Left In Lowell

From the PDM, Chelmsford chapter:

==========
SEPTEMBER MONTHLY MEETING THIS THURSDAY
Sept 20th, 7pm (3rd Thursday of the month) Independence Bar, Radisson Hotel

Please come to our first meeting. There’s a lot to cover:
* Issues discussion –
- Tax fairness (Chelmsford hasn’t endorsed closing tax loopholes, for
example)
- Tax override for Chelmsford
- MA05 race, other elections
- Other issues

* Recap of the state-wide PDM issues meeting (Sep and positioning training
* Organize precinct captains and other roles.
* New web tools demonstration & discussion

RSVP to Mike, mike {at} combsnet.com (replace spaces and {at} with an @)
==========

As Dick says, this is party unity? Dick has the transcript of a WCAP call from Pat McCarthy, a Tsongas supporter in the primary. The whole thing is worth a read, but I just want to point out one delicious little irony from something Pat says:

But this is a real personal campaign for them [the “six”]. I think that they’re going to openly attack people that supported Niki Tsongas. I’m sure they’re bitter about Rita’s endorsement and Bud Caulfield’s endorsement and they’re going to make it very personal. So it’s not really about raising the city up It’s not really about good government. I think it’s more about personal vendettas.

When in doubt, ascribe your own motivations to others, I suppose…this rant is, of course, from the treasurer of the “People for Lowell” who were going to get those “rats” (according to their own pamphlets) aka those councilors who supported getting a new City Manager. Even funnier and more ironic, the above was prefaced by a very personal attack on Councilor Elliot: “Rodney Elliott keeps saying this is how it should be run as a business, and this is what they do in the private sector. How would he know? He’s never held a private sector job in his adult life. And I’ll stake my reputation on that. Give me the list – if it’s 5% of his adult life that he’s held a private sector job, I’d be amazed.”

By the way, Eileen Donoghue - along with other primary opponents - have all jumped on the Democratic bandwagon and are doing their part. Eileen has strongly indicated her support for Niki Tsongas in the general, and was very clear about working to keep the seat in Dem hands. If anyone’s taking anything personal, it’s the GOB. Leave it to them to drag the larger Congressional race into this, erroneously. It’s not about anyone’s endorsement in the primary, for pete’s sake.

Thanks to Dick for putting up the transcript (which is probably get far more play than it should, but sunlight does do wonders).

Paul Georges, the ubiquitous President of the United Teachers of Lowell and President of the Merrimack Valley Central Labor Council (AFL-CIO), has a letter in today’s Lowell Sun in response to School Committeewoman Jackie Doherty’s op-ed piece in the paper’s September 11th edition.

Lynne had already posted (The Fluff Over School Hiring is Well Fluff) on SC Doherty’s commentary which dealt with a report on the hiring and promoting practices of the Lowell School Department. As SC Doherty stated “The report supports what the Superintendent has been saying all along. ‘We are committed to selecting the candidate who best matches the requirements and needs of the position being filled…We are also committed to developing and recognizing the skills and knowledge of Lowell educators who wish to pursue administrative positions’.”

But Mr. Georges sees it differently: “The additional classification of administrators as being ‘Lowell residents’ or ‘raised in Lowell’ is not germane to the question and does more to create a smokescreen than answer the greater question of whether rank-and-file teachers, with long and dedicated service to the system and community, are getting a fair shake in consideration as applicants for positions of leadership in schools across the City.”

I know I am swimming in dangerous waters when I try to debate Mr. Georges publicly. I have to admit that he is an outstanding orator and a relentless champion for his union but the only smokescreen here is the one advanced by the Superintendent’s critics. So now that it has been proven that we do hire from within Lowell, the definition of “within Lowell” has changed.

I respect the 44 out of the 45 “teacher building representatives” who indicated to the UTL that they “felt that there was little opportunity of advancement to a key administrative position in the Lowell School System.” I know that sometimes perception is reality and that most of us do not want to work in an environment where there is no room for advancement. But at the end of the day, the people of Lowell should be asking, where is the data that indicates that a qualified, willing “rank-and-file, long-term Lowell educator” was not selected and a less capable and ineffective “outsider” was?

I am an avid reader of The Column, the Sun’s static political blog, where political rumors and speculation are mixed in with analysis and news. So, now that the City Manager’s contract has been extended, the rumor mill has moved on to whether he is getting a pay raise or not.

The Column writes, “So look for [City Councilors Kevin] Broderick, Eileen Donoghue and the rest of the lame-duck council majority to try to get Lynch an adjustment any way they can, even if they have to change the ordinance before January 2008.”

Oh, really!

This City Council did not give the CM a pay raise and it will not. They had an opportunity in May/June 2007 when they were reviewing and approving the City Budget for FY 2008. There was no request for a pay raise nor was one given. Check it out; there is no increase in the City Manager’s line item in the FY 2008 Budget; he got paid $145,000 in FY 2007 and he is receiving the same in FY 2008. (Page 54, FY 2008 City of Lowell Budget.)

If I am not mistaken during the 2 hour Personnel Sub-Committee meeting last Monday, the CM was asked about a pay raise in this contract extension and he answered that he was not getting one. And when the original motion was introduced by CC Kevin Broderick, he did clearly state that there was no raise attached to his motion. And this morning on WCAP, the CM reiterated that had not asked for a pay raise for FY 2008 nor was one offered. Yes, FY 2009, when the City finances are better, he will and should receive a pay raise.

But to suggest that before January 2008 this Council majority will be changing the ordinance to give the CM a pay raise for the remainder of the Fiscal Year is simply not true. This baseless speculation just adds to the false rumors about the true intentions of the majority of the City Council.

As for the future (2008-2010) Councils, they will not be able to hide behind the mantra, “I do not believe in contracts” and let him go. Rather they will have to take a stand in support of this City Manager or not. That is what leadership is about.

By the way, when does an office holder become a lame duck? I always thought it was the period between an election and the end of their term; and it only applied to someone who was not reelected or chose not to run. I did not realize that our elected officials were already in their “lame-duck” stage.