Last night’s Lowell City Council meeting was preceded by an important Zoning Committee meeting which may have been the reason why the Council meeting began almost 15 minutes late. I thought it was an interesting meeting with a number of major issues discussed with some Councilors expressing strong opinions.
The meeting began with the appearance of Elmo of Sesame Street fame and ended with the Council agreeing to go into Executive Session to discuss the Lock Monster issue. I am not a fan of Executive Sessions. I understand the necessity but the council voted to go into Executive Session, which is essentially a private meeting by a public body, to discuss issues which were not well defined.
As I said, Elmo was there to meet and greet everyone and accept the temporary renaming of East Merrimack Street as Sesame Street. I am sure those of you who have children are aware that the muppets are in town and will be performing at the Lowell Auditorium. I did not know that.
The City Councilors agreed to name the corner of John and Page Streets in Memory of the Lew family. I found the brief biographical information on the family to be of great interest. They are an African-American family who lived in Lowell for decades and were active in civil and human rights. They also ran the underground railroad in Lowell during the civil war era. The dedication will take place on February 18 in conjunction with Black History Month.
The rules were suspended to take up acceptance of a Justice Department Grant in the amount of $66,169. I am also not a fan of suspending the rules. If the item is not presented in time to make the agenda and it is not an emergency, I do not think the rules should be suspended. I do not know if this item needed to be taken up last night.
It appeared that most of the Councilors did not have an opportunity to study the fine details of the grant, even the City Manager did not realize that part of the grant was for added personnel. Councilman Rodney Elliott who did notice that line in the grant proposal questioned what happens when the money runs out; do we lay-off the person.
The City Manager was candid and told him, no, not really. Usually the position becomes somewhat indispensable. Elliott responded that if we cannot afford these grants when they expired then we should be cautious when accepting them. He wants the City Manager to make sure that positions filled by grants are clearly marked in next year’s budget. The Council voted to accept the grant. I think Elliott raised an excellent point. This is how our budget expands uncontrollably.
The emotionally-charged discussion regarding the potential mew methadone clinic in downtown Lowell exposed once again that on occasion the Council finds out what is going on in the City from the Sun. The Manager explained a number of times that right now this particular entity who is interested in opening this for profit business, a substance abuse clinic, has not applied for a license with the State Department of Health. Furthermore, our State House delegation has been made aware of the situation, the City Health Department is looking into and we are going to see if the Zoning laws prevent such a facility from moving in. The last was a motion that came from the Council floor. There is already a methadone clinic located in Lowell and according to published reports in the Sun this morning, they have room to take on more clients/patients.
One more thing, I do not understand why representatives of a private company would meet with Jimmy Cooke of the Lowell Plan and the Chief of Police to discuss this venture. But according to Councilman Jim Millinazo, it was Cook who alerted everyone to what was happening. The building is located on John Street and is owned by Louis Saab. We will have to wait and see what happens.
The Zoning Sub-Committee report and discussion which dealt exclusively with the Burbeck project was frustrating. I did not attend the Sub-Committee meeting so I do not know exactly what the Members of the Planning Board said. Councilman Kevin Broderick, Chair of the Sub-Committee, did indicate that the Planning Board members understood that they had flexibility in applying the zoning regulation for that neighborhood.
If that is the case, these people are tone deaf. They brought a 4-page explanation to the meeting to defend their action of allowing a 7 story, 39 units residential structure to be built with only 56 parking lots.
The Sub-Committee recessed and will meet again on this subject. It is apparent to everyone that there is nothing the city can do at this time. Councilman Elliott said this project is wrong and as the City Council does not support it. Why can’t we do something about it, he asked. Good question. Maybe they should not reappoint these people to the Planning Board who cannot follow the direction and the wishes of the elected City Council. Oh, the City Solicitor had advised the Sub-Committee that there is nothing that the city can do.
It was Councilman’s Millinazo’s motion to instruct the Law Department to Prepare Order Taking for Lichoulas Property in Hamilton Canal District that created an interesting exchange between the Councilman and the City Manager. Cox implied that the reason this project was not moving forward was because the Economic Sub-Committe, which Millinazo Chairs, had not met. Of course, Millinazo called him out on it and Cox back tracked saying that is not what he said. I think he did say that but upon further review, he realized that was not accurate.
The Hamilton Canal District (nice marketing name) is the area around Jackson street which the city has a grandiose urban renewal plan to renovate that area. One small problem, we do not own the properties that we want to “renovate.”
The Manager has been negotiating with the lawyers of the property owner to buy the land. The preliminary deal was not acceptable to the Council. It is times like this that I am glad we have 3 lawyers (Broderick, Donoghue and Ramirez) on the Council. They were discussing the letter that had recently arrived from Lichoulas’ lawyer and they interpreted the letter to be another stall tactic rather than a proposal as the City Manager indicated. Councilwoman Donoghue reminded the Manager that we are paying everyday for the cost of this project, the City took out a bond, and according to the plan, we were scheduled to have control of the entire property by Summer of 2005.
.
I tried to give those of you who did not have an opportunity to watch the City Council meeting last night a feel for what was going on. I would strongly recommend watching the replays of the City Council if you do not have a chance to catch it live on Tuesday nights. I know 6:30 p.m. is difficult for most of us, especially for those who have a long commute. I may suggest to the City Council that they move the meetings to 7:00 p.m. and Sub-Committee meetings to 6:00 p.m. Maybe more people will watch them live. The other thing would be to have Instant Replay. That is later on that evening, LTC replays the meeting.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:00 pm
Mimi, great coverage, and thanks for doing it!
January 25th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
The councilors complaining about “finding out things in the Sun first” in this case, was silly.
As the manager clearly stated, and the Sun clearly stated, this matter has to be filed with the State first before a 3 month review period that also takes community input, can even begin. That has not happened yet.
So this whole issue - hasn’t even begun yet. And it was admitted by all, that this company came in and didn’t meet with the Manager but met with others.
Another red herring.
I did appreciate Mr. Elliot saying point blank he did not want this downtown, while others danced a bit around the issue.
Just another thing, like low income housing, that people think Lowell must take accept all of. Let Chelmsford or Dracut or Tewksbury step up for once.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:51 pm
I agree that a second methdone clinic in Lowell has no place, particularly downtown.
I do think, though not sure, that clinics such as this and group homes need only be liscensed by the state, with little if
any, input from the community. I don’t beleive these types of facilities are typically exempt from many local controls.
HMI runs a good operation on Suffolk St., very rarely, do we hear of any incidents.
As for the city stating they could nothing on the Burbecks site….I knew they were not going to do anything.
They are not going to go back on the decision that they made. This would also set a precedent for future projects.
As far as I’m concerned, the council has been paying lip service in an effort to appear concerned. Horsecrap!
They all knew there was NOTHING that could be done.
Of course, the planning brd is going to have a 4 page expanation as to how they arrived at their decision.
Unfortunately, many do possess the wherewithall, to REALLY question the planning brd. No one on that council is a planning
expert. Whereas, if you got this OUT of this City, they would CRUMBLE. They rely upon their good boy, “local yokel” network to accomplish what they want to do. It is a WHOLE differant ball game when it goes before a judge.
Furthermore, I have to say, I am rather disappointed that abutters of the Burbecks project appear to have chosen not to appeal.
Yes, it costs money, (over a longer period of time) but, not nearly as cost prohibitive when many contribute.
The fact is, the developer stands to lose a lot more. AN appeal can take up to 5 years to resolve. These guys have to start building,
start selling and start paying their debt. Time is on the abutters side, NOT the developer.
Hand the victory flag over, the Burbecks developer has been allowed to win.
This is exactly what they rely upon. They count on folks not having money…However, how much market value will their homes lose
once those apartments go in? How much is that worth? How much is it worth to maintain your quality of life?
Personally, when I invest my money, I expect it to hold it’s value or increase in value.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Correction from above, “I don’t beleive these types of facilities are typically exempt from many local controls”.
RATHER…I do beleive these types of organizations are exempt from local controls.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:24 pm
I’ve heard things about drug dealing happening at the Suffolk Street site, and people who work at Wannalancit are not at all enthused about having a methodone clinic right there. That might be a reason why the building is mostly empty of office tenants.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
What’s so bad about a methadone clinic downtown?
January 26th, 2006 at 4:39 pm
Since they have developed new zoning for the city, why not put methadone clinics etc. in an
area zoned “medical”? Such a clinic in the Saints or LGH complex I wouldn’t think would be a burden,
although there is a school next to Saints Memorial Hospital so that could be an issue.