Paquette: Miles’ statements are wrong

In today’s Sun, Dracut School Committee candidate May Paquette has a letter to the editor in rebuttal to yesterday’s letter from current school board member Mike Miles.

Here is a portion: I spent nine years serving on the School Committee with Schools Superintendent Elaine Espindle from May 1998 until May 2007. During that time, we worked together to see many great projects come to fruition: a major renovation of the Englesby Intermediate School, the construction of the new Lakeview Junior High School and the initial submission to SBAB for our new high school renovation project. With the truth being told, I was not on the board when Elaine Espindle submitted to the committee her intentions to retire.

To say that she was “disposed of” is simply not true. But again, I was not on the board. Neither was I on the board for the selection of the subsequent superintendent (Spencer Mullin). In fact, Mr. Miles was the one who was on the board during Espindle’s submission of her retirement intentions and Mr. Miles was on the board and seconded the motion to hire Superintendent Mullin. To imply that I had anything to do with either of these situations is simply not true.

It concludes with: We need people to serve on the board who will share the facts with you, not false or misleading statements.
MARIETTA (MAY) PAQUETTE
Candidate, Dracut School Committee

Zimini: Love the Caricature, not the distortion of Facts

I asked John Zimini what he thought of the Archinski AD and John said he loved the caricature but didn’t like the distortion of facts.

What John objected to is the ad makes it appear that all these donations came in 2008 and were taken from Campaign Fiance Report from the Town Clerks Office.

In Fact they are a compiled list of donations over a 7 year span and are not from 2008. A fact John pointed out is you cannot receive more than $500 a year and the ad distorts that and makes it appear one union donated over $2,000 which they legally cannot.

John said if you are going to be clever and use a Caricature in place of a picture you shouldn’t use a Caricature in place of real facts. Since Tony received $500 from the Union he works for and that union has supported many candidates, you think he would know that.

John said he is very proud of the donations he received from workers in unions and it was Tony Archinski who stated in the public debate that he wanted a more “labor friendly Town Manager.” not John. He also pointed out it was Tony who sued the town when he didn’t get promoted not John.

John also found it amusing that the Dracut Forum which defended Bobby Cox when he voted for a liquor license for the club he was a board member of and said that “O’Loughlin is an up-front guy” while reporting he was fined over $7,000 for FAILING TO FILE FINANCE REPORTS would write this statement: That’s the point of the ad. In voting on issues where the police union is involved, Archinski would have to recuse himself. When voting on housing project proposals, would Zimini? Did these union relationships have something to do with the Louisburg Square project a couple years ago?

John pointed out he always recuses himself in any situation he thinks is even close to a potential conflict and Dracut Forum chooses to ignore that fact but it is public record. He also pointed out that Shawn didn’t object to Joe DiRocco bringing up a 3 year old issue under old business that wasn’t listed on the agenda.Using Shawn’s logic since Tony Archinski contributed to Jimmy O’Loughlin’s campaign should Shawn and the public look back and question all of Jimmy’s votes on Police Issues that effected his pal Tony?

Even a Lowell guy like me knows that the Dracut Board of Selectman didn’t vote to kill the Louisburg Square project. The Dracut Housing Authority did. To try and stretch being against a project to a potential conflict of interest when the Selectman didn’t even have final authority on it seems to be a huge leap of logic and fairness..