Applications For Environmental GrantsÂ

By ELIZA HALLABECK

Published: Nov 28, 2008 12:00 am

The Environmental Protection Agency is seeking applications from educators, education institutions, public/state environmental agencies and nonprofit organizations who are eligible for environmental education grants for the fiscal year 2009. The applications must be postmarked by December 18.

EPA funds environmental education projects that focus on educating teachers, students, parents, or the general public about human health problems. These issues range from pollution, improving teaching tools and techniques for educators through workshops, building state or local capability to develop and deliver environmental education or public outreach programs, or promoting environmental careers and stewardship among students through hands-on activities.

The program also encourages projects that educate members of a community through community-based organizations, or educates the general public through print, film, broadcast, or other media to be more environmentally aware and make environment friendly decisions in their day-to-day lives.

Last year in New England, EPA awarded $189,000 of environmental education grants to nine New England organizations. Most of the grant awards range from $10,000 to $30,000.

New England schools, universities, nonprofit organizations, and government agencies that would like to further environmental education can apply for grants by getting a copy of the solicitation notice.

For more information go to www.epa.gov/enviroed, or contact Kristen Conroy at conroy.kristen@epa.gov.

My Backyard Habitat: Celebrating Our Native Bees

16-Year-Old Entrepreneur To Moderate ‘Timeless Newtown’ Series Finale

Patricia Anzellotti

Fire Reports | August 13-19, 2025

Labor Day Closings & Early Deadlines

It seems a lot of the discussion around the flagpole focuses on vilifying drivers who pass on the right, but the real issue is being overlooked. If Chapter 248 Section 14-251 were enforced, we wouldn’t see this problem to begin with. That statute prohibits stopping in the middle of a roadway to yield to cross traffic—as so often happens with cars waiting to turn from Church Hill. When vehicles stop illegally in the travel lane, they effectively create a blockage. Other drivers then either sit through unnecessary delays or carefully pass around them on the right, which is fully permitted when the vehicle ahead is “illegally parked” in the roadway. Instead of punishing drivers reacting to the obstruction, enforcement should focus on the cause: vehicles unlawfully stopping and backing up traffic in the first place. If that behavior were addressed, the need to “go around” would largely disappear.

Borough Board of Burgesses Continues Traffic Safety Discussion

John, you raise an important point — these situations are tragic, complicated, and often far less clear-cut than the headlines make them seem. In the Fredericksburg case, the full facts still aren’t publicly known, and like so many of these stories, there’s conflicting information. It was apparently the back door at 3 a.m. — was it justified to use deadly force? We don’t know yet. What we do know is that the homeowner has been charged, and as you rightly noted, that is very serious. But this is also where perspective matters. These cases are quickly sensationalized in the news and on social media, yet when the dust settles, the outcomes are rarely publicized. People forget that in our system, you are innocent until proven guilty. Try to find much coverage of the convication in the case of the Fairfield Realtor vehicle homicide, or updates on the woman who shot her husband a couple of Christmases ago, or even the pedestrian death in Sandy Hook a year or so back. The follow-through simply isn’t there, and public opinion is often shaped only by the first round of headlines. At the end of the day, these situations remind us how split-second decisions in the middle of the night can change lives forever — which is exactly why the right to protect one’s property, home and family is so fiercely debated, and lucky constitutionally protected.

Late Night Prank Gone Wrong

First the low hanging fruit. Dave; it was a joke, please get over it. You are the only person in Newtown that thought I really wanted to build a stadium on 6 Commence Rd. Now on to Alex. You might not appreciate my writing style or my selection of words, but let's not loose sight of the fact that by responding to my letter in the manner that you did, you have removed any doubt whatsoever that you have no idea of the quantifiable benefits you are dismissing not only for the town, but also for protesters. Either you stopped listening at the word "ordinance" or you never started.. Your constitutional rights to assemble were never in question and would actually be strengthened and there would be literally no impediments. We could even title it "The Alex Villamil Ordinance" if you want. It could be your legacy and actually show Newtown your willingness to work in a bipartisan way for the betterment of the town. Businesses would be protected. Traffic wouldn't be interrupted. The town would save hundreds of thousands of dollars in police overtime. And maybe most importantly, the town could prevent another tragedy while mitigating legal risk in the event something terrible happens at a protest. Nothing bad could never happen in Newtown right? All that could be accomplished by a simple, non-intrusive ordinance unless all the detriments to our town are intentional in order to bring more attention to your cause. Alex, this was not me throwing a temper tantrum. Believe me, you will know it if that happens. I am just putting Newtown first. From that perspective, if you think critically, the regulation is necessary. It makes sense logically, rationally, and is reasonable. There is absolutely no down side. None. I would be willing to sit down with you to see if we could come to some type of compromise if you want. Let me know. You would be amazed how much you can accomplish when there is dialogue amongst neighbors.

It’s About Dialogue Amongst Neighbors — Not Regulation

A popular prank circulating on TikTok is “ding-dong-ditch” where a group of young people violently bang or kick someone’s door late at night and then “ditch” or run. On May 3 three high schoolers here in Fredericksburg Va. were participating in such a prank. One homeowner assumed, as in this case, an attempted break in and also took measures to defend his family and property. As the youths were running away he fired, striking an 18 year old graduating senior in the back killing him and seriously injuring a second youth. A wasted life, a family shattered, and the homeowner charged with murder.

You’re absolutely right — no one should ever feel unsafe in their own home. Being startled awake by violent banging at your door late at night is no joke, and it’s a stark reminder that danger can come without warning. That’s why I’m thankful for the right to protect ourselves, our families, and our property. In a moment like that, you don’t get a second chance to call for help before you act — you have to be prepared. Our homes should be a place of peace, not fear, and the ability to defend them is a right worth safeguarding.

<< Aug 2025 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
27	28	29	30	31	1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31	1	2	3	4	5	6

Log In

Applications For Environmental GrantsÂ

Leave a Reply Cancel reply