Email us!
Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums
- adventures of the mohards
- Art is the Handmaid of Human Good
- Blog from the Office of the City Manager, Lowell MA
- Dracut Forum
- Dracut Musings
- JackieDoherty.org
- Lowell Deeds
- Lowell Police Dept WebNews
- Middlesex Community College Blog
- Mr. Mill City
- RichardHowe.com
- Right-Side-of-Lowell
- Tewksbury Issues
- The New Englander
Lowell Politics
Mass Bloggers
- - Leftyblogs MA Blogroll - Almost all of my favorite lefty blogs in Massachusetts can be found here. Linking here keeps my own blogroll short but still up to date! Below are some other MA blogs which are not listed at LB.
- H2Otown (Watertown, MA)
- MargeBLOG (Williamstown)
- Michael Forbes Wilcox (Western MA)
- The Gazebo (Worcester area)
Media in Lowell
- Community Connections The online archive of many of WUML's radio shows.
- LTC :: Our community cable access channel (8 & 10). Excellent people, I've worked with them before.
- Open Source :: Chris Lydon's new show, broadcast on WUML and WGBH locally.
- The Lowell Sun :: Love it or hate it, it's the big newspaper in town.
- WCAP radio :: Talk radio in Lowell - still locally owned, and in transition.
- WUML :: The student- and community-run radio station of UMass-Lowell. Lynne hosts a radio show, Thinking Out Loud, 10am on Fridays.
Media in MA
Other Daily Reads
Politics Online
- City Council Agenda Past City Council agendas, posted in a mostly timely manner
- Lowellma.gov Official city website
Progressive Local Orgs
Snark and politics
The Arts in Lowell
- 119 Gallery - Art gallery with exhibitions of many local artists, interesting events, and living, breathing culture.
- Arts League of Lowell (ALL) - Artist community group, a recent but welcome addition to the arts scene in Lowell.
- Brush Art Gallery - Come and meet working artists in their natural habitats!
- Cultural Organization of Lowell (COOL) - Great local calendar of events.
- Lowell Opera Company - Community opera.
- Lowell Philharmonic Orchestra - Local community orchestra.
- Lowell Poetry Network
- Lowell Rocks - List of live music events
- Merrimack Repertory Theatre - A local theatre "presenting an exciting mix of contemporary and new plays in historic downtown Lowell."
- OUtlET - Paper and online 'zine making a splash locally with events in art, poetry, music, and everything in between!
- Revolving Museum Contemporary, local, public art space with a plethora of children's programs and art by and for the community.
- The Fine Print - Socially aware, themed, arts and issues periodic publication available throughout Lowell.
- The Image Theater - Theatre company which puts on all original works by local playwrights.
- Whistler House Museum - A great collection of contemporaries of Whistler at his historic birthplace.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
I had to laugh when I read your post. It seems to me that under “normal” circumstances Rita or Bud certainly would have ‘leaked’ the goings on at the Executive Session to the paper, but since they haven’t and are taking this route I can only imagine one of two things (or both) is happening.
1. They didn’t understand a word of the briefing and when asked specific questions by the paper they couldn’t intelligent answers.
2. They don’t have the kahonas to openly violate Executive Session so they will try to imply that something is being hidden from the public in an attempt to discredit Lynch.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
The thing I find interesting is that this will certainly give the Sun something to talk about other than the contract extension.
If this hadn’t have come up I would assume that practically the only thing the Sun would be reporting on the meeting is the extension.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:10 am
The best thing that Rita, Bud and A. Mercier can do for the City of Lowell is resign from the council. I see many things that need to be fixed in the city that these three could and should be focusing on. #1 Trash. #2 Rental property not being maintained by out of town owners. #3 Abandoned property. #4 Curb and sidewalk weeds. Never seen so many of these weeds anyplace else in the U.S. Mabe we can become the weed capital of the nation. This could go on and on and there are so many things that they can do to make this a better city to live in. Oh well, meby they will be gone soon and someone who cares will take their place. They certainly don’t have my vote
September 12th, 2007 at 8:02 am
The gall (or lack of commonsense) the CC RM displayed is mindboggling!
How many articles and radio appearances does the CM need to do, to placate those that are demanding privilaged information that they are not entitled. Was this CC RM’s attempt to get on the Sun’s good side? Oh, perhaps the Sun will endorse her this year (yeah, unlikely).
And for Pat Mc. to infer comparison to Dick Howe Sr is outright buffoonery.
Listening to Pat Mc. this morning, he also inferred that the division within the CC has been made up by the “6″. HAAAAA, HAAAAAA…Pat Mc. who is named in Public Record on the People For Lowell PAC, he who phoned WCAP when CC ED was on air, just days after the former CM was advised he no longer had majority support..and the list goes on and on..
Niki has her referndum on Bush, our referendum is to elect CC who are running for the interest of all of the residents of Lowell (you know, progress, for our future) not to benefit the few, the sneaky, greedy developers and the hacks.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:06 am
Sidewalk weeds?
September 12th, 2007 at 8:42 am
Prince, the weeds are pretty disgraceful, particularly on the VFW Hwy.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:20 am
“Counselor Mercier”, LOL.
It is interesting to read between the lines of what was said during the discussion. The City Solicitor provided credence to the delay in lawsuit when she explained that the punchlist of open items was being worked off in the past 6 months, and now that it was completed (or one open item) discussions would be held in an attempt to settle prior to filing suit.
The “report” was described as a legal opinion from counsel, not an “audit” as it has been described publicly previously. And there were indications that it contained both “pluses” (supporting the city’s claims) and “minuses” (issues that compromised the city’s claims). Knowing your weaknesses is a good strategy in a lawsuit, whereas disclosing them to your competition would be foolish. Of the trio, CC A. Mercier is the only one that recognized that.
The eventual release may include a description of those weaknesses. That may be interesting fodder for future discussion, but it may come after the city election.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:11 am
“And for Pat Mc. to infer comparison to Dick Howe Sr is outright buffoonery.”
I’m not sure he meant to compare councilor Mercier to councilor Howe, but rather an attempt (in his mind) to marginalize a favored councilor in an attempt to take control. He could be right, as I am still confused by the apparent turn-around from late 2005 (when Howe was a voice crying in the wilderness about Cox’s overstepping his authority) to the Spring of 2006 (when Cox was convinced to leave) by these council members. Was there new information available to them that changed their minds? Or was it a strategy to seize control of the direction the city was heading?
Only those that know, know.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:11 am
Curious…
Is there anything to be ‘read’ in noting when Rita puts her glasses on and reads from a (presumably prepared) piece of paper vs when she’s just talking out loud?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:16 am
I was of the mind that reading on on the council floor from a prepared “speech” was prohibited? Am I incorrect?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:20 am
I didn’t get the feel that she was reading from a prepared speech so much as generally referring to the paper. It probably contained talking points she wanted to make sure she addressed.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:24 am
I think many people are getting sick and tired of these 3. I do have a little support for Caulfield since he has helped out with flood victims. Other than that, its time to boot them all out of office, especially Rita Mericer. No matter where you stood on the Cox/Lynch battle, I think most people agree that these 3 are taking it too far. I mean, seriously, get over over it already. Lynch is our city manager and he is doing a decent job. Let’s move on and get rid of these 3 and elect candidates that are actually going to start working for the people.
September 12th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Eleanor Rigby,
How about:
3. Rita and Bud know this document shouldn’t be made public, know it will never be made public, don’t even think that it should be made public, but are taking advantage of the opportunity to look like they’re champions of government transparency?
Those two pose for the cameras more than rest of the Council combined. And that’s saying something.
September 12th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Yeah…not a lot of intelligence going on here. Im sure she is trying to help out the Sun’s Campy. How can you ask to disclose information when you are told it is not legally advised? I have never seen anyone so not with it. She had better think about what she discloses and to whom before she sees herself in a legal battle of her own.
September 12th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
My question ( playing devil’s advocate ) I don’t have a problem with not releasing info because of future litigation. When I heard Mgr. Lynch on ‘CAP he said it wasn’t being released because of Atty-client privilege,
as a Lowell resident and taxpayer am I not the “client” as opposed to the Mgr who doesn’t live or pay taxes here? One of my pet peeves is union negotiations. the taxpayer is paying last years wages will be paying next years wages is paying the people involved in the negotiations as well as the heat, lights, and the room where they are taking place. We even pay for the paper we’re going to write it on but God forbid I should know what is being discussed during these meetings. Are you listening Paul Georges?
September 12th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
I believe the atty-client privilege and future litigation argument is one in the same.
Joe….you could be correct with #3. Bud Lite and Rita, if nothing else, are politically astute.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
The only thing better than Rita providing legal interpretations is when Caulfield displays his extensive background and knowledge in city planning and engineering matters.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Lynne, you attack Rita because “she thinks she knows law better than a lawyer.”
Umm… you have a blog in which you make assertions about the law, economics, politics etc. everyday… what was your degree in again?
September 13th, 2007 at 2:00 am
LOL Josh! Great to see Lynne (or Mr Lynne- how sad is THAT?) get a wake up call!
September 13th, 2007 at 6:29 am
Josh… open your eyes. Not Lynne.
Are you seriously defending Rita here? Seriously. Go on.
September 13th, 2007 at 8:10 am
Mr. Lynne, sorry about the mistaken identity. I wasn’t wearing my glasses when I was reading last night.
But I wasn’t defending Rita per se, I was just commenting on the idea of dismissing someone because they don’t have a fancy degree.
September 13th, 2007 at 10:07 am
Regarding Union Contract negotiations: The reason topics are not made public during negotiations is to give the chosen and elected representatives on both sides of the table the best chance to negotiate in good faith. When an agreement is brought forward it is then the best contract both sides feel they can produce, which is then subject to votes of the bodies of the two sides represented: labor (all represeted workers)and management (in this case elected officials of the government).
Because each agreement is a series of trade offs of what each side wants, the whole contract is voted up or down, not cherry picked. If the contract is voted down by either body, both sides have to start all over again with negotiations. If each point is subject to discussion of the masses, not much can get done. Its the same reason you elect representatves to deal with issues in the house, senate and city council, everyone can’t know it all thoroughly and put in the time. It also keeps uninformed people out of the negotiations. There are actually issues labor is concerned about like job specific working conditions and safety, the general public would not be familiar with.
Believe me as a union member who has been on a bargaining team and one who has not, not much information is given to the general body of membership during the process for that reason. We’d spend our time debating everything with our members instead of getting anything done. The union members are even more of a pain in the butt and want to know what is going on that the public. We are not told minute by minute, so our leaders can do their job. Imagine trying to keep a few hundred or thousand union members happy at every turn, nevermind a manager having to individually do the same for 100,000 or so taxpayers. Its not possible. When the best deal is hammered out, everyone gets to see it at the same time.
And negotiating sites are chosen by both parties, if you don’t want to pay the heat, light, etc. Let your representatives know. Then they can instruct the city manager to pay 50% of the hall or conference facility rental. I’m sure the union would be happy to hold the negotiations in their own hall if coming to enemy turf isn’t a problem. If you want we’ll just negotiate during the good weather, we can sit out at a public park (the permit fees are pretty reasonable) if you don’t object to blocking the sunlight on your grass.
I think what I find most amusing is that people assume that the negotiating process, among many other municipal functions haven’t been well thought out and tested over time. If there was a better process than collective bargaining I’m pretty sure they’d use it.
Once in a while you need to cut them some slack to do their jobs, even if that means you can’t know everything instantly. The vast majority of elected officials and public workers really give a damn and work hard. Some of us actually like serving the public, you know the whole higher calling thing.
Oh and we love hearing how you pay our salaries, as if we didn’t know. Just make sure you divide my salary by the total number of taxpayers, minus the local aid and lottery share. That way I know exactly how much you personally are paying me. Oh and subtract the taxes I pay because I am choosing to just paying myself (and my wife too I like to tell her I’m sponging off her!). Guess what? Every product I buy, I pay that person who works there too, I don’t feel compelled to tell every one at the store though when I shop. Its all part of the great big thing we call the economy.
September 13th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Jason Said “Oh and we love hearing how you pay our salaries, as if we didn’t know. Just make sure you divide my salary by the total number of taxpayers, minus the local aid and lottery share. That way I know exactly how much you personally are paying me. Oh and subtract the taxes I pay because I am choosing to just paying myself (and my wife too I like to tell her I’m sponging off her!). Guess what? Every product I buy, I pay that person who works there too, I don’t feel compelled to tell every one at the store though when I shop. Its all part of the great big thing we call the economy.”
I wasn’t trying to irritate you. I realize public employees are a necessary evil we have to live with. I’d just for once like to take friday off so I can beat the traffic to “my place on the vineyard”
September 13th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
Lowellian wrote:
“…One of my pet peeves is union negotiations. the taxpayer is paying last years wages will be paying next years wages is paying the people involved in the negotiations as well as the heat, lights, and the room where they are taking place. We even pay for the paper we’re going to write it on but God forbid I should know what is being discussed during these meetings. Are you listening Paul Georges?…”
******************
I promise, I won’t take nearly as much space as Jason!
Obviously you (Lowellian) have never been a part of a contract negotiation (union or otherwise). There is give and take. Both sides present the other with demands each consider outragous and they bargain to an agreement that they can both live with. This is done behind closed doors for a reason.
Unless you do it outside in the park, you’re going to have use a conference room with a table! LOL (I am going to assume that part of your post was a joke)
As for Jason going off on how “they” LOVE to hear how “we” pay their salaries. Get over it! We DO pay them, you know it, we know it, period.
Now, once a contract has been negotiated, agreed to and ratified by the rank and file and, in the case of a municipal or state contract, legislative body, there is certainly no reason in the world that it should be withheld from the public.
Taxpayers have the right to know and to agree or disagree with parts, or the contract as a whole, and to make their opinions known.
What this has to do with keeping a strategy and information involving litigation private is beyond me.
September 13th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Lowellian -
“place on the vineyard”? yeah right just once I’d love to see folks finally separate the fire/police/teachers type of municipal employees from everyone else. everyone thinks they live the life of Riley and it’s unfair to lump the greedy teachers union types in with everyone else. have them not take a raise for a few years like the non-teacher/public safety employees did a few years back…would never happen, they’d never pitch in for the greater good of the municipality, always wanting raises that others in municipal govt. wouldn’t get. not everyone makes a fortune working for the city
September 14th, 2007 at 9:46 am
Yeah… thats why I went into teaching, for the money.
Oh wait.
September 14th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Mr. Lynne is a teacher? That explains a lot. I thought I smelled chalk!
I take it you’re retired, right? Otherwise, those 9:46am posts would be happening on the taxpayer’s dime, wouldn’t they?
September 14th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
LOL…
No. I was once on the career path to teach. I was complimented by many professionals that I’d make a great teacher. Unfortunately my addiction to paying rent won out over other concerns. I wish I could say it was because of a cyst a’la Mr. Limbaugh, but alas.. it was the job market.
BTW… “Oh wait” is typically (at least online) an indicator of snark. In this case, not sarcasm because I’m a teacher and are not paid enough, but because I almost went down that path and decided not to on account of cash.
September 14th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Shame that your timing was off. Nowadays, you can actually make a pretty good life for yourself teaching if you have another comparable second household income. And the retirement benefits are killer.
I’m actually kicking myself for not getting into it. Then again, I think I’d strangle one of the little brats, so perhaps it’s better that I stayed out of the profession!
September 14th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Mr Lynne, You must live pretty high on the hog if you can’t live on a teacher’s salary. At a base pay of 53k after 7 years that comes to $45.29 per hr. I’m surviving on a lot less than that.
September 14th, 2007 at 9:05 pm
My issue was that the teaching in question would have teaching music for higher ed. The decision was made that dealing with bills prevented the required grad school. The stories I heard about starting salaries, combined with the forecasted debt showed the math wasn’t going to work for me.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Good to know we’re a necessary evil. That’s such a great way to look at government service. I’m not sure what you mean by your Vineyard comment. I can’t afford a vacation place myself.
You in a roundabout way made my point ER and I find it funny you think I went off, some of what I wrote was very tongue in cheek. We all know where the money comes from. I don’t think the people who need to remind me where my paycheck comes from (Since we all know) contribute to the discussion. It’s the lowest common denominator when talking to a public employee. If it makes you feel better telling us that, I’m not sure what to say.
I don’t forget who I work for or why I do my job and I don’t think my co-workers do either. But thanks for the reminder. I’ll make sure to tell the next dying person I tend to thanks for paying my salary all these years before they go. The implied message whether intended or not (I happen to think it is), is that you don’t think paying for our service is worth it (see: necessary evil). If you have a real issue with the work we do let me know.
I was raised and educated to view my civic obligation to pay taxes as contributing to the common good of society by the goods and services those taxes provide, be it education, police and fire protection, roads, parks or anything else. I guess that’s a minority opinion. It seems so many look at it as having their pocket picked.
I do agree that all contracts should be available to the public. Taxpayers should be able to view them and then express their opinion, (agree or disagree) to their elected officials to their hearts content and attempt to convey contracts more in line with what they feel is fair, but they can’t all be in the negotiating room. Unfortunately I can’t even get an updated contract for my own job. Wish I had an answer for you on that one.
If my lengthy posts annoy you ER, feel free to skip them. I don’t let an uninformed comment pass by regardless of the thread topic.