August 10, 2016

Ranglin-Vassel, Walsh call on state to fix Canada Pond dam

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Progressive legislative candidates Marcia Ranglin-Vassell and Moira Walsh are imploring the state to “act with urgency” on a distressed dam that could destroy parts of their Providence districts if it fails.

The state Department of Environmental Management said the Canada Pond dam near the north of the city is a “significant hazard” that could damage the neighborhood if it breaches. According to a recent article in the Providence Journal about the dam: “a collapse could unleash a wall of water along Route 146 that would swamp Branch Avenue, which handles about 15,000 cars a day, and undermine power lines that carry electricity from a generating station in Massachusetts to a substation in Providence.

“Most of it would barrel down the railroad tracks along State Street to Canal Street and empty into the Providence River downtown. Part of it could be expected to split off near the Home Depot on Charles Street, sweep south at Route 95 and follow the railroad tracks downtown.”

“I cannot understand how this threat was allowed to reach this point,” said Ranglin-Vassell. “Right now, my neighbors are at risk. Our community needs leaders who take proactive action, rather than waiting until people are in danger of getting really hurt. It is stunning to me that my opponent has represented our threatened area for decades and yet, to my knowledge, has never made any attempt to organize a response to significant safety threat. I call on city and state officials to take all possible precautions and immediately begin working either to fully repair the dam or fully remove this hazard to our community.”

Walsh said, “I was born and raised in this neighborhood, and for as long as I can remember, it’s felt like our community has gotten the short end of the straw when it comes to city and state services. But I never imagined that would extend to actually leaving us in danger of being in the path of a broken dam. This neighborhood needs elected leadership that will stand up and fight for our families, even when it means taking DEM, the city, and the state to task and forcing them to treat matters like this with urgency. It’s unfortunate that the people currently in charge don’t seem up to the task, because there is nothing more important than the safety of our community. When I am state representative I look forward to putting that safety first.”

Ranglin-Vassell and Walsh are two of the many up-start progressive campaigns running against more-conservative, establishment Democrats. Ranglin-Vassell is challenging House Majority Leader John DeSimone, whom the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats filed an ethics complaint about yesterday. Walsh is running against Tom Palangio.

August 10, 2016

Grim Wisdom talks with Jeanine Calkin

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

After a long break, the Grim Wisdom Podcast is back. In this week’s episode, I sit down with RI State Senate candidate Jeanine Calkin to discuss her candidacy, economic inequality, the slow heat death of American journalism, and the cynical hypocrisy of her opponent. Oh, and we also talk about climate change and economic development. Enjoy the bleakness! :)

August 10, 2016August 26, 2016

Sierra Club seeks clarification from Elorza on LNG statement

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Rhode Island Sierra Club has responded to Mayor Jorge Elorza‘s statement on National Grid‘s proposed liquefaction project for Field’s Point in the Port of Providence.

“The Rhode Island Sierra Club is glad the Mayor has publicly agreed to not offer any subsidies to National Grid related to the LNG liquefaction project in Fields Point. We would however urge him to clarify whether his definition of subsidy also includes Tax Stabilization Agreements and if it doesn’t, we would would ask him to take the same strong stance against those type of subsidies and end TSA negotiations immediately.

“While Elorza is correct in saying the decision will ultimately be made by FERC, we would argue his assertion, ‘the city will have little input into that decision’ is false. The mayor can’t abdicate his responsibility on this. Local officials can be hugely influential on Federal decisions. An outcry from public officials immensely helped in 2005 when a similar project was ultimately denied. Not sending in a letter, like the one nine Providence legislators sent to FERC last week, is a statement and a betrayal of his rhetoric on climate change.

“At the absolute minimum, we would ask the mayor to join the thousands of residents, and many businesses, environmental, community and religious organizations in signing the NoLNGinPVD campaign’s petition letter to FERC.

“The mayor also needs to hold the City Council accountable and ask them to follow through on their resolution to provide wide-scale public involvement, on which no action has been taken. They resolved to host meetings between National Grid, Dept. of Health, DEM, Coastal Resource Management Corporation and city residents, and city residents deserve nothing less.”

August 10, 2016August 26, 2016

Invenergy loses bid for Harrisville’s water

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Harrisville Fire District and Water Board voted 5-1 to turn down Invenergy’s offer to purchase water to cool it’s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville. Thunderous applause broke out in the Assembly Theater, where the meeting had to be held to accommodate the nearly 100 people in attendance.

The road to the no vote was Rhode Island political theater at its finest, with the Harrisville District attorney, Richard Sinapi, taking on the role of villain in the piece.

Sinapi is not only the attorney for Harrisville, he’s also a lobbyist who has testified at the State House in favor of the proposed power plant. He represents the New England Mechanical Contractors Association. In this capacity, on May 25 he testified in favor of the power plant and against Rep. Cale Keable’s bill to give the residents of Burrillville a vote on any tax treaties the Burrillville Town Council might negotiate with Invenergy.

At the House Committee on Environment meeting Sinapi suggested that choosing to purchase a home near an existing pipeline means that one should expect a power plant to be built nearby, just as choosing to live near the airport in Warwick means that one should expect runway expansions and jet noise.

Sinapi also suggested that since we live in a republic, people should not expect a democratic vote on things like power plants being located next door to their homes, they need to understand that their representatives will decide for them, and that they do not have a choice in the matter.

It was on the subject of water, however, where Sinapi made his most egregious comments at the House Environmental meeting in May. “Well 3A has in fact been shut down. It was shut down because it was not suitable for potable purposes. You cannot drink that water. It’s contaminated with MTBEs. However, you can wash with it, you can bath with it. You can’t consume it. That water, that contamination, is 16 years old.”

This is of course completely wrong. MTBE contaminated water cannot be used for washing or bathing, by court order. The water will irritate the skin and there is an unpleasant “sweet smell” to the water as well. Sinapi, a legal advisor to the Harrisville Water Board, should have known this.

At the Harrisville Water Board meeting Tuesday evening, Sinapi presented Invenergy’s pitch to the water board. He said that he and Harrisville became “involuntarily” involved in the Invenergy project after the Burrillville Town Council asked Harrisville to explore the possibility that drawing MTBE contaminated water out of well 3A might spread MTBE contamination throughout the aquifers. Sinapi did not mention his previous involvement as a lobbyist for the New England Mechanical Contractors Association at the meeting.

The offer from Invenergy was to build a pipeline from a well site in Harrisville to the Invenergy power plant site, at Invenergy’s cost. Sinapi presented the idea as an economic boon to Harrisville. The water drawn, said Sinapi, was, “not to exceed the capacity of the well.” Harrisville would receive about $10 million dollars in water sales over the life of the power plant.

Additionally, said Sinapi, if Harrisville did not accept the offer, Invenergy would move on to a “third option” which Sinapi described as more expensive for Invenergy. “I would like to emphasize,” said Sinapi, “they have a third option. It’s not just 3A, they have a third option.”

After Sinapi’s presentation, during the public commentary period, residents of both Harrisville and Pascoag asked, “What is the third option?”

“I’ve been told by two sources that they have a third option,” said Sinapi.

“You made it up, that’s fine,” said someone from the audience.

Under further questioning from Burrillville resident Donna Woods, Sinapi admitted that he has “no idea” what the third option might be.

When Burrillville resident (and candidate for Burrillville Town Council) Jeremy Bailey rose to speak, he said, “I have a an issue right now. Mr. Sinapi was paid $15,000 last year to represent the Mechanics Union, who wants the power plant… That’s a conflict of interest, and none of you [the Harriville Water Board commissioners] seem to be concerned with that… We have a state that’s so corrupt with non-transparency and not a single one of you really has a concern with it.”

No one on the board responded to Bailey’s concerns. Instead, they moved to vote.

The vote was taken, and Invenergy’s proposition to open a new well in Harrisville was turned down, 5-1.

August 10, 2016August 10, 2016

Public input needed on proposed changes to RI diploma system

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Hopefully many parents, teachers, and concerned RI residents are aware that the RI Council on Elementary and Secondary Education has proposed changes to the high school diploma system. They will host four public hearings in late August and early September, and also are accepting public comment in writing. Here is the link to the draft changes.

The meetings will be held Monday, August 22 at the Cumberland Public Library; Monday, August 29 at the Newport Public Library; Tuesday, September 6 at the Warwick Public Library; and Monday, September 12 at URI’s Providence Campus.

In addition to the dates and venues for the public forums, this document says that written comments can be submitted to Sonya Barbosa at Secondary@ride.ri.gov. One week ago, on August 1, I submitted the following email with my questions and concerns. I re-sent them two days later, when I realized that Ms. Barbosa might not have read through to the end of my email and not have realized that I requested a confirmation that my comments had been received and forwarded to the members of the RI Council on Elementary and Secondary Education and the members of the RI Board of Education. It is now August 8, and I still have not received an acknowledgement. Therefore, I am making my concerns public. I hope that this will inspire others to read the proposed changes, consider their impact, and provide a statement in person at a forum and/or in writing. The future of our students is too important to leave to the educrats to decide.

To: Sonya Barbosa, RIDE
Email: Secondary@ride.ri.gov
To the Members of the RI Council on Elementary and Secondary Education, and the Members of the RI Board of Education:

Thank you for the opportunity to express my thoughts on the proposed changes to the graduation requirements. As a retired teacher from the RI School for the Deaf, I have read through the proposed changes and considered how they would affect my former students and students in general across the state. I have several questions and concerns.

• As many of you may know, I have been an outspoken critic of the Common Core State Standards and the PARCC assessments, for many reasons. I was surprised to see on lines 70-73 of the proposed regulations that the definition of Common Core Standards had a strike-through of the entire paragraph. What does this mean, since the PARCC tests are based on the CCSS (and so are the PSAT and SAT), and students in grades 3-9 will still be expected to take the PARCC annually?

• Lines 305-307 state that as of 2017 LEAs may choose to include the state assessment or other standardized assessment as a graduation requirement. How does this mesh with the latest announcements from RIDE that 10th and 11th graders will no longer take the PARCC, and may optionally take the PSAT and SAT? This is purportedly for the purpose of guarding against over-testing.

Some districts have already made participation in the PARCC a graduation requirement as of 2017. Many RI parents and parents across the country have researched the PARCC ELA and Math assessments and decided that it is not is the best interest of their children to participate. Will RIDE accept the situation that students who have fulfilled all other requirements for graduation will not receive a diploma for not taking this flawed test? Will an exemplary student be denied a diploma in 2021 for refusing to participate in the PARCC Algebra 1 test in 8th grade, or the PARCC ELA test in 9th grade? We are soon entering the 2016-2017 school year. There is so much confusion around the diploma requirements across the state. RIDE keeps changing the recommendations, people assume that the RIDE recommendations are state-wide regulations, but districts can still decide otherwise. This situation is untenable.

• The major proposed changes to the current Proficiency Based Graduation Requirements seem to involve the Optional Commissioner’s Seal and the Optional Pathway Endorsement. These are alluded to in lines 446-464 as Council Designations. Yet the Commissioner’s Seal and Pathway Endorsements are not described in detail in the proposed changes. According to the “Proposal for a Revised Rhode Island Diploma System: Overview and Frequently Asked Questions,” developed as of May 20, 2016: http://www.ride.ri.gov/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/Diploma-System/Regs_FAQs_v%202_5%2020.pdf

“6. Why don’t I see a reference to the Commissioner’s Seal or Pathway Endorsements in the proposed Secondary Regulations?

“The Commissioner’s Seal and Pathway Endorsements would be allowed under the proposed section L-6-3.3, which outlines the criteria for Council Designations. [L-6-3.4 says “Council designations” but does not outline them.] In order to stay current with innovative practices in the field, the proposed Secondary Regulations create the structure for the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education to name, define, and allow the Commissioner’s Seal and Pathway Endorsements at a later time than the initial vote on the regulations, and to review and revise these designations as necessary.”

It seems quite problematic to leave the specifications of these endorsements to the Council to determine at a later time. Will there be public input?

• Lines 466-479 discuss the alternate recognition of high school accomplishment, defined as a Certificate, which is not considered a high school diploma. It states that students with an IEP and modified proficiency standards [i.e. students who take the alternate assessment] may, at LEA discretion, be awarded a diploma. From my experience teaching at the RI School for the Deaf, students who took the alternate assessment had to meet very stringent criteria, and those criteria included significant cognitive impairment. Very few students at the school were eligible for the alternate assessment. Yet many of the students who had in actuality been successful throughout their academic careers at the school, but whose reading levels were considerably below typical for their grade level, were not eligible for the alternate assessment. Many students have additional learning disabilities, live in families who do not speak English, live in families who do not fluently communicate with them in sign language, and/or live in poverty. These students are capable of post-secondary level work, but might be denied a diploma depending on how the proficiency levels are set.

According to the Frequently Asked Questions mentioned above, the proposed diploma system is intended to be flexible enough to help students with disabilities and any students academically at risk by allowing schools and districts to set the proficiency levels for their students. Yet the schools are to be held accountable for preparing their students for post-secondary education and the workplace.

Who is to decide if the proficiency levels as determined by individual schools are reasonable and fair to all students with varying special needs, when this decision is left to the districts? Will there be comparability of proficiency levels from school to school within a district and between districts?

• At the RI Board of Education meeting on May 17, 2016 Commissioner Wagner discussed the menu of standardized assessments that might be approved for the Commissioner’s Seal endorsement. He said that these would be nationally recognized assessments and nationally recognized cut scores. Again, as a retired teacher from the RI School for the Deaf, I am deeply concerned about this. In my many years of experience teaching deaf and hard of hearing middle school and high school students, we had numerous students graduate and go on to post-secondary programs. Many went to Gallaudet (four year liberal arts college for the deaf) or to the National Technical Institute for the Deaf, affiliated with the Rochester Institute of Technology.

These programs for the deaf required the ACT as a college entrance test. However, cognizant that mastery of academic English is a challenge for many students deaf from birth or early childhood, these institutions set the cut scores for entrance considerably below that for non-deaf students entering post-secondary programs. This did not mean that the students had inferior aptitude, but considered their challenges, anticipating the appropriate supports they would be provided at the post-secondary level. Many of our students completed college and went on to satisfying careers. A nationally recognized cut score for the general population is not an appropriate hoop for all students to jump through to be recognized as prepared for college level course work.

At the same Board of Education meeting, the Commissioner explained that RIDE can factor into the districts’ accountability system the % of students that earn a Commissioner’s Seal or a Pathway Endorsement. If the RI School for the Deaf were to be evaluated by how many students achieve the Commissioner’s Seal as currently described, the evaluation would not accurately reflect the quality of the teaching and learning at the school.

• When asked by a Board of Education member at the same Board of Education meeting, “What resources will be provided to districts to accomplish all this? [i.e. the proposed diploma system], the Commissioner’s answer was: districts can adjust with advanced notice. The Commissioner is expecting an awful lot from districts if they are to accomplish personalized systems of pathways for every middle school and high school student with no additional resources. I hope that the Council will further consider the impact on districts of such a sweeping overhaul of the diploma system.

Thank you for considering my concerns. I would appreciate an acknowledgement that my concerns have been forwarded to the Members of the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education, and the Members of the Board of Education.

Sincerely,
Sheila Resseger, M.A.
Retired teacher, RI School for the Deaf