All Boards

Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
Posts awaiting your approval 0
John Trenam July 23, 2014 at 12:08 AM
Did you or maybe someone else give the picture to the editor of Voices? I think it would be hardRead Moreto keep her on the Southbury beat if they are faced with that kind of conflict. So much for journalistic integrity
Marcye Britt July 25, 2014 at 12:40 PM
Right you are Jeffrey - Wednesday's article gave EE the usual kid glove treatment from MaeveRead MoreSlavin. Southbury is ill served by the local press and that includes the Republican-American and Chris Gardiner. Neither of these reporters ask the tough questions - which is what reporters are supposed to do. The Stephens tuition reimbursement should not even be an issue. The State requires both Part 1 and Part II of the training to be certified as an ACO if you were hired after a certain date. Ms Stephens took Part I last year and the Town paid for it up front. To get into the limited class for part 2 this year, she was authorized by her supervisor to register for the course and charge it to her credit card because they couldn't wait for the Town to process a payment - there were only a few seats left in the class. Re: Ms Stephens' job description per Edelson which requires only part 1-- The state does not make any distinction between deputy, assistant or full-time ACO - why? Because the job exposes you to dangerous situations regardless of whether you are working part or full time, or a deputy or assistant. Ms Stephens covers for her super during vacations, illnesses, etc. Remember she was the arresting officer in the Boeckel case! On that topic and Edelson's recent letter to Voices and Republican-American informing the citizenry that no more dogs from that case are living at the pound - we should all be concerned about his handling of this case. We should demand confirmation from Mr. Edelson that the case is no longer pending in court; that the dogs were returned because Ms Boeckel agreed to the conditions under which they were to be returned; that two animal control officers inspected the home and found no more than three dogs living there in healthy conditions and that Ms Boeckel consented to regular inspections of her premises with no prior notice by the ACO. Several people have told me she now has six dogs. Does Mr Edelson know this yet? Does he want to see a repeat of this situation? What steps are being taken by the Town to ensure this doesn't happen again with this individual??
Marcye Britt July 25, 2014 at 12:44 PM
Another comment: Mrs. Edelson's sister insisted during a phone conversation with me that Mrs.Read MoreEdels on doesn't even know Maeve Slavin...well I guess she does now. The reason for the phone conversation is another story....
See more »