Chariho School Parents’ Forum

June 16, 2008

A funding option for the Hopkinton Town Council

Filed under: 1 — Editor @ 12:00 am

I will be making a presentation to the Hopkinton Town Council tomorrow night. Here is the letter sent:

June 9, 2008
Hopkinton Town Council
One Town Hall
Hopkinton, RI 02833

Dear members of the Hopkinton Town Council:

I would like to present an education funding option for the children of Hopkinton and, briefly explain why this option is necessary and important to our town and our children.

The Rhode Island education system’s per pupil spending is the 9th most costly in the nation (1).  Our per-pupil spending on salaries and benefits is the nation’s highest (2). Preliminary research suggests that RI spends 34% more than the national average educating our children (3).

What has all of this money gotten us?  As frequently reported, this year’s New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) showed that only 22% of RI students could score a 62.5% or better on the math portion of the test.  The education standards have dropped so low that this score which once would have been a D-, is now called “proficient.” Chariho was slightly better at 29% but in a state with the largest city having the “third poorest urban area in the country” (4), we should not compare Hopkinton to Providence or Central Falls and we should not be content with less than one-third of our children able to pass a math test.

Rhode Island is low on national standards (5), and Chariho is low on equivalent RI standards.  As a mater of fact, the three towns comprising the Chariho School District (Hopkinton, Richmond and Charlestown) have fewer indicators of “risk” than do Westerly, South Kingstown, North Kingstown, Exeter and West Greenwich, our geographic peers (6), yet our student performance is the worst of the bunch (7).  This indicates that Chariho is underperforming compared to its demographic cohorts.

There is no other way to describe it; we have high costs for low performance.  We see this in many areas in RI but education has a direct impact on our children and the future of our society – this should be our first priority.  We are doing a disservice to our children.  You, as members of the Hopkinton Town Council have it in your power, and I would suggest it is your duty, to change the education dynamic.

I would like to respectfully request that Hopkinton take it upon itself to empower parents with the freedom of choice by implementing a voucher system for education. 

A voucher system would improve the education system and deliver immediate results.  By allowing parents the same power of consumer choice as we all use when purchasing a car, groceries or the services of a doctor, we will generate competition that incentivizes performance and create choice that provides for the individual needs of all children, including those with special needs and special talents.  We cannot expect a monopoly like the current public education system to be sufficiently flexible to meet the needs of every child in our diverse community, but we give those parents and children no good option.

The utilization of vouchers will not only improve education but could also save the town a considerable amount of money. Chariho averages over $12,000 per student and as much as $52,000 for the average RYSE student (8).  Private school tuitions can be as little as 1/3 the price.  By providing a voucher that is capped at a percentage of the Chariho expenditure we can ensure that a voucher system will be at the very least fiscally neutral and will most likely save the town and the taxpayers a significant amount of money.

There will be many, if not most parents who will elect to stay at Chariho.  A recent study by one of my business affiliates determined that as little as 10% of the parents looked at 2 or more schools when selecting their child’s school (9).  But considering the current discontent with Chariho, I believe our participation will be higher.

The more participation we have, the more money we could save and the better educated our children will be.

The mechanism of providing consumer choice is allowed by both federal and state law. In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that vouchers, even when used for parochial schools, are constitutional (10) and the RI Constitution has language equivalent to that decision (11);
        “[N]o person shall be compelled to frequent or to support any religious worship,
place, or ministry whatever, except in fulfillment of such person’s voluntary contract …”
Rhode Island Case law (12, 13) and statute (14) support the ability to provide choice in education as well.  The Hopkinton Town Council has within its power the ability to place a voucher option in the Town Charter. More importantly, it is the obligation of the council to do its best to provide for a suitable and effective education and to do so while promoting the interests of the taxpayers.

A voucher system will not restrict people from staying at Chariho, it will not necessitate withdrawal from the District, and it will not require a change to the Chariho Act.  But it will empower parents with consumer choice and it can provide a better education for our children.  The possibility of saving money is nice too.

Those who may utilize the voucher system and leave Chariho are not asking for more money or to force anyone else to make a change. In fact, with the discounted cost of a private education that we might choose, the dollars available for each public school student remaining in the system could increase. We are simply asking that we be given an option other than the public schools that seem to be failing, and we are asking for that choice right now, when it can actually help out children.

I would be happy to provide more details or answer questions regarding this proposal.  I would also be willing to provide cost and enrolment change estimates as well as utilize my resources to implement the program and attract education options into the area.

Thank you for your consideration.


Bill Felkner

1 RIPEC – How Rhode Island School Finances Compare
2 ProJo OpEd, Dec., 12, 2005 – Tom Coyne, Stop the R.I. ripoff in education, welfare
American Federation of Teachers
3 Ocean State Policy Research Institute – Brian Bishop, The Costs of Immigration
4 Bob Walsh quote on Lively Experiment
5 National Assessment of Educational Progress
6 Kids Count data on poverty, parent education, parent employment and family structure.
7 New England Common Assessment Program – Chariho vs demographic cohorts
8 National Center for Educational Studies
9 Wisconsin Policy Institute – Fixing the Milwaukee Public Schools: The Limits of Parent-Driven Reform 10 Zelman v Simmons-Harris, (00-1751) 536 U.S. 639 (2002)
11 Rhode Island Const. Art. I, § 3
12 Bowerman v. O’Connor, 247 A.2d 82 (R.I. 1968 )
13 Exeter-West Greenwich Regional School District v. Pontarelli, 460 A.2d 934 (R.I. 1983)
14 Rhode Island General Laws Section 16-2-19


  1. If you are successful in your efforts to convince local leaders of the wisdom of school choice, you can skip every graduation ceremony for eternity and you’ll still be the hero to all the childfren (whether they realize it or not).

    With the bond marching forward again, choice may be Hopkinton’s salvation. If things go awry and Hopkinton families make the mistake of approving any part of a Chariho bond, school choice may be the only thing left that will save us from a very bad decision.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 7:10 am | Reply

  2. Bill are you sure that Hopkinton wouldn’t have to pull out of the district to do this? Also what about transportation? Who would be responsible for that cost? I unfortunatly can’t make it tonight, but I would like to hear more about this proposal. Maybe we can discuss this sometime.

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 8:28 am | Reply

  3. Most parent’s who really care about their child’s education could care less about the setup of the district, or the effects a voucher system would have on the district. If the question is “Would the Chariho district in its current status prevent Hopkinton from establishing a voucher system?” then an answer is needed. As for tranportation, parent’s who currently send their child(ren) to other than public schools already bear this responsibility, I doubt this is an overriding factor in the choice to get the best education possible.

    Comment by RS — June 16, 2008 @ 9:22 am | Reply

  4. I have heard that PATV will stop providing coverage of School Committee and Town Council meetings.Channel 18 on Cox has no such events listed on their program schedule for this week.

    It is my understanding that cable TV had made a commitment to air these events when they were granted their licenses by the PUC and/or FCC.

    Comment by george abbott — June 16, 2008 @ 10:21 am | Reply

  5. Hi!
    I will not be at the Town Council meeting tonight in Hopkinton but Bill mentioned this at last night’s GOP Town Committee meeting, I also saw George there.
    It will be interesting how this is received. However obviously there will be be
    STAUNCH RESISTANCE to this by the education bureaucracy.Will this be scuttled by the educational insiders and supporters before a logical and rational debate takes place?

    Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — June 16, 2008 @ 10:41 am | Reply

  6. Everyone who is interested in this option should attend if you can. I realize with children, work and other activities it may not be possible, but I would like to hear from the citizens to discuss this interesting development. My understanding is that the vouchers can be used for Parochial, Private, Charter, Public and Alternative schools. Transportation is not necessarily provided but the choices may still be very important to many parents and students.

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 16, 2008 @ 11:01 am | Reply

  7. Hi!
    This obviously should be a topic for workshops that should be set immediately. Obviously blood will boil with even the thought of these options while others will be pleasantly delighted. Do you think most of Bill’s collegaue’s on the Chariho establishment and Chariho School Committee will suffer Angina attacks because of this? Just teasing!
    I rarely miss a town council meeting but the Grace United Methodist Church I attend in Westerly is having a get together at the Shelter Harbor Inn so I plan to be with them tonight.

    Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — June 16, 2008 @ 11:52 am | Reply

  8. maybe the hopkinton town council should reschedule since hirst cant be there

    Comment by what? — June 16, 2008 @ 12:02 pm | Reply

  9. by the way…..did you get endorsed scott bill?

    Comment by what? — June 16, 2008 @ 12:03 pm | Reply

  10. Your on target Mr. Hirst. School choice scares the heck out of government schools, many school boards, and administrations. They fear competition above all else because they lose control. Do you think Mr. Petit puts in all this effort to then let parents decide what is best for their children? Frankly I believe I’d be good at deciding curriculum and what should be taught and what shouldn’t be taught. The difference is that I’m not so arrogant that I think my opinion should override the opinion of a child’s parents.

    Keep in mind that public schools as we know them do not disappear when school choice become available. Most parents continue to send their children to government controlled schools. What does happen is the government schools are forced to adapt to competition. They improve and demand more from their employees, but there is no reason government school employees can’t teach as well as non-government employees. Once properly motivated they compete very well and everyone’s children reap the benefits.

    I can’t imagine we are limited by the Chariho Act. School choice was likely not well known back when the Chariho Act was put together. School choice would not be the same as Hopkinton starting its own schools to compete with Chariho. All we’d be doing is telling parents that they get to decide and we’ll pay a reasonable amount based on what we save when we don’t have their children at Chariho.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 1:12 pm | Reply

  11. GREAT! Let us give all parents and taxpayers some control over school spending. I remain an advocate for school vouchers. My children were educated in both private and public schools. Transportation was difficult at times, but we were able to car pool with others. I do not believe that CHARIHO will be greatly impacted at first, as the number of private schools is low. BUT with the decline in enrollment in WESTERLY schools, there may be some openings available there with vouchers from Hopkinton. The graduation rate there is higher, and parents could choose from a number of other day schools in the area as space permitted.

    Comment by Dorothy Gardiner — June 16, 2008 @ 1:21 pm | Reply

  12. Let me start by saying I am not opposed to vouchers, at least not yet. I won’t speak for or against because I don’t have enough information to do that. I will have to do some research and listen to those who have before I say yes or no. I was just asking a question about transportation. If I read Mrs. Gardiner’s post correctly, I would say that the parent would have to provide the transportation.

    If it cost $12 thousand a year for a student at Chariho; is the voucher for the same amount of money? I am not sure how that works. If Chariho is $12 thousand and, lets say Westerly is only $11 thousand, where does the other $1 thousand go? Is this left in a fund for the Town? Does this help off set the transportation cost if the district has to pay? Does this money just go with the student to help the parent pay for transportation? And what happens if the parents choose a school that cost $14 thousand a year, who pays that cost? Does the parent than have to make up that difference?

    Just questions that if anyone knows the answers to I would appreciate the help. This could be a big decision for this district.

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 1:37 pm | Reply

  13. Bob,
    Come to the meeting tonight. We all want to know all those answers and many other questions as well. It should be very interesting – certainly nothing that was available when I went to public schools. Hopefully the discussion will be illuminating and vibrant.

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 16, 2008 @ 1:51 pm | Reply

  14. Mainstream students do not cost $12,000, $13,000 or $14,000 per year to educate. Per pupil cost is the average cost per student and includes special education students who can cost tens of thousands to educate. Who knows, maybe RYSE students cost hundreds of thousands?

    I believe the town could designate whatever amount they wish. Elementary Schools are less expensive than High Schools so they could likely offer larger vouchers for older children. I’m unsure how transportation works, but I believe transportation to local private schools is currently provided for by the community. Since the cost of transportation is part of the per pupil cost I see no reason why transportation can’t be calculated into the voucher program.

    Vouchers would not pay above the amount needed. If Hopkinton offered $8000 voucher but a school only charged $5000, then the money would not go to the parents but it would go back to the town. Personally I would offer homeschooling parents a few thousand dollars, but since they are technically not schools this might to more controversial.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 1:55 pm | Reply

  15. What appeals to me about the whole thing is when a significant amount of Hopkinton kids go to other schools then like it or not Charlestown and Richmond will carry a larger economic burden for their budget and bond decisions at Chariho.

    Remember as Hopkinton kids leave Chariho we will pay a lesser percentage of the total cost. If Richmond and Charlestown decide to continue to throw away money with contracts and other irrepsonsible spending then they will pay a higher price. Plus as Hopkinton is forced to spend more and more at Chariho the amount we offer in voucher will also increase. This means more schools will form if there is profit to be made.

    Instead of Hopkinton being stuck paying for Charlestown and Richmond’s irresponsible spending those towns will have less power to make Hopkinton live with their irresponsibility. I like the idea of parents deciding but throw in the fact that vouchers stick a thumb in the eyes of Richmond and Charlestown and how can we resist?

    Comment by Real Question — June 16, 2008 @ 2:06 pm | Reply

  16. Thank you CR. I see where you are coming from as per student and per cost. Right now the district pays for the students to be transported. That is why I was wondering if the cost would be turned over to the parent now that the parent would have to provide the transportation.

    I do agree that if this was something that was to be done than homeschooling should also be included and those parents should get something to help offset the cost of books and supplies.

    If Hopkinton offered $8000 voucher and the school only charged $5000 and the town gets the money back or keeps the money; what does that money go towards? And if the parent doesn’t like this school do they have to wait all year before pulling their child out and place them in a new school? Now that school costs $6500, where does that money come from? One problem I can see is it being an administrative nightmare for the Town. At least at the begining until everyone found a school they liked and it all settled down.

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 2:09 pm | Reply

  17. I’m no expert on choice. Mr. Felkner may have the answers.

    I do know that choice is used in this country and most other countries. They figure it out and I’m sure we’re up to the task.

    I’m a supporter of choice because I believe parents are better at protecting their children’s interests than politicians. Most parents wouldn’t tolerate things like constructivist math. Parents put their children first, not school employees.

    Choice is not about money to me. I’d support it even if it cost the community more. I have so much faith in parents choosing that I know that the educational outcomes when parents decide will justify the cost. I hate paying for failure, but paying for success doesn’t bother me at all.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 2:15 pm | Reply

  18. Bob:CHARIHO bills Hopkinton based on the number of students we send to it’s school’s .I don’t believe that the School Committee ,the CHARIHO Administration,the other two towns or the unions would have any standing in the establishment of a voucher program for Hopkinton’s children.Also,I’m unaware of any language in the CHARIHO Act or the Rhode Island General laws governing regional school districts that restricts a town from issuing school vouchers.

    Comment by george abbott — June 16, 2008 @ 2:20 pm | Reply

  19. I’d be very surprised if a decision by Hopkinton to allow parent to choose schools did not result in numerous lawsuits. As much as I want parents to choose there is no doubt that the unions and political powers in Rhode Island have a vested interest in maintaining the government school monopoly. They will not be pleased if Hopkinton empowers the little people and bypasses the elites.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 2:28 pm | Reply

  20. OK thank George. CR I agree with you on the lawsuits. I believe it happened in California when they went to vouchers. The one problem I would have is this scenerio: lets just say a child is going to a school that cost more than the $8000 dollar voucher, the parents have to pay the difference; they loose their job; now where does that student go to school? The student than has to go to a school that the voucher covers the costs like it or not; am I correct?

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 2:46 pm | Reply

  21. What happens now when families move to different school districts? Worse case scenario Chariho is always available. We must have students who enter school during the school year? I’ve yet to hear of a school choice program which put government schools out of business.

    Comment by Real Question — June 16, 2008 @ 3:01 pm | Reply

  22. I can’t help but think raising objections to a program (school choice) which is used successfully in this country and around the world has no other purpose than to undermine the concept. If one accepts the premise that parents choosing schools is preferable to government employees choosing schools, then ask questions about choice, but let’s not pretend there is an obstacle which can’t be overcome.

    For sure there are numerous issues that must be addressed to effectively implement choice. Despite this obvious truth, we also know implementing choice can be done because it has been done.

    If someone wants to oppose choice based on misguided allegiance to the government school system, then go ahead, but don’t degrade the proven value of choice. Also don’t tell people public schools will be replaced by private schools. This isn’t true.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 3:18 pm | Reply

  23. These are all good questions. The answers will be fascinating and may lead everyone to a calmer place. If Chariho wants to keep the 10 year olds with the teens perhaps parents can choose to send their 5th and 6th grade student to another private or parochial school until they are a true Junior High student. Then return to Chariho for the larger community of students.

    It may also lessen the strain on the size of the middle and high school if fewer students attend from Hopkinton or the other two towns if they want to address vouchers for their students. Equalization isn’t an issue, transportation may not be an issue and the public schools already buy books for home schooled and some other students.

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 16, 2008 @ 3:53 pm | Reply

  24. cR now you are being a fool. Ok lets just jump right in and do it becasue you think it is the best thing to do. NO I will ask questions! I am not saying nor have I said that I am against it but I am not just jumping into it becasue BIll Felkner says it is good and his friends all want this. Sorry, you can jump on that ship. I will make sure I am satisfied first.

    If you don’t like me asking questions than don’t come on.

    Barbara you are correct it might lessen the strain. I think this is worth looking at very closely and see if it is something that will work for us. But I do think we need to look at all aspects of vouchers before we just jump right in.

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 4:15 pm | Reply

  25. Guilty conscience Mr. Petit?

    I clearly said to ask questions. Nothing wrong with legitimate questions. I even said that their are numerous issues that need to be addressed.

    Your problem seems to be that I warned against those who raise false objections. I didn’t identify you as one of these people. Since you’ve chosen to take offense then are we to assume you are making false objections and regardless of the proven success of school choice you’ll come up with an excuse to oppose it? I think Mr. Petit may have got ahead of himself and let the cat out of the bag.

    Comment by Real Question — June 16, 2008 @ 4:28 pm | Reply

  26. I don’t know how you do it every time Mr.. Petit. I agree asking questions is needed and you still get angry. I don’t understand your emotional reactions?

    School choice lets parents decide. Right now school administrators decide. Who thinks school administrators make better parents than parents?

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 4:31 pm | Reply

  27. Excellent point about parents who want kids to remain in elementary having their needs met while parents wanting kids to go to middle school also having the flexibility.

    Comment by Real Question — June 16, 2008 @ 4:33 pm | Reply

  28. Mr. Abbott does the Chariho Act use specific language such as “vouchers” or “tuition” when referring to the payments from towns to Chariho? Maybe we already have a quasi-voucher system and don’t even know it?

    Most school districts around the country have tax equity within the district. Because Chariho charges each town based on enrollment then we are real paying for education by the student rather than by district. Implementing vouchers may require little effort if it turns out we are already running a voucher system?

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 4:37 pm | Reply

  29. Real Question going back over your post in #21 I assume it is in repsonse to my post in #20. You say in worse case scenario Chariho is always available; I ask is it? Not if you have a voucher for $8000 thousand and it cost more than that to send them to Cahriho and the parents can’t afford it. If I understand all of this correctly ( and maybe I don’t but this is why I am asking) once we decide to pull out for vouchers are they now out of the Chariho School District? This is why I would think being a regional school you would have to pull out as a town and voucher you children back in. We are different than a school like Westerly. Their town and school are one. We are regionalized someone has to watch over the voucher program. If the district does than they can pay out to the schools that are choosen and the difference to the towns.If the towns take care of it than they would need to pull out their money from the district and pay out of those funds, I think Hopkinton is around $17-18 million.

    I hope some of these questions get asked and answered tonight. I again can not attend the meeting but do look forward to hearing more on this.

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 4:39 pm | Reply

  30. Why vouchers? Why not withdraw if you don’t like the way things are done at Chariho. You have a choice to stay or go. Hopkinton can leave and it won’t be missed. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

    Comment by CharihoParents — June 16, 2008 @ 4:42 pm | Reply

  31. CR and RQ If I jump the gun I apologize but since I was the only one asking quesstions when I saw this quote from CR “I can’t help but think raising objections to a program (school choice) which is used successfully in this country and around the world has no other purpose than to undermine the concept.”I will admitt I lost my temper as I thought you were saying that I didn’t want vouchers. I am just trying to get answers because I can not go tonight and I do want to understand this program. It may very well be a good thing.

    Sorry for jumping on you if that was not your intentions.

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 4:44 pm | Reply

  32. I hope the solicitor listens intently to Mr. Felkner’s presentation. I can’t see how offering vouchers would be withdrawing from Chariho. All Hopkinton would be doing is making money available for parents who choose not to send their children to Chariho. Officially Chariho would still be the town’s government school. That would be my take on it, but I’m no lawyer. I wonder if any other towns with regional schools also offer vouchers?

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 4:50 pm | Reply

  33. I still have many questions about school choice too Mr. Petit. I know it can be done because it is done. I know it can be successful because it is successful. I have faith in free markets and logically school choice creates competition which results in superior product, but how we get there from here is still a good question in my opinion. I am concerned about false objections. This is very common when school choice is discussed, but most often it comes from the educational establishment or people who cling to the sentiment of government education, not parents who want what’s best for their children.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 16, 2008 @ 4:54 pm | Reply

  34. If Hopkinton withdraws money then it is withdrawing period. Good riddance!

    Comment by CharihoParents — June 16, 2008 @ 4:58 pm | Reply

  35. Cr I understand what you are saying. But I assure you that right now I am not saying I am for or against it because I do have so many questions. I know this program works and is being used in different parts of the world and in our states. Like someone said earlier we just need to dot all of our i’s and cross all the t’s and make sure all is right. I also agree with competition making a superior product and I would like to see all of our students superior.

    Comment by bpetit — June 16, 2008 @ 5:02 pm | Reply

  36. Perhaps I am being too simplistic, but it seems to me that if I can shop for the best(for me and my family) medical care, food, clothing, cars, a home, WHY can’t I shop for the best fit for education? WHY can’t a parent have a choice of the type of education they want for their child? Why NOT vouchers for at least part of the current cost of education at a school of choice? What a great way to get parents more involved in parenting and providing the best for their child! Seems to me to be The American Way! Freedom, Liberty, and all that good stuff?

    Comment by Dorothy Gardiner — June 16, 2008 @ 6:02 pm | Reply

  37. To CR: Operating expenses for each fiscal year or portion thereof shall be apportioned
    among the member towns in proportion to the relationship of their respective pupil enrollment in
    the said district school system on October 1 of the previous calendar year to the total pupil
    enrollment in said school system on said date. In the event that enrollment in the said district
    school system has not been accomplished on October 1 of any year, operating expenses for the
    ensuing year or portion thereof shall be apportioned among the member towns in proportion to
    the ratio that the total number of students enrolled in grades kindergarten through twelve (12),
    inclusive, residing in each of said towns and receiving education at such town’s expense as of
    said October 1, bears to the total number of such students in the entire district.

    CHARIHO has been commonly referred to as a “Tuition School” for many years.

    Comment by george abbott — June 16, 2008 @ 6:45 pm | Reply

  38. Dorothy,
    Parents already do have a choice, they can shop for what they feel is the best education for their children. Why should I as a taxpayer pay for someone’s child to attend a parochial school or a charter school. If that’s what parents want, then they are free to do it.

    I do believe that Bob Petit is correct in stating that currently Chariho pays for out of district transportation. Why should I as a taxpayer have to pay to transport these students out of district? Parents make a choice to send their children out of district then they should pay for the transportation as well. I don’t want it on my dime!

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 16, 2008 @ 6:47 pm | Reply

  39. Why should I as a taxpayer pay for someone’s child to attend any school? That question makes as much sense as CP’s question.

    I believe in parents teaching values not schools, yet I pay Chariho for sex ed., nutrition, health and many other topics I personally would prefer my children learn at home. We could all complain about what we are forced to pay for, but if parents are allowed to choose the schools then each family will get the education for their children that they want rather than the education chosen by strangers. Bill Day or dad and mom?

    Comment by Truth or Consequences — June 16, 2008 @ 10:30 pm | Reply

  40. Because we (all three towns) do not pay for our regional school system by equal taxation of household but we pay by enrollment (or by student) we are effectively paying tuition per child. Which should mean we could offer parents X amount of dollars if they choose not to send their child to a public school. It does not need to be a large amount to begin. It could actually go up by year as we assess the movement of parental choice (also allows us to get a handle on the numbers of students/by budget). For instance $1500 the first year, $2500 the second year, $3000 the third year….

    We already pay for transportation within the region (not the district) and soon within the state if the state takes over all transportation – which it is planning on doing shortly. We pay for Charter students tuition now through the district. Public schools are just that – Public. Which means students can return to them at almost any time.

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 16, 2008 @ 11:16 pm | Reply

  41. I think before we jump on the state paying for anything we need to look at why we are in the position we are in. Teh state mandates that we teach sex ed, health and some of the other programs that T or C is talking about. The STATE by no means pays for all the programs they mandate. So I won’t beleive the state taking over transportation costs until it is written in stone. We all know they change their minds up in the State House more than New England weather.

    I might shock a lot of people here but here goes. I actually agree with Mrs. Gardiner’s post #36. What a great way to get parents involved in the education of their own children. Freedom of choice the great American way.

    I would still need to have a lot of questions answered before I would make a concrete decision. Only becasue I would want to make sure it is the best for all of us.

    Comment by bpetit — June 17, 2008 @ 1:10 pm | Reply

  42. Bob,
    You are probably right that it will take some time before the state takes over all the bus routes, but it is coming.

    Remember also that many parochial and private school students are taken to school by their parents or a family/friend now. They have their own carpools that they have found without anyone’s help.

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 17, 2008 @ 4:00 pm | Reply

  43. Barbara that I don’t agree with I think a lot of people still count on transportation. Not that this would be a stopper for vouchers but needs to be considered.

    Comment by bpetit — June 17, 2008 @ 4:08 pm | Reply

  44. Dear CP,

    I already pay over $8,000 a year in taxes. On my street, there are 13 homes, and of those 13 homes, only THREE have children in school. THREE of the homes had residents for more then 40 years with no children! YOU, as a parent, will NEVER have to “pay for someones child” to attend another school. I am sure that your portion of taxes pays for for a fraction of one childs education at CHARIHO. Of course, we could do what many towns in Maine do, give all homes with NO children in school a 50% to 60% rebate on their taxes? Would THAT be better? Require all towns and cities in RI to only charge parents who have children in public school those taxes need to support the schools? THEN parents could pay for the education they want!

    Comment by Dorothy Gardiner — June 17, 2008 @ 5:01 pm | Reply

  45. OOPS! Maine has changed their property tax rebates/savings to three types: Homestead, “Circuit Breaker” (rebates based on the % of taxes to income) and elderly rebates, which I believe start at age 59 1/2! You can qualify for two if not all three rebates based on your tax bill vs. income, homestead rebate, and/or age.

    Comment by Dorothy Gardiner — June 17, 2008 @ 5:30 pm | Reply

  46. Dorothy, that’s quite the assumption on your part, you have no idea on what I pay for taxes. I love the way people jump to conclusions about other people’s circumstances on this blog.

    TorC, I agree with part of your post #39. I firmly believe that the schools should go back to teaching the fundamentals, Reading, Writing, Math, History and Science. The rest of the things are pure BS that the state mandates and forces the schools in the state to have to hire more staff then what’s really needed. Our legistlature, primarily the House of Representatives, had a chance last night to allow the school districts to set aside some of these unfunded mandates but they wouldn’t do it. Heck, the House of Representatives wouldn’t even take a stand on 10% co-pay for their health insurance. They took the chicken way out of it and layed the motion on the table, not once but twice. So, we as taxpayers, really shouldn’t expect much relief coming from our legislature. I say, vote the current legislature out of office!

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 19, 2008 @ 7:23 am | Reply

  47. We vote for these morons so we get what we deserve. Vouchers may be a way of taking back control of the education of our kids. Take control from the state and the local politicians and give it to the parents. Parents who want the schools to teach their kids non academic nonsense will still have the option. Parents who want schools to only teach academics can pick schools that stick to the basics.

    Comment by Real Question — June 19, 2008 @ 9:36 am | Reply

  48. RQ, remember that when you go into the voting booth this September and November and you see an incumbents name on the ballot.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 19, 2008 @ 10:19 am | Reply

  49. I haven’t voted for Kennedy is years. He care about power, not the local community. Breene lost my vote by allowing the bond revote. I’d don’t care who runs against them.

    Comment by Real Question — June 19, 2008 @ 10:35 am | Reply

  50. RQ,
    Breene didn’t bring the revote to the Senate, Mr. Algiere did. Mr. Breene said that the three town councils did not approve – Hopkinton rejected it. He tried to support us.

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 19, 2008 @ 1:41 pm | Reply

  51. Hi!
    Last Sunday night I made a motion, seconded by Bill Felkner that passed at the Hopkinton Republican Town Committee to notify the Governor about vetoing the Chariho legislation. Our GOP Town Chair in Hopkinton announced it at the Hopkinton Town Council last Monday evening. The big question is whether the Hopkinton Democratic Town Committee will do the same? Vincenzo Cordone is Chairman of the committee and can be reached at about the Dems opposing it formally.

    Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — June 19, 2008 @ 4:53 pm | Reply

  52. Hi!
    I talked with Kevin today. He was the ONLY STATE SENATOR to vote against it. Call the Governor’s office to voice your disapproval if you like at 222-2080,.The Governor’s Fax is 222-8096,. To thank Sen. Breene call him at 397-5613 or e-mail him at ,. Governor’s address,State House, Room 115,Providence, RI 02903,. Kevin’s address is 21-D Victory Highway, West Greenwich, RI 02817,.

    Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — June 19, 2008 @ 5:00 pm | Reply

  53. Thanks Scott.

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 19, 2008 @ 5:43 pm | Reply

  54. Could Mr. Breene have killed the bond re-vote? It’s not enough to vote against it if he had the political capital to kill it, but didn’t do it.

    As one of a few Republicans holding state office, I imagine Mr. Breene has ready access to the governor. I will wait to see if Governor Carcieri vetoes the re-vote. If not, then I too will blame Mr. Breene for not aggressively doing whatever he can to put an end to the re-vote.

    I find it amazing that with the state in a fiscal freefall the legislature would pass a spending bill for millions of dollars when the town of Hopkinton opposes the spending. You would think they’d be looking for excuses not to spend money. Fools.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 19, 2008 @ 6:22 pm | Reply

  55. CR, did you personally call the governor’s office to voice your objection to the bond bill?

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 6:53 am | Reply

  56. Thats a big question Scott Bill Hirst…..I am not going to get any sleep until I know the answer.

    Comment by what? — June 20, 2008 @ 9:07 am | Reply

  57. What I don’t get is why Hopkintonians are so worried about the bond going before the voters. Are you afraid that it might actually pass this time due to a higher voter turnout in Hopkinton during a presidential election year? Is it that the vocal ones are actually in the minority in Hopkinton? Forget the excuses that this is a re-vote, you’re trying to block the voters from voting on the bond and I’m curious as to what the worry is. If it was without merit in the eyes of Hopkinton a year ago and if you’re speaking for the majority of voters, then it will be defeated in Hopkinton once again.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 9:27 am | Reply

  58. Hi!
    1. What, if you want more credibility on this blog, please be a lot more serious.
    2. This morning I have been on the phone to the Governor’s office already. Will continue to pursue this.
    3. CharihoParent there are multiple reasons you can be against a bond revote. Please remember prominent members of BOTH parties are against a revote.The Hopkinton Republican Town Committee last Sunday actually formally took a stand on this. The Hopkinton Democratic Town Committee to my knowledge has not.As far as I know of the six party committees only the Hopkinton Republican one took a stand one way or the other on the vote.The Hopkinton Democratic Town Committee has a number of educators on it including I believe one of the school principals and some former school committee members including bev Kenney’s husband Greg Kenney. Beverly is also a member. However the Hopkinton Town Council majority,Democratically controlled opposes the bonds.
    3.Kevin Breene are Dennis Algiere are two of five Republicans out of 38 State Senators. The grapevine is Patrick Scmitt, a Democrat, who ran against Sen. Algiere in 2006 is running against him again.Sen. Algiere while winning in his district lost to Schmitt in Charlestown but carried Westerly.Only a small piece of Charlestown is in Sen. Breene’s district.

    Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — June 20, 2008 @ 10:47 am | Reply

  59. Scott,
    Prominent members? What prominent members beside Hopkintonians? That’s only a handful of people, Scott. Get real! A tad bit of exaggeration on your part. Again I ask, if the bond question is without merit and you believe it’s going to fail, why are fighting so hard to not have it on the ballot? You’re missing the root point of the question. Can you answer that, Scott? Like I said, forget your excuse that it’s a re-vote because it really isn’t, the money s less, it’s now 3 questions instead of 1, just as Tom Buck had asked for originally. What’s the motivating fear of now letting the voters of the towns decide this issue? Why are you trying so hard to disenfranchise the voters? I would rather see 3000 voters decide this issue, not the 5 member town council of any town, not the few legislators that we have, not the governor. Let the voters have their say!

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 11:06 am | Reply

  60. I called the President and Chief Justice Roberts. They’re working on it.

    I know the country has veered off course, but having re-votes until pro government spending groups gets their way is not a good idea. Funny how we’re not having any re-votes when budgets and bonds pass, but only when they fail.

    I’d like to go back and re-vote on the formation of a Chariho Middle School. I suspect the majority might have a different opinion this time around. I’d like to have a re-vote on the Chariho district taking over K to 6th grade from the towns. I think Hopkinton might have changed its mind. I’d like to have one vote on RYSE. Any chance?

    No, of course not…for dolts like CharihoParent, re-votes are only a good idea when their side doesn’t prevail the first time around. We never get to re-vote when the spenders are granted access to our bank accounts. Funny how that works.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 20, 2008 @ 11:33 am | Reply

  61. CR, you’re using the arguement I feel is untrue! Go ahead, cloud what I’m asking. It’s not the same bond, it’s less than before, it’s not all lumped into one question, split into 3 questions just as Hopkinton’s Councilor Buck has wanted all along. That being said, it’s not a revote which I realize Hopkinton uses to muddy the waters. So let’s put that part aside since we will disagree on it forever and try to answer my real questions, what are your fears to put if before the voters? Afraid of a voter turnout that might be in more favor of Chariho than what you want? Afraid that the tiny little 47 vote margin won’t hold up when it’s a presidential election year? Afraid that people will find out that the vocal group are really a minority in Hopkinton? Can you answer these very simple questions? Let’s see if the Buffoon Brigade can comprehend what I’m asking them in plain, simple english. So far, two have swung missed.

    CR, answer my other simple question, too. Did you or did you not call the governor’s office? A straight out question that deserves a straight out yes or no answer. Very simple for you, CR. You only have to type two or three letters depending on your answer.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 12:20 pm | Reply

  62. When you support making slight modification to budgets which have been approved and then voting on them again, I will support making slight modifiations to the bond and then voting on it again. We can even split the budget into 3 parts…teacher compensation, administrative compensation, and support personnel compensation. We will then vote to approve or reject the split budget. How about it? You game? Or are you afraid of voter turnout that might be in more favor of families than what you want?

    I called the President and the Chief Justice. Did you?

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 20, 2008 @ 12:38 pm | Reply

  63. Sure I’m game, I’ve got to problem with spliting the budget into 3 parts. But, you’ve oversimplified it since there’s much more to the budget then just compensation. I have problems with the budget as they are now presented to the voters, we can’t see what the actuals are versus what the budget was. They leave us blind to that information.

    Stop avoiding the direct question, if you can’t answer it then I’ll take it that you didn’t call the governor.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 1:48 pm | Reply

  64. oops, I’ve got NO problem…..

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 1:48 pm | Reply

  65. I called the President and the Chief Justice. The President was away on business so I spoke with Laura. We go back.

    Yes, I simplified the budget split recognizing a re-vote will not happen and I should not spend a lot of time working on actually splitting budget items.

    I’ll take it that you didn’t call the President (or Laura)?

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 20, 2008 @ 2:20 pm | Reply

  66. SBH-
    do you think the governor really gives a hoot that a couple of republicans in Hopkinton don’t support the legislation???? Honestly….???? If the people in power…i.e. the town council, couldn’t stop it, then how can you really think that a stupid town committee can??? wake up already. This is not providence, its hopkinton and we DONT COUNT upstate.

    Comment by what? — June 20, 2008 @ 3:33 pm | Reply

  67. But I did call the governor to voice my support for the bond issue going to the voters and letting the voters decide. Something you’re unwilling to do (letting the voters decide). So now it appears that you’re really nothing but hot air and prefer to just bloviate on the board but when push comes to shove, you do nothing.

    By the way, I also voiced my disappoint with Senator Breene for his vote and casting away the feelings of the other two town he represents.

    what?, SBH likes to think that he’s important.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 3:43 pm | Reply

  68. But I called the President and he’s far above the Governor. The Chief Justice may be too, but I don’t know if the Supreme Court Chief Justice is considered more worthy than the Rhode Island Governor. I would concede that Gov. Carcieri is more important than Mrs. Bush.

    I like that you’ve turned your attention to insulting me instead of an entire race. I’ve done my good deed for the day.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 20, 2008 @ 3:49 pm | Reply

  69. I’m sure you know this, but the Governor doesn’t pass bills, he only signs them into law. Calling him to legistlate a bill is fruitless. Calling him to not sign a bill howeverr is usefull, but highly unlikely he would not sign it, unless a march on the State House got his attention. His door is open on thursdays, go visit.

    Comment by RS — June 20, 2008 @ 6:17 pm | Reply

  70. RS, forgive my wording, I called the governor to urge him to SIGN the bill so that the voters in the district can have their say. Satisfied now?

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 9:50 pm | Reply

  71. CR, I didn’t insult an entire race, just the lazy folks in Hopkinton’s very own Buffoon Brigade who can’t earn decent wages then sit on their lazy butts and complain about everything. If the shoe fits, wear it, you loser!

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 20, 2008 @ 9:54 pm | Reply

  72. Can’t help but notice that CP left out the “lily whites” versus blacks and hispanics this time. Maybe he isn’t as dumb as he seems? A dog can be trained not to pee on the carpet so maybe CP can be trained to leave race out of it? If we could only give him a pat on the head and a scratch behind the ears.

    Comment by Real Question — June 20, 2008 @ 10:11 pm | Reply

  73. RQ, be careful, I might bite your ankles. But then again, I might not, the stench coming from you makes you very unappetizing.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 21, 2008 @ 8:08 am | Reply

  74. Good, good, you’re learning.

    Comment by Real Question — June 21, 2008 @ 9:15 am | Reply

  75. Hi!
    First, there are many hundreds of Republicans in Hopkinton. Of course they are not all on the GOP Town Committee but it the committee is bigger than me.
    Sen. Breene committed not to support the legislation if not all towns were on board and he honored that. Customarily that is the protocol. Rep. Brian Kennedy who only represents Hopkinton of the three Chariho towns violated that custom of only supporting legislation supported by local officials.
    A great point is missed, regardless of the merits of the bonds, if one is passed it will make withdrawal of a member town more difficult. If the middle school bond passes, it will less likely to return eventually the younger children to the elementary school.
    I understand the fairness issue to the Charlestown on tax equalization. Charlestown had the chance to withdraw and declined to do so. The anti-withdrawal group in Charlestown SOS worked hard with other anti-withdrawal people in Charlestown to keep that town in the district DESPITE the fiscal disparities. If Charlestown left, it would have removed the fiscal disparities and issues that remain to this day in the district. Essentially you have people want to keep the district intact and NOT finally resolve the fiscal disparity issues, at least not effectively.

    Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — June 21, 2008 @ 9:37 am | Reply

  76. SBH, if Bob Petit heard more support for the bond than what he did against the bond what makes you think that Rep. Kennedy didn’t also? Maybe, just maybe, Bob and Brian Patrick did exactly what the constituents they heard wanted them do. Ever think of that aspect?

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 21, 2008 @ 6:39 pm | Reply

  77. SBH, I keep hearing in one breath that Hopkinton wants to remain in the Chariho School District then in another breath I hear but “if the bond passes it will make withdrawl of a member town more difficult.” Since you are only concern Hopkinton and you don’t want to withdraw from the district, what’s the concern?

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 21, 2008 @ 8:00 pm | Reply

  78. Opps again… that should read Since you are only concerned about Hopkinton….

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 21, 2008 @ 8:01 pm | Reply

  79. What was wrong with my “NO” vote on the bond? Why are you trying to overturn MY vote? If the bond fails (or should I say any of the THREE bonds fail), will we vote again, and again? I want my FIRST vote to count! I do NOT want to see this bond (in one, two, three or multiple parts) again, until we have settled the very serious problems we currently have.

    Heaping more money on our failing educational system is like pouring gasoline on a forest fire while proclaiming you are trying to put it out. (You know, “liar, liar, pants on fire”)

    Comment by Dorothy Gardiner — June 22, 2008 @ 9:07 am | Reply

  80. The reason people need to keep voting on failed bonds is because money is like a drug…..they can’t get enough especially when it is someone else’s hard earned cash they are spending. When people have zero respect for their own fiscal responsibility (as witnessed by the negative savings rate in this country), then the ranking of spending the taxpayers money is obviuosly well below their own. I would imagine the most zealous backers of getting more money from the taxpayers have the most dysfunctional personal budgets and fiscal planning, and if not, then they are nothing more than practicing socialist.

    Comment by RS — June 22, 2008 @ 10:12 am | Reply

  81. If done right money is the tool for exchanging value. If you bring value you get money. You can then use the money to purchase something of value from someone else. Government doesn’t have to deliver value to receive money. If government can convince enough people they can steal someone else’s value by use of a majority vote.

    Chariho has been scamming voters for years. Hopkinton has seen through the charade and has taken steps in recent years to put an end to the con game. Chariho responds by attempting to circumvent the process. They pulled off this shell game in 2005 claiming the school needed money, but the money went into surplus.

    Some of the same names behind Chariho’s budget corruption then are still pushing…Brown, Polouski, Hosp, Adevesian to name a few. How many times will the voters fall for it? This time Hopkinton has the power as a town to stop it. Will we or will we be scammed again?

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 22, 2008 @ 10:46 am | Reply

  82. Dorothy, no one is overturning your vote. Hopkinton did not approve the total bond as proposed, plain and simple. This bond is not the same amount, it askes three different questions. Petit and Kennedy heard from voters that said they would approve parts of the bond but didn’t want to approves the whole bond as it was asked. You can still go into the voting and vote no again, it’s your right, it’s your privilege. They are doing the right thing, letting all the voters who decide to vote decide the issue, not just a few loud mouthed individuals on some blog, some of whom probably never picked up the phone to let the representative know how they felt.

    Here’s another point for you to digest, what was wrong with my “YES” vote on the bond? Because of the strange way the Chariho Act is setup and let’s a town have the right of veto, my “yes” vote was denied. In fact, the majority was a “yes” vote and they were all denied.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 22, 2008 @ 8:45 pm | Reply

  83. CP,
    Then change the Chariho Act. Nothing was wrong with your vote. But each town gets that veto by voting independantly of each other. We count too. What was wrong with our NO vote, within and with respect of and to the Chariho Act determination.?

    Comment by BarbaraC — June 22, 2008 @ 9:13 pm | Reply

  84. The Chariho Act is set up to protect each town by giving them the veto over bonds. I wish they had thought to do the same thing for budgets. Without the town veto two towns could gang up on one town and force spending only for things they wanted. For example Richmond and Charlestown could agree to only maintain or renovate their elementary schools. They could also decide to let a Hopkinton school fall into disrepair and then vote to turn the school back over to Hopkinton in poor shape. Oh, wait, they did do that!

    The argument that a revote is valid because some people expressed a desire to vote again is rubbish. I never get all the results I want out of an election but my complaining has never led to another chance to vote again. CP must be trying to amuse us.

    Comment by Real Question — June 22, 2008 @ 9:38 pm | Reply

  85. Hi!
    CharihoParent, I do not certainly support, at least at this time Hopkinton leaving the Chariho Regional School district. The best bet for a town leaving has been Charlestown not Hopkinton. The SOS group who strongly fought against Charlestown’s withdrawal a few years back NEVER came up with a plan that I know of, how to deal with the fiscal disparities in the district, that they just wanted the district to stay together like it currently exists. That were certainly continue the present problems. It seems TWO MAIN SOLUTIONS to the Chariho problem: tax equalization or allowing Charlestown to go. As far as Richmond joining Charlestown would Richmond really join Charlestown with a town whose assassable base is approaching three times as it’s own? Possibly but is it likely?

    Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — June 23, 2008 @ 1:03 pm | Reply

  86. I wish Richmond would leave with Charlestown. Faced with the spending desires of Charlestown’s huge tax base they’d soon come running back to Hopkinton on bended knees. Richmond is foolish, but probably not that foolish. It would be fun to watch.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 23, 2008 @ 2:45 pm | Reply

  87. Only time will tell what Richmond decides to do. It is my understanding that they are seeking members for a withdrawl committee to investigate the options open to Richmond.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 23, 2008 @ 2:53 pm | Reply

  88. SBH, if you don’t support Hopkinton leaving the district then why do you continually say something to the effect of “it will make it more difficult for a member town to withdraw”? Yeah, talking out of both sides of your mouth just like a lot of the politicians in this state.

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 23, 2008 @ 2:56 pm | Reply

  89. Do you pay attention to anything? Mr. Hirst is referring to Charlestown threat of withdrawal. We wouldn’t want to do anything to impede their efforts.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 23, 2008 @ 4:25 pm | Reply

  90. CR, nice defense for SBH but why would he care if Charlestown withdrew or not? That is the least of his concern!

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 23, 2008 @ 5:07 pm | Reply

  91. I would think everyone by now would realize CharihoParent has contributed zero worthwhile information to any discussion. Ignore is the best medecine ignorance.

    Comment by RS — June 23, 2008 @ 5:10 pm | Reply

  92. CP-
    SBH DOESNT talk out of both sides of his mouth……he talks out of his rear end

    Comment by what? — June 23, 2008 @ 8:58 pm | Reply

  93. Charlestown’s withdrawal is the ultimate solution. They get such a deep discount now it is unlikely they will leave as things stand. If Richmond ever realized their families can’t keep up with the spending abilities of Charlestown and instead Richmond joined Hopkinton in demanding decreased spending and less bells and whistles, Charlestown might take their tremendous wealth and build their own first class school.

    Comment by Curious Resident — June 24, 2008 @ 1:34 pm | Reply

  94. what?, sorry, my mistake! You’re quite correct!

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 24, 2008 @ 6:27 pm | Reply

  95. Really Stupid, yes, will you please ignore me. I beg of you to ignore me. You can’t seem to apply your own advice though. I’m sure you are one of those parents that tell you children, “Do as I say, not as I do”. I feel sorry for your children.

    Constipated Resident, will you please listen for once? Richmond’s town council has been after the school district to control it’s spending. It’s been a sore subject with the town council. I don’t know how you’ve failed to hear that. It was Richmond’s town council that showed the school committee and the administration that they couldn’t force any of the towns over the state mandated tax caps. When is this going to sink into your brain?

    Comment by CharihoParent — June 24, 2008 @ 6:35 pm | Reply

  96. Richmond TC has done nothing but kiss Chariho butt for years. Ricci gets a vote of confidence? Sounds like Richmond wasn’t happy kissing butt and decided to do some further exploration in that region.

    One time it would be nice to see Richmond say no to Chariho.

    Comment by Real Question — June 24, 2008 @ 7:00 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: