this poll
If I get enough responses, I'll post about the results here or in a later blog post.
Update: One person asked about the anonymity of this poll. It was set up using Google Docs. You do not have to be logged into Google Docs to fill out the poll. It does track the time you filled it out, and your answer to the questions, but it does not track any other information besides the questions you answer.
We've already had answers from all three towns.
Amity AstroTurf Referendum
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sun, 09/22/2013 - 14:04On Tuesday, voters from Bethany, Woodbridge, and Orange will go to the polls to vote on a referendum about installing astroturf at Amity Regional High School. There has been a bit if discussion about the issue on various social media sites, but no good comprehensive examination of the subject that I've been able to find.
So, I've been gathering information from various sources which I will try to present here.
Two links have been posted on the Conserve Woodbridge Facebook page:
Turf Wars: Pros and Cons of Artificial Turf
and
The Truth About Artificial Turf
The first article appears to be a fairly balanced view of the topic. It lists advantages as lower, maintenance costs, pesticide free, increased playability, fewer injuries and saves water. For the cons, it talks about a heat hazard, lead, zinc and other harmful chemicals, increased MRSA risk, bacterial breeding ground, adverse affect on asthmatics and once artificial, always artificial.
Unfortunately, the article doesn't provide links to support its claims, and there is plenty of material to contradict various claims. For example, the New York State Department of Health has a Fact Sheet: Crumb-Rubber Infilled Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields
They state:
While injury studies have not consistently identified differences in abrasion and laceration risks between natural and infilled synthetic turf, some types of synthetic turf may result in more skin abrasions. Although very few tests have been performed, the available data do not suggest the widespread presence of infectious agents, such as MRSA, on synthetic turf fields. Also, the available information indicates that outdoor or indoor synthetic turf surfaces are no more likely to harbor infectious agents than other surfaces in those same environments. Disease outbreak investigations conducted in response to illnesses caused by a variety of germs (e.g., MRSA, Campylobacter, meningococcus, echovirus, herpes simplex virus, hepatitis virus, coxsackie virus) have not identified playing fields, either natural or synthetic, as likely to increase the risk of transmitting infections.
Another valuable resource is the The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection's Risk Assessment of Artificial Turf Fields.
The second article is written by a turfgrass producer and is far from unbiased. Yet even this article contradicts the first article:
Teams that once had artificial grass, like the Reds, Phillies, Pirates, Cardinals and Mariners, have chosen natural grass when updating their fields.
Over on the Woodbridge - Bethany Residents Forum there has been a lengthy discussion. I highlighted a few different articles, such as NH Register 5/19/2013: Amity considers artificial turf for field and Orange Live 8/24/2012 - A Letter From The Amity Turf Committee. Allison Rossi also shared a link to Group seeks $700,000 for turf football field at Amity High School, and to Bethwood Patch 1/10/2012: Turf Wars Avoided at Amity and Ed Walsh shared, NH Register 1/13/2012: Amity dads hope to raise $1M for artificial turf field
There are a few key things that come out of this. There had been an effort to raise private funds which appears not to have been successful, and the price has fluctuated between $700,000 and $1 million.
There has also been considerable discussion at various town meetings. Summaries of these discussions can be found in minutes of various board meetings.
Amity Regional School District No. 5 Facilities Committee December 18, 2012 This includes:
Fundraising for a turf field has been done by a committee of dedicated volunteers and so far $2,000 has been raised. Another route to getting the turf field could be to bond it. We could present the idea to the people of the three communities and see if they would support spending $900,000 for this. With a brand new turf field, you can deduct approximately $20,000 per year for field maintenance. If a situation arose where it snowed, the field could be plowed.
Amity Regional School District No. 5 Public Hearing Board of Education May 21, 2013
It starts off with
Mr. Mengold recapped the history of discussion around an artificial turf field, beginning in 2004 with a proposal to the Board. He reviewed debunked reports on harmful effects of such fields (carcinogenic materials, increased injuries, etc.) and how the state Attorney General’s moratorium on installing artificial turf was later lifted. He went over the wet conditions of the current grass field, how heavy use by both Amity and community youth football games damaged the field and led to more athletic injuries.
Most other sports teams play on synthetic turf fields at other schools; in Amity’s DRG only one other school does not have a synthetic turf field.
The public hearing was followed by a special meeting, Amity Regional School District No. 5 Special Meeting Board of Education May 21, 2013 where the board approved
APPROPRIATION OF $945,000 AND AUTHORIZATION OF BONDS AND TEMPORARY NOTES IN THE SAME AMOUNT FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE CURRENT NATURAL GRASS FIELD AT THE AMITY REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC STADIUM WITH AN ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD
The board then approved a referendum on the bonds:
SHALL REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER 5 APPROPRIATE $945,000 AND AUTHORIZE BONDS AND TEMPORARY NOTES IN THE SAME AMOUNT FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE CURRENT NATURAL GRASS FIELD AT THE AMITY REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC STADIUM WITH AN ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD?
I've also spoken with elected officials of neighboring towns, who have spoken positively of their experiences installing astroturf at their high schools.
Based on all of this, it seems to me that there is not compelling evidence of significant negative environmental or health risks to moving astroturf. In terms of the most basic cost benefit analysis, it appears as if the fields would cost $20,000 a year less to maintain, but that would take close to fifty years to cover the cost of the installation.
There have been discussions about special shoes necessary for playing on astroturf, but it is not such that the fields couldn't be used for other sports and given that our teams play away games at schools with astroturf, I suspect the shoes necessary for playing on astroturf are already available.
So, is the cost of installing astroturf worth it in terms of additional field use, or other benefits? I haven't seen a strong argument for that either.
In terms of private funding, I would love to see people from the community step up to help cover some of the cost, but I worry about this leading towards a slippery slope. What school activities should be publicly funded? Which ones should be privately funded? Should we look for private funding to make upgrades to science laboratories?
While I have yet to find compelling reasons for, or against the astroturf, I hope this will help others be better informed about the issue, make their own decisions, and show up at the voting booth on Tuesday.
Stand Down
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sat, 09/21/2013 - 07:43Yesterday was Stand Down in Connecticut. In a positive light, it is a yearly event to provide services to needy veterans in our state. Community, Health Center, Inc., where I work, is a regular participant at Stand Down, providing medical screenings and dental cleanings to our veterans. CTNewsJunkie has a great article about Stand Down being A Bittersweet Stand Down for Outgoing State Veterans Affairs Commissioner.
Schwartz, who for a decade has been commissioner of the state Department of Veterans Affairs, accepted a nomination last month from President Obama to serve as an assistant secretary within the federal VA.
CHC acknowledged Commissioner Schwartz' great work and I was honored to hear some of her story about making Stand Down the success it is.
Yet there is a different way to look at Stand Down, not quite as rosy, and much more challenging. Stand Down is the yearly reminder that every day, we do not do enough for our veterans, or for that matter, for the men and women currently serving in our Armed Services.
This morning, I found a blog post, My Name Is Jason, I’m A 35-Yr-Old White Male Combat Veteran…And I’m On Food Stamps.
I do apologize for burdening you on the checkout line with real-life images of American-style poverty. I know you probably believe the only true starving people in the world have flies buzzing around their eyes while they wallow away, near-lifeless in gutters….
I’ve known people recently - soldiers in the Army ... They were off fighting in Afghanistan while their wives were at home, buying food at the on-post commissary with food stamps.
And nobody bats an eye there, because it’s not uncommon in the military.
So if you run into a congressman or a political commentator who is calling for reducing food stamps, as them why they are cutting funding to veterans and servicemen.
If they give you some story about how people are using food stamps to support their addictions, whether it be tobacco, alcohol, or some other type of drug, ask they why they aren't addressing the underlying problem of addictions?
Jason has his take on what's going on. It isn't about stopping fraud. It is about being a bully.
I didn’t risk my life in Afghanistan so I could come back and watch people go hungry in America. I certainly didn’t risk it so *I* could come back and go hungry.
Anyone who genuinely supports cutting food stamps is not an intellectual or an ideologue – they’re a bully.
And nobody likes a bully. Except other bullies.
It’s time for regular Americans to stand up to these bullies. Not cower in the corner, ashamed of needing help. Because if there’s one thing life has taught me, it’s that you never know when you’ll be the one in need.
We need to stand up to bullies, not just because we, or someone we love may be the next to be bullied. We need to do it because it is the American thing to do, it is the moral thing to do.
Sojourners President Jim Wallis wrote,
"These same politicians are not willing to go to where the real money is: the Pentagon budget, which everyone knows to be the most wasteful in government spending, or the myriad subsidies to corporations, including agribusiness subsides to members of Congress who will be voting to cut SNAP for the poor. ... They are going after cuts to the poor and hungry people because they think it is politically safe to do so. So let’s call that what it is: moral hypocrisy."
I'm all for cutting fraud, waste, and abuse wherever it may be, whether it be in food stamps, or the Pentagon budget.
#Glass Stories in Connecticut
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Mon, 07/15/2013 - 09:53This morning, there were two news stories about Google Glass.
The first, Woodbridge man one of those chosen to test new Google Glass technology is from an interview I did with Jim Shelton from the Register about Google Glass about a week ago.
The second, Anaylsis & Video | Google Glass Review is by a friend who is also a Glass Explorer, and was not as impressed as I am. He writes:
It falls short because in the end the only people who likely will be willing to immerse themselves in 24/7 digital living are the several thousand “Glass Explorers” Google invited to purchase the $1500 product.
I responded:
As one of the other Glass Explorers in Connecticut, I would like to present a contrasting viewpoint. I received my Google Glass just over a month ago, and I'm very pleased with it.
It is true that currently, everything that I can do with Google Glass, I can do with a Smartphone. It is also true that just about everything I can do with a smartphone, I can do with a laptop and a digital camera.
However, I find it easier to take and share pictures and videos with Glass than it is to take and share pictures with a smartphone, just as I find that task easier on a smartphone than I do with a laptop and a camera.
Yet looking only at the current applications of a prototype seems a bit narrow. I have chosen to explore Glass, not for what it can currently do, but for what it will be possible to do in the future with it. I've already started developing apps for Glass as well as brainstorming with other Glass Explorers around the world.
One of the most exciting areas is looking at Glass as a sensor in health care and in grids for big data analysis.
As I commented in my interview in the New Haven Register, I believe that Google Glass is to wearable computing what the Apple Newton was to PDAs and Smartphones.
People maligned the Apple Newton, and its product life was not spectacular. Yet it laid the groundwork for PDAs and smartphones. Lon is probably right, the only people willing to spend $1,500 on a prototype are innovators and early adopters. Everyone else is likely to wait until wearable computing becomes more developed and ubiquitous. At that point, I'll set my Google Glass next to my Apple Newton and the core memory from an old PDP-8.
I didn't address the price point issue. I do believe that $1,500 is steep for participating in a development program with a prototype, but not out of line.
On the other hand, I expect that by the time the third generation of wearable computing comes out, older versions will be in the $200-$300 range.
Women's Rights and Jobs in the Best State
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sat, 07/13/2013 - 09:58I have never been a big fan localities fighting against one another to attract companies. Typically, the companies win and the localities lose. Yet some recent developments point larger political issues. A month ago, Texas Governor Rick Perry came to Connecticut to try and recruit local gun manufacturers to move to Texas in response to legislation passed in the wake of the Newtown shooting. Businesses have tried to fight worker and consumer friendly legislation talking about Connecticut being bad for business. Walmart has vowed not to open stores in Washington DC after the city council passed a law requiring large box stores to pay a living wage to its employees.
All of this begs a question, what sort of business is good for Connecticut? Do we want jobs where people have to rely on the Government or their families and friends to survive in this state? Texas might, but should we?
This was illustrated nicely in the latest Measure of America report, where Connecticut came out as the best state to live in.
Connecticut and Wyoming have nearly the same GDP. Yet Connecticut residents, on average, can expect to outlive their western compatriots by two and a half years, are almost 50 percent more likely to have a bachelor’s degree, and typically earn $7,000 more. This comparison shows how an overreliance on economic metrics such as GDP can provide misleading information about the everyday conditions of people’s lives.
Recently, Colorado has been attempting to attract businesses to relocate to their state because it is one of the healthiest states. If Connecticut wants to keep for jobs, it should be competing to be the healthiest and happiest state, and not the state where workers and consumers have the lowest paying jobs and worst health.
In the long term, this appears to be much more productive. Take a look at Costco and Walmart. Which one has better returns and stronger stock performance? Costco, the company that treats its employees well. I hope Costco will offer to step into Washington DC in lieu of Walmart.
Yet back to the politics. Gov. Perry came to Connecticut to recruit businesses that don't like our new gun laws. Perhaps, after the vote in the Texas State Legislature, it is time for Gov. Malloy to make a trip to Texas to recruit businesses that respect the rights of women.
