Category Archives: Letters

Letter to the Editor: Old Lyme First Selectman Endorses Matt Ward for Town Treasurer

Posted on by
1

To the Editor:

Matt Ward is on our Board of Selectmen and he is also one of our part-time Police officers.  In addition, he is very active in the Town’s Little League program.  Matt has recently accepted a position with a local accounting firm, so he will not seek reelection to the Board of Selectmen.  However, he is seeking to be elected as our Town Treasurer on November 7th.

The Town Treasurer is responsible to manage the Town’s investable funds and works closely with our Finance Director to be sure funds are available to pay the Town’s obligations in a timely manner.  The Treasurer must ensure the funds are invested safely and in accordance with audit policies.

Matt’s financial background includes serving as the Interim Finance Director of a neighboring town where he works closely with its Treasurer.  That town uses the same accounting software that Old Lyme uses, so Matt is well versed in its features.  In fact, when our prior Finance Director was out on leave during last year’s budget season, Matt was able to fill in to enable the budget process to move forward seamlessly.

In contrast, our current Treasurer, Michael Reiter, did not distinguish himself during this period.  First, he complained that he was not informed that our Finance Director was out on leave.  The Treasurer and the Finance Director are supposed to work closely with each other, so why was Michael in the dark?  Perhaps because he wasn’t doing his job?   Next, when the Board of Finance asked him for an update on how the Town’s funds were invested, Michael had to be educated about the various accounts and he learned they were not invested very effectively.

Let’s elect Matt Ward to be our Treasurer because he has the knowledge to do the job and the commitment to follow through.  

Sincerely,

Timothy Griswold,
Old Lyme, CT.

Editor’s Note: The author is a Republican and the current Old Lyme (OL) First Selectman. He is not seeking re-election. Reiter (D) is the current OL Town Treasurer and endorsed by the Democratic Town Committee for the position in the upcoming election. Ward (U) is endorsed by the Republican Town Committee for the position of Town Treasurer in the same election.

Letter to the Editor: Re-elect Mary Powell-St. Louis to Region 18 Board of Education, She Continuously Demonstrates Her Focus on Putting All Kids First

Posted on by
Reply

To the Editor:

Numerous Letters to the Editor and OpEd’s have been published in LymeLine, CTExaminer, and The Day, recommending Mary Powell-St Louis’ re-election to our Board of Education (BOE).  I know Mary personally and, as a moderate, independent voter, would like to add my endorsement.

Mary and I served together for nearly a decade as volunteer adult leaders of our local Boy Scout troop.  Mary continues to work tirelessly on behalf of our Scouts, going as far as to complete the highest level of adult training that Scouting offers.  The Scouting curriculum emphasizes project management, conflict resolution, listening, diversity and inclusion, mentoring, and team development – all of which benefited our troop.  Troop activities are led by Scouts, with guidance and support from adult leaders such as Mary.  She continuously demonstrates that her focus is on putting all our kids first, which carries over into her work on the BOE.

Our public school system is among the best in the State.  Families in other communities are eager to pay for the opportunity to have their kids attend our schools.  Mr. Lodge’s implication that our BOE, administrators, and educators aren’t inclusive of all children and aren’t putting them first doesn’t make sense to me.  I personally know children who were or are in our schools who have diverse needs.  In my experience, with consistent parental involvement, our school system cares and goes the extra mile to help each of them.  With her focus on continuous improvement, Mary recognizes that there is always more that our schools can do to support the needs of all students while keeping in mind what is affordable for our taxpayers.

I believe that Mary is by far the more qualified candidate to represent our town on the Region 18 Board of Education.  In her eight years on the BOE, Mary has held numerous positions, including Treasurer, Vice Chair of the Board, Vice Chair of the Building sub-committee, and has been a member of several subcommittees, such as the Safety, Policy, and Facilities and Finance committees.  She has broad experience in all facets of the Board’s functions, and understands the needs of our students, educators, administrators, and taxpayers.  Mary has her own views, and believes in compromise and collaboration to achieve the best outcome for all of us. We are incredibly fortunate that she is willing to volunteer to serve our communities for another four years.

Please come out and vote next Tuesday, November 7th, and join me in re-electing Mary.

Respectfully,

Tony Lynch,
Lyme, CT.

Editor’s Note:  The author is a former Committee Chairman of Boy Scouts of America Troop 26, Lyme-Old Lyme.

Letter to the Editor: Vote Democratic Slate to Rectify Unhealthy Imbalance in Old Lyme Local Government

Posted on by
Reply

To the Editor:

I hope you are aware that there will be a municipal election in Old Lyme on November 7. In all, there are 23 elected positions on the ballot. Of those positions, Democrats currently hold only six seats. This imbalance in our local government does not allow a variety of viewpoints and is not good for Old Lyme. It can only be changed by increasing citizen participation on our Boards, and Commissions. We simply must elect more representative voices.

Therefore, I am asking you to vote for the exceptionally qualified slate of Old Lyme residents endorsed by the Old Lyme Democratic Town Committee. This slate, led by current Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker, for First Selectman, and current Planning Commission alternate, Jim Lampos, for Selectman, can be viewed here.  Please take a look at their credentials. 

The most important action we can all take is to make sure our Old Lyme friends and family are registered to vote and then actually get to the polls on Election Day. With your help in electing the Democratic slate, all of whom are on Row A of the ballot, we can improve the balance of voices in our town government on November 7.

Sincerely,

Mary Jo Nosal,
Old Lyme.

Editor’s Note: The author is the Chair of the Old Lyme Democratic Town Committee.

Letter to the Editor: Old Lyme Treasurer Reiter Again Refutes Statements Made About Him, Looks Forward to Serving Another Four Years in Same Role

Posted on by
1

To the Editor:

I read John Flick’s October 30 letter to the editor entitled, “’Dedicated Volunteer’ Ward has ‘In-Depth  Financial Expertise, Experience’ Required to Serve as Old Lyme Town Treasurer” and was dismayed to  find the exact same (word for word) untrue statement about my record as Treasurer that was printed in an LTE [on] this LymeLine website from October 16. So I am here to say again, while what he writes about Mr. Ward may be true, what Mr Flick writes about me continues to be false. 

Mr. Flick notes with exactly the same words as the [previous] LymeLine LTE that he reached out to Board of Finance members and was told that I rarely attend any Board of Finance meetings. I remind you all that he left out a rather crucial point: the Town Treasurer has no standing need to attend Board of Finance meetings. The duties of the Town Treasurer and the duties of the Board of Finance are different. One can easily research the statutory job responsibilities of the Treasurer in section 7-80 of the Connecticut General Statutes which is titled, “Duties of the Treasurer.” As I said before, the Treasurer is responsible for managing the Town’s money and ensuring that all bills are paid. Which means the Treasurer works with the Finance Department, not the Board of Finance. Nor do I report to the Board of Finance or Board of Selectmen either. 

So what have I been doing over the past four years, besides the day to day task of working with the Finance Department? When COVID hit I worked with the Finance Director and our IT Company to ensure that even if Town Hall had to shut down, bills and paychecks would still be paid. (And while I was at it, I worked with the Town Hall IT Committee to upgrade all our IT systems to current standards). More  recently, when our Finance Director was out on extended medical leave, I helped find a temporary replacement to fill the role until a permanent replacement could be found. 

I believe that the Republicans actually do know the Town Treasurer responsibilities and continuing to push this lie in now a second LTE concerns me deeply. If they are telling people this clearly false statement about me and the Town Treasurer responsibilities, what else are they telling you that isn’t true? 

I take this role extremely seriously. Honesty and integrity are the backbone of all elected positions. I’ve  been inside Town Hall for the past four years working hard for the people of Old Lyme and I’m looking  forward to continuing to work for you over the next four years.

Sincerely,

Michael Reiter,
Old Lyme.

Editor’s Note: i) The author is the current Old Lyme Treasurer and the candidate endorsed by the Old Lyme Democratic Town Committee for the position in the upcoming election.

ii) The author is correct that the letter from Mr. Flick is an almost ‘verbatim’ copy of Mr. Bucior’s letter. We apologize that we did not notice that — we would not have published the second letter had we realized. We offered to take down Mr. Flick’s letter but Mr. Reiter preferred to respond to it since it had been published for a few days. We would respectfully ask that letters are not submitted, which are effectively copies of previously submitted letter,s, but signed by a different author. Thank you.

Letter to the Editor: Banning is on the Ballot

Posted on by
4

To the Editor:

In June, a number of candidates on the current Old Lyme and Lyme RTC slates, including Board of Ed candidates Mary Powell St. Louis and Mike Presti, signed a letter seeking removal of sex ed books from the Young Adult section of the public library.  Surrogates continue this shameless campaign even now, and have gone so far as to publicly call for the resignation of Democrats on the Board of Education who have rejected this censorship. 

So what’s all the fuss about?  Two cartoon sex education books.  Are the books obscene? Unequivocally: no.  From a legal perspective it isn’t even close. The U.S. Supreme Court addressed this issue in Miller v. California. There, the Court noted that in order for a book to be determined obscene, one must review it “taken as a whole” and find that its primary purpose was to appeal to “prurient interests” (i.e. to turn people on). The Court understood that context matters. It understood that historically censorship proponents often cherry-picked “objectionable” out-of-context snippets to the detriment of society.  For example, the previously governing Comstock Laws led to anatomy textbooks being prohibited from being sent to medical students on obscenity grounds. (At least those future doctors didn’t have to see naked people!)

A reasonable person would see that taken as a whole, these books are meant as a form of relatable and informal sex education – a sometimes goofy but genuinely sincere attempt to answer the very real questions that might stem from an often confusing and clinical school curriculum.

Unless they are your own kids, attempting to “hide” that resource from teens who seek it out isn’t just wrong, it’s unconstitutional.  The federal court in a case called Sund v. Wichita Falls, found that “the First Amendment to the United States Constitution indisputably protect(s) the right to receive information” and therefore the First Amendment is violated by “the forced removal of children’s books to the adult section of the Library.” Almost a duplicate of the facts here. (But the Court does give a solution, “if a parent wishes to prevent her child from reading a particular book, that parent can and should accompany the child to the Library, and should not prevent all children in the community from gaining access to constitutionally protected materials.”) That should end this. These books are by definition not obscene, and banning them, moving them, or restricting them is unconstitutional censorship. That’s the law.  

So why are we still having this conversation?  Because certain people have made a choice.  They’ve gone “all in.”  They’ve decided that the national Republican Party has cracked the code to victory.  

And that code means book bans are on the ballot. 

Sincerely,

David Rubino,
Old Lyme.