Aldrich may end up being a school again

Posted

It was built as a high school, transitioned into a junior high school and then closed when Warwick secondary schools were consolidated a year ago. Now Aldrich could reopen as a school, depending on whether the city accepts the bid of the International Charter School to buy the property for $1.9 million.

But classrooms and teachers don’t appear to be in the future for the adjoining Christopher Rhodes Elementary School that closed in 2008 and, with the exception of a hiatus when used by the Rhode Island School for the Deaf, has sat vacant. The future of that property could be an extension of the adjoining single-family residential neighborhood or a condominium development.

Both schools were the subjects of bids opened Friday. Each of the properties received only one bid, which was a disappointment to Richard Crenca, principal planner. He had hoped for a greater level of interest with perhaps multiple proposals for the two parcels and possibly a plan for the combination of the two. Nonetheless, Crenca feels both offers are solid and should be seriously considered.

Asked about the bids on Tuesday, Mayor Scott Avedisian felt the same way. He said he plans to meet Monday with members of the administration to review the offers. He reminded that it is his plan to reduce the city’s debt by whatever funds are received for the properties. Likewise, Ward 2 Councilman Jeremy Rix is encouraged by what he’s heard, although he is reserving judgment until he’s had the chance to thoroughly review the proposals.

“My number one concern,” Rix said, “is that any new development conforms with the comprehensive plan. No big box stores, no way.”

Retail is not part of the picture.

Warwick resident and developer Hugh A. Fisher submitted a bid of $550,000 for Rhodes School. Fisher, who has built more than 1,400 homes in Warwick and North Kingstown in the past four decades, proposes one of two alternatives for the school property – 27 single-family homes or 50 condominium units. Fisher also proposes that he raze the former school, which includes asbestos removal and the removal of oil tanks and asphalt, in which case that cost would be deducted from the $550,000, or that the city do it and provide him a clean piece of property. A bid from Lake View Farms to do the work accompanied Fisher’s proposal. The cost was projected at $418,000.

Fisher also looked at what redevelopment of the property could yield the city in tax revenues. The 27 single-family homes, he estimated, would bring in $162,000 in taxes. A condo development he put at $250,000. Given the time to clean up the Rhodes property and obtain permits, Fisher estimates the project could be completed in two years.

Reached Wednesday, Fisher said if his bid is selected he looks forward to meeting with community representatives to determine which of his two proposals is the best fit for the neighborhood. He described the condo proposal as a single floor development targeted at an aging population looking to downsize while remaining in Warwick.

While the International Charter School, based in Pawtucket, wouldn’t be subject to taxes, the school’s bid includes a $70,000 per year payment in lieu of taxes to the city.

“We want to make sure we’re providing a benefit to the City of Warwick,” explained school director Julie Nora on Wednesday. She said while the school has adequate space where it is now located in Pawtucket, it doesn’t have the opportunity to expand and there are no outdoor fields like those at Aldrich. She believes the ICS proposal is a win for the school as it will be able to grow, and a win for Warwick, too, since it would preserve a historic building and comply with the city’s comprehensive plan.

The ICS vision for Aldrich is extensive, as spelled out in a book-sized document that gets down to specific classrooms. Proposed are $6.9 million in mechanical, electrical and plumbing upgrades, along with new windows, floors, ceilings, bathrooms, kitchen equipment and lockers. There would also be improvements to playing fields as well as a playground and a new entrance to the school at the Post Road traffic signal to Walmart and the elimination of the Relph Street access.

Nora said the school has the funds to make the purchase of Aldrich but would need to conduct fundraising in order to complete the proposed upgrades. He said she was “pleasantly surprised” to learn that ICS was the only bidder for the property.

ICS is a state charter school and, hence, open to students from across the state. As those seeking to attend exceed the available slots, acceptance is based on a lottery. Tuition is paid by state and municipal funds.

A key to the plan, and one the city was pressing, is the preservation of the Aldrich School façade with its columns, peaked roof and entrance stairway. Should it be accepted, under the ICS proposal the school would have an enrollment of 465 K-5 students when it opens in 2019, which would expand to a maximum of 800 K-8 students over the next eight years. Aldrich would enable ICS to provide a middle school option that it currently can’t offer because of space limitations.

While international is in the name of the school, enrollment is from 15 Rhode Island communities with the greatest population coming from Pawtucket, Providence and Central Falls. ICS was founded in 2001 by a group looking to bring together students from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds to create an environment where they could learn from each other’s languages, celebrate diverse cultures and excel academically. The school offers a dual language education and teaches all students in two languages, with half the instruction in English and half in Spanish or Portuguese.

In its proposal, ICS reasons that more and more families are looking for their children to be exposed to a range of language and cultural backgrounds.

“High quality educational models that provide diverse student populations with the flexibility to move between languages and cultural paradigms, problem-solving skills, and empathy are what we are all going to need in a globally connected world,” reads the proposal.

Comments

29 comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment
Justanidiot

nock both the eyesores down and put in public housing

Thursday, July 20
richardcorrente

Let's see.

Hugh Fisher, one of Warwick's finest home builders wants to build 27 single family homes that will being in $162,000 a year in taxes that will increase annually OR 50 condos resulting in $250,000 a year in taxes that will ALSO increase annually.

He is choice number one. Either of his ideas bring great value to Warwick.

Choice number two is a charter school that will bring in $70,000 a year for the first year with no certainty of future Payments-In-Lieu-Of-Taxes.

Not a hard choice here.

From a guy who ran for mayor as a "Cut Taxes - Cut Spending" I think either of Hugh Fisher's plans are a blessing. His new tax revenue will decrease the need to increase taxes on the rest of us and might even help lower them. A win-win for everyone. It also preserves employment for the Warwick teachers. So make that a win-win-win situation.

Happy Summer everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, July 20
WwkVoter

I'll save the Captain the trouble this time.

Corrente the delusionist fake mayor cant stop. That he talks tax revenue is rich, since he himself had probems paying his own tax, apparently.

As to his nonsense, single family homes COST the city more than they pay in taxes generally, as it costs around 14k per child to educate, but each home might pay 3k or 4k in taxes.

And how does a charter school "preserve" Warwick school teachers? Could anyone be more clueless? Anyone?

So glad I voted Avedisian, not that it was even a close decision. Wow.

Thursday, July 20
CrickeeRaven

Thank you, WwkVoter, for your factual and insightful reply to the fake "mayor."

In particular, your statement of the cost for educating children in Warwick compared to the estimated tax payments from those homes is especially helpful for readers who value honesty and accuracy.

Let's do some basic math that objectively proves your point:

- 27 single-family homes with one child each [a very conservative estimate, as there may be more than one child per home], times $14,000 per child, equals $378,000 in costs.

- The developer of these proposed homes says they will bring in $162,000 in revenue from taxes.

Simply using these estimates, one may conclude that the fake "mayor" supports a plan for the city to lose $216,000 per year, while claiming that this is preferable to a proposed charter school that would pay $70,000 in revenue per year to the city.

Embarrassing as this failure to do basic math is, the fake "mayor" will no doubt exceed that humiliation in his future comments.

Thursday, July 20
richardcorrente

Dear WwkVoter,

My taxes have always been paid. Please don't lie. I can't register my car otherwise. I was, in fact, unknowingly behind this year and when I went to the tax collectors office I learned that I owed a whopping one penny. As of March of this year, that huge "past due" has been paid.

As far as your comment about cost per child to educate, it's true that the taxpayers pay way too much to the School Committee ($161,000,000) annually for an ever-decreasing number of students, but gaining more tax revenue does not increase the cost per student. It just gives the city more revenue to pay it. Adding additional students to our schools spreads out the fixed expenses among a larger number of students making our cost-per-student come down. But you already knew that didn't you.

And when I said "It", you knew I meant the Hugh Fisher Plan. Didn't you? Because charter schools do NOT "preserve" Warwick school teachers. You tried to mislead the reader to believe that I said that. But you knew that wasn't true either, didn't you.

Face it. You were wrong on all counts. And you're an Avedisian guy, right?

Happy Summer WwkVoter.

Happy Summer everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, July 20
Scal1024

Rick, I'm interested to learn when you became such an advocate for the teachers? When you started running for mayor? It certainly wasn't in 2014 when you were supporting Stacia for mayor, was it? Very interesting how none of her positions seem to square with your constant pandering. Yet you still supported her campaign...seems like the move of an opportunist.

Next, Rob Cote broke down your tax delinquency year to year and for you to suggest it was only 1 penny and it was just 1 year is a flat out lie. You are a fraud who will say anything to gain support. You aren't fooling anyone here, just like you couldn't fool the voters when you were embarrased.

What line item would you cut in the budget to pay for your buy a house, get a check gimmick? You cannot say with new tax revenue as Rob has pointed out to you repeatedly. So please enlighten me Rick...

Thursday, July 20
richardcorrente

Dear CrickeeRaven,

I like you but...You're not much of a mathematician are you?

If 27 to 50 new homes generate 1 or 2 students, the overall school budget cost of $161,000,000 gets divided by that many MORE students. That means the cost-per-student comes DOWN not UP as you say. You are able to do basic division math aren't you? You don't possibly think that the city has to pay on a per-student basis regardless as to fixed expenses do you CrickeeRaven???

I gave you much more credit than that. Just a few years ago we had about 14,000 students being educated by the same $160,000,000+- budget. That meant the cost per student was even less back then. Having these new homes with an increase of new families helps reduce our cost-per-student as anyone (but you) can see. Just divide the budget (fixed cost) by the number of students. Unless you're trying to mislead the reader. Wait a minute. You're not trying to mislead the reader are you CrickeeRaven?

Sorry you don't know how to do that third grade basic math problem. Division is challenging to you apparently. The Warwick Taxpayer has been paying the same cost of $160,000,000+- since 2009, but the number of students keeps going down (from a high of 17,000 to today's number of less than 9,000) That means the cost-per-student goes UP if we decrease the number of students and DOWN if we increase the number of students as would be the case with these new families.

All this might be too much for you to calculate. Call me at (401) 338-9900. I'll do it for you.

Happy Summer CrickeeRaven

Happy Summer everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, July 20
Scal1024

Rick, if the school budget is still the same amount, for less students...wouldn't that imply huge built in costs for teacher salaries and benefits? Why does it seem you don't get this? The same reason you can't offer anything of substance to any discussion: you have no idea how to. Thats why you say foolish things like "don't ask for a contract with raises, don't ask for a cut, just a signed contract." Pandering nonsense! You say this knowing that the teachers rejected 3% raises over 3 straight years. 9% salary increase over 3 years sounds pretty good.

I look forward to more clueless ranting from the Non Taxpayers Mayor.

Thursday, July 20
richardcorrente

OK Scal1024,

You made a lot of good points and you deserve answers, even if some are repeats.

1. I was never "an advocate for the teachers". I never said they deserve a contract that pays them more. I never said they deserve a contract that pays them less. I only said they deserve a "signed" contract. Scal, even you should agree that whatever they deserve for their new salaries, waiting this long to get to that point is wrong. I say, they should get extra because of that time-delay. Please don't call me "an advocate for the teachers". You can call me "an advocate for fair play" if you want. That's "fair". If you want a calculation, I feel that whatever the teachers end up with for their new salaries should be multiplied by 110% because it took so long.

2. Like Rob Cote and others, I supported Stacia and even contributed to her campaign when she ran against Avedisian in the primary. I don't regret that. She is a hard working lady. The mayor is not. He goes on vacation more often than 100 municipal employees put together. I then decided to put my money where my mouth was and ran against the mayor myself. I invested about $40,000 of my own money and campaigned over 700 days in a row. Don't you remember criticizing me for it? I received 13,278 votes (with NO PAC contributions!), more than any other previous opponent of Avedisian, and Scal, I got my "Cut Taxes - Cut Spending" message across so much that 80,000 Warwick citizens were talking about it long after the elections. When the budget came out, Avedisian tried to insert 29 tax-increasing amendments and the City Council, after hearing loud-and-clear from their constituents, said "NO!" UNANIMOUSLY to every one of them and for the first time in eighteen years Scal, we have a budget WITH NO TAX INCREASES!!

Scal, I'm very proud that I had something to do with that movement, and Scal, you're welcome!

3.My lender broke the law Scal as I have told you several times before. Over a thousand plaintiffs, myself included, sued them in Federal Court and we WON. Got that Scal? We won. My lender was court ordered to pay taxes that came out in my name and they did but they paid them late. They then did several other things that I can't get into because that part of the lawsuit is still pending, but Scal all taxes have been paid! (with late fees!). Even though the bill was in my name, the legal obligation was theirs and they finally paid and Warwick received even more revenue because of the late fees.

4. "What line item would you cut?" C'mon Scal. Now you're sounding like Cote. If we GAIN a new taxpayer, the city will gain several thousand dollars in NEW taxes. ANYONE can understand that. We don't have to "cut" ANY LINE ITEM. Just give the new taxpayer a one-time rebate check equal to a small portion of the NEW TAXES that the NEW TAXPAYER generates. You can see that can't you Scal? You're not trying to mislead the reader into believing we have to cut one of the departments budgets to get a tax rebate for the new taxpayer are you Scal? No. Not you. You're too much of a straight-up guy for that, aren't you. And how come we can't give the tax rebate out of the new tax revenue? Even if we had to borrow it on a credit card the cost would be a fraction of the revenue, wouldn't it Scal? And the credit card payment would get paid in full long, long before the revenue ended wouldn't it Scal. Come on now Scal. It would. Wouldn't it?

So how do you feel now Scal1024?

Enlightened?

Feel like you might even support my "tax rebate plan" or my "two year moratorium on building permit fees"? How about my "voluntary pension buyout program"?

Get back to me. It's always nice to hear from you. My cell is 401-338-9900.

Happy Summer Scal1024.

Happy Summer everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, July 20
CrickeeRaven

His obvious arrogance aside [which itself proves his unfitness for office, as if further evidence were needed], the fake "mayor" seems to believe that Warwick schools can somehow absorb up to 50 new students, the equivalent of two classrooms, at no additional cost.

Honest observers understand that two new classrooms full of students would require at least two new teachers [at $70,000 to $90,000 per year, plus benefits and pension contributions], teacher aides for special ed students, bus monitors, and other staff, aside from the facility-related costs of accommodating that many new students.

So, either the fake "mayor" is advocating for filling classrooms beyond contract-specified capacities, or he believes that Warwick actually has too many teachers and is using imaginary numbers to justify maintaining current staffing levels.

The fake "mayor" will no doubt continue to humiliate himself in his future comments.

Thursday, July 20
richardcorrente

Dear Scal1024,

Wow. Two comments in one day. I'm impressed.

Here is your answer to the second comment.

You say "Rick, if the school budget is still the same amount for less students...wouldn't that imply huge built-in costs for teachers salaries and benefits?" And the answer is "If the entire budget went to the teachers then YES!!!" but you and I both know that it doesn't, does it. It all goes to the School Committee; NOT the teachers, in fact, the School Committee administration is growing at about the same rate as the teachers are reducing in number. That's the problem Scal! The School Committee keeps spending the taxpayers $160,000,000+- on an ever-DECREASING number of teachers and a ever- INCREASING number of administration. In a perfect world we would have one budget for the teachers and another one for the School Committee. I believe that day is coming old friend but it probably will take a Home Rule Charter to do it, something else that I have campaigned for.

As far as the ongoing teachers contract dispute, it was a cheap, disgusting move on the School Committee to make PART of the contract discussions public. They are just trying to sway public opinion on their side. Sneaky, deceitful, dishonest trick. Scal, you know better. You know that the only reason the School Committee violated the privacy of the discussions is to make their proposal "sound pretty good" as you say. We don't know the whole contract story. We don't even know the first chapter. Leave them alone until the deal is done. Then we can both judge the end results with no "pandering" toward either side. Fair enough?

Hope you have been sailing.

Happy Summer Scal1024.

Happy Summer everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, July 20
RISchadenfreude

Mr. Corrente, you appear to be confusing two different properties:

The proposed home/condo development is for the Rhodes Elementary School property.

The ICS Charter School is proposed for Aldrich, which is now sitting empty; you know what happens to vacant structures (particularly old ones) when they sit vacant for even a relatively short period of time.

Justanimbecile, you obviously don't live anywhere near these properties, or you wouldn't be proposing Section 8 filing cabinets for humans.

Friday, July 21
davebarry109

The city should reject the developers bid for Rhodes School. If they deduct 418,000 for the demolition of the building and asbestos/asphalt abatement, that means this guy gets that huge piece of land for about 100,000. That's insane. The city could demolish the building and divide the parcel, selling the lots individually and come out way ahead. A buildable lot in Warwick is worth 100,000 and there seems to be room for 27. Do the math.

Friday, July 21
WwkVoter

"My lender was court ordered to pay taxes that came out in my name and they did but they paid them late. "

This is interesting. The LENDER didn't pay Corrente's property tax?

Monday, July 24
richardcorrente

Dear WwkVoter,

No. You misread that (or you are trying to misrepresent it.) My lender was court ordered to pay all real estate taxes and fees. They DID pay them, as I stated, but they paid them late. (as I also stated)

Please don't mis-quote me. I never said "The LENDER didn't pay" . All I said was they paid them "late".

Have a great Summer WwkVoter,

Happy Summer everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Wednesday, July 26
CrickeeRaven

Hello again WwkVoter:

Many frequent readers share your confusion over the explanation by the fake "mayor" with regard to the tax delinquency that resulted in him losing his residence and having court orders filed against him to vacate the premises. It seems that he is claiming the mortgage lender did not pay property taxes and fees on time, resulting in the delinquency and foreclosure.

On a related note, other commenters have rightfully wondered how the fake "mayor" could have spent $41,158.58 on his losing campaign [as shown in RI Board of Elections records here: http://bit.ly/2uxLmGB] amidst the tax delinquency and foreclosure process; it is also puzzling why he could not have used his money to actually pay the property taxes on his claimed residence, regardless of the lender's behavior, to avoid a situation where the property would have been lost, in addition to having his tax status readily discovered and publicized, including on this site.

26,000+ Warwick voters were correct in deciding that such behavior as losing one's residence to tax sale and blaming others does not qualify someone for elective office, particularly since he potentially had the means and opportunity to avoid it.

I look forward to joining thousands of honest, taxpaying voters in Warwick in rejecting his candidacy again next November.

Wednesday, July 26
Thecaptain

I Was hoping I didn't have to comment on the Dumbness Mayor's latest comments.

Lie #1. I owed a whopping 1 penny on my car taxes. LIE - On 3/24/17 Mayor Dumbness paid $176.87 in overdue car tax payments. Bear in mind, that from 2009 - 2012 his taxes were almost 2 years late. Then his car license plate BANKRS mysteriously left the tax roles, became unregistered in Warwick, paid no taxes, and that was during the same time that he defaulted on his mortgage and property taxes.

Lie #2. My lender broke the law. Over a thousand plaintiffs, myself included, sued them in Federal Court and we WON.

Mayor Dumbness was never part of any federal lawsuit. He was a defendant in RI district and superior court where he lost multiple appeals, was forcibly evicted from the premises, filed an appeal, lost the appeal along with 16 other cases in civil and small claims that he lost. What he doesn't understand is that when his house was sold out from underneath his squatting butt, the people who owned the tax lean, pay the tax lean, and assume ownership of the property. That property, was sold twice while the tax cheat remained in the house, used city services and never paid them. Here is the total breakdown of what the tax cheat beat us for.

2013 taxes $5035.62 Defaulted - Paid under tax sale by JOSHUA LAVOIE

2014 taxes $6910.33 Defaulted - Paid by CLAYTON A SHACKLETON

2015 taxes $6762.19 Defaulted - Paid by CLAYTON A SHACKLETON

2016 taxes $8080.41 Defaulted - Paid by Redstick Acquasitions after Mayor Dumbness was forcibly removed and evicted from the property.

Total defaulted taxes by Mayor Dumbness = $26,788.55 (not including the $500 water bill he screwed us on that was paid by Christine Adams)

Lie # 3 (actually its just more like a pathological liar trying to convince other people of the delusions that he accepts)

The idea that he doesn't need a line item to make a budget disbursement. This type of limited fiscal expertise is probably why he lost his house, filed bankruptcy, destroyed his credit, and was forced to live like a bum, not paying his fair share, screwing the taxpayer, and becoming a public buffoon.

Disillusionment #4 - Hugh Fisher, one of Warwick's finest home builders wants to build 27 single family homes that will bring in $162,000 a year in taxes that will increase annually.

Mayor Dumbness obviously believes that it is a good thing to have property tax increases every year. That statement wraps up the case that he is a moron. The defense rests.

Wednesday, July 26
CrickeeRaven

Hello again Thecaptain:

I must first applaud you for yet another thorough dismantling of the fake "mayor," and raise the following question as friend to the defense:

What do you think it would represent if the fake "mayor" made a campaign expenditure to the same Mr. Clay Shackleton that you list as a payor of the taxes on the fake "mayor's" behalf? See the evidence for yourself, counselor: http://bit.ly/2v999yp

Wednesday, July 26
Thecaptain

Well, well, well Crickee. It seems that your astute observation brings in to question of the fake mayor's campaign expenditures and his tax default to an entire different level now doesn't it? It would appear, since the fake homeless fiscally dysfunctional mayor had his taxes paid by someone other than himself, then raised money in a campaign account, then cut a check to that same person from his campaign account, it certainly raises the question of quid pro quo. Now, being of sound mind I would offer for the record that if in fact the fake mayor was paying rent to this individual, that we would see numerous rent checks for his "failed campaign office", paid on the same day each month. However, knowing the BS and outright delusions that come from the mouth of Mayor Dumbness, he probably has convinced himself that no one would question this type of anomaly. I would stipulate for the record that a third party would be necessary to perform adequate research to confirm or deny proper adherence to state and local campaign laws. You know, just for a healthy civics argument.

Thursday, July 27
CrickeeRaven

One further fact that provides context to a prior statement by the fake "mayor" and proves his shifting political loyalties:

-- "I supported Stacia and even contributed to her campaign when she ran against Avedisian in the primary. I don't regret that."

- As shown at this link -- http://bit.ly/2uxLmGB -- the fake "mayor" made two campaign donations totalling $125 to Evan Shanley, who defeated the 2014 Republican primary candidate in a General Assembly race last November. One can reasonably conclude that either he does "regret" supporting the Republican candidate in 2014 [explaining why he would not support her again], or that he engaged in blind partisan opportunism in 2016 by contributing to other candidates in the party he joined to avoid a similar result to hers.

Thursday, July 27
richardcorrente

Dear CrickeeRaven (AKA "CR"),

In addition to "not being much of a mathematician", and not having the courage to identify yourself as I always do, you are also not too intelligent, so let me explain. Again.

I supported Stacia in the Republican primary because I felt she was a better candidate than Scott Avedisian as the Republican candidate for Mayor of Warwick. It was also an anti-Avedisian, no-confidence vote.

Then, about a year later, I supported Evan Shanley for the General Assembly, State Representative for district 24 because he was a fellow Democrat and because I was impressed with his intelligence and work ethic, and I felt he was the better candidate for THAT position than Stacia was. Those are two different races; two different parties; and most important two different job descriptions. Even you can understand that, can't you Cricket?

You're funny.

Happy Summer CR.

Happy Summer everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, July 27
CrickeeRaven

"You're funny," says the fake "mayor."

What is not funny is learning that the fake "mayor" paid $4,000 to the person who previously paid the taxes on his property.

What is not funny is the fake "mayor" continuing to bully other commenters for their use of pseudonyms.

What is not funny is how often he calls himself by a title he did not earn and does not deserve.

What is not funny is how regularly he humiliates himself in his comments. It is a certainty that he will continue embarrassing himself in his future comments.

Thursday, July 27
CrickeeRaven

It also appears that the fake "mayor" provided an honest answer to a prior query, specifically:

"[E]ither he does "regret" supporting the Republican candidate in 2014 [explaining why he would not support her again], or that he engaged in blind partisan opportunism in 2016..."

His reply: "I supported Evan Shanley... because he was a fellow Democrat" clearly proves that the answer is the latter.

The fake "mayor" will certainly continue to humiliate himself through his complete failure to restrain himself from commenting on this site, thus further proving himself unfit for any office.

Thursday, July 27
Scal1024

Great research and insight CrickeeRaven and Captain. Just when you think Corrente can't get any lower he proves he can swim in the swamp with the best of them.

What a fraud! Also, notice how he wouldn't even touch that accusation about cutting a check to the man who paid his taxes. This guy shouldn't be trusted to run a lemonade stand. Nevermind, the city of Warwick. Don't worry Rick, I'll give the Board of Elections a call, just to make sure they're aware of your campaign activities.

Friday, July 28
CrickeeRaven

Hello again Scal1024:

Thank you for your kind compliments.

In fact, the fake "mayor" did respond to the question raised in prior comments, at this link: http://warwickonline.com/stories/4th-quarter-honors-announced-at-pilgrim-high,126494?#comments

Here is the relevant excerpt: "Clay Shackleton bought the tax bill at a tax sale and my lender, by law, had one year to redeem. While they were doing this they were court-ordered to negotiate "in good faith" with me. I contend that they did not but I can't comment further because that part of the lawsuit is still on-going."

[Online city records show that Mr. Shackleton is the payer of record for property taxes in 2014 and 2015 on the claimed residence of the fake "mayor." During that time, he was listed as owner of the property, prior to its 2015 transfer to Red Stick Acquisitions for $0.]

Perhaps you agree that this comment does not actually address the core issue of the losing candidate using campaign funds to pay rent in 2016 to the same person who had taken ownership of his property through tax sale in 2013.

Like you and Thecaptain, I agree that further review of these activities by an outside organization may be warranted.

Friday, July 28
Thecaptain

Scal and Crickee,

A bit more to chew on. The payer of the taxes of Mayor Dumbness, Mr. Shackelton, is the owner of the Gateway Plaza that Mayor Dumbness now rents from. Please find attached Secretary of State link to the corporation GW Realty.

http://ucc.state.ri.us/CorpWeb/UCCSearch/UCCFilingHistory.aspx?SearchLapsed=False&UCC1=268228

Having said that, I happen to know people who have rental space at that plaza and the rent checks that they issue are made out to GW Realty. Having rented in a multi tenant facility myself for over 20 years I can attest that my rent was always made out to the corporation and not a personal check to the owner. This begs the question as to how Mayor Dumbness is managing his campaign finances. As evidence to his fiscal mismanagement I would simply enter for the record his complete mismanagement of his own personal finances which put him into foreclosure, tax sale, bankruptcy, credit destruction etc...

I also wonder why he had no retort on this subject matter. Being a student of mathematics, in my studies, 1 + 1 always equals 2. I will have more info to post after my research is complete, and as you all know, I am pretty good at research.

Friday, July 28
CrickeeRaven

Hello again Thecaptain:

With your incisive observation, you drive directly at the heart of the pending question: It is curious that the campaign check was not written to the corporation that owns the location of his campaign office.

You may also find it interesting that the losing candidate is now using the office he rented for his campaign for his mortgage company. That location is also now listed on his campaign finance reports as the primary address for his campaign. To be clear, there is nothing wrong with using a business address for such a purpose; this is just to confirm that the change had been made.

Friday, July 28
Thecaptain

Crickee,

I am well aware of the "office" issue. What I am puzzled about is where the former tax delinquent squatter is now residing. Is it City Park under a tree? Is it a homeless shelter? Is it his rental unit on Greenwich Ave. where his tenants are suing him? Is it the back deck of his 23 ft Trophy center console fishing boat that is laid up in the back yard of Greenwich Ave? I am truly puzzled. Where does the vagrant mayor reside?

Saturday, July 29
CrickeeRaven

Understood, Thecaptain. I look forward to the results of your research.

Saturday, July 29