Left In Lowell

Well, not exactly, but I wanted to get your attention. I kept meaning to post about the upcoming Dudley House Orchestra concert, which both my husband and myself are playing in, and forgot.

This Sunday, 4pm, at the Sanders Theatre at Harvard U (Cambridge), you can, for very little money, listen to a fabulous orchestra (the best I have ever had the pleasure of playing with) with featured cello soloist Alan Stepansky. I’m being objective when I say this is a great concert, with high quality music. The program will consist of Saint-Saëns’ Cello Concerto No. 1, which features Stepansky, and “Dvorak’s final symphonic work, the rarely played A Hero’s Song, and the rousing Symphony No. 1 of Vasily Kalinnikov, a favorite of Tchaikovsky’s and Rachmaninoff’s.”

From the soloist’s bio: “Alan Stepansky is a world-renowned performer and teacher. After graduating from Harvard (A.B. ‘82), he was named principal cello of the Boston Pops, before moving on to the New York Philharmonic, where he served as associate principal and acting principal cello for nine years. His chamber music recordings have earned critical praise from Gramophone magazine, the New York Times, and the BBC. Mr. Stepansky is currently head of the cello department of the Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University and is on the faculty of the Manhattan School of Music, in addition to working at music festivals throughout the world.”

TICKET INFORMATION

Tickets for the May 4th concert are available at the Harvard Box Office (in person or online). $12 (general public), $9 (students, seniors, Harvard affiliates). Tickets also available at the door, but be sure to arrive a little early to account for the line at the door.

Additional info, directions, and more.

Anyone who is a classical music fan should not miss this! Plus as an added bonus, you get to make faces at me trying to get me to screw up my part.

As you may or may not know, our very own Mehmed Ali, has accepted a position with the US State Department and will be deployed to Iraq to work on Cultural Affairs.
With that, please join us in sending him off:
Caffe Paradiso
Palmer St. Lowell
Monday, May 5 @ 7pm

Tonight at 5:30 at City Hall, the City Council’s Sub-committee on the Environment meeting will address the city’s recycling program, which is currently losing money and is in danger of being cut if we can’t bring about a change and get more of our residents to recycle.

Supporters of the city’s recycling program are encouraged to attend. This is a case where local involvement could bring about a sea change in our environmental impact in Lowell, or end with moving backwards by losing the program. If we all do our part, the recycling program could even make our city some money!

Tonight’s the Lowell City Council meeting will focus on finances, mostly in preparation for the upcoming discussions on the FY 2009 budget.

There are two motions that address the issue. The first is by CC Kevin Broderick asking the City Manager to report on the impact of the [anticipated] $3.5 million revenue decrease on cuts in personnel and services. The second motion is by Mayor Bud Caulfield. He is asking the Auditor to provide the Council with a financial report and projection for deficit also anticipated Free Cash Figure.

On April 8, the Finance Sub-Committee (CCs R. Elliott (Chair); K. Broderick and B. Martin) met to discuss the Capital Plan, the FY 2008 Budget (a quarterly report was provided by CFO Tom Moses) and the FY 2009 Budget. Here is the LTC link. Essential viewing for those who are interested in the financial state of our City.

Last year, the City Manager submitted the FY 2008 budget the third week of May. It gave the City Council plenty of time to review it and discuss it. I assume that the Administration will be ready with their proposed budget in a few weeks.

City Council members have two options in their approach to the budget: increase taxes or cut spending. It is really that simple. Unfortunately, on occasion some CC members want to have it both ways; in June they do not want any decrease on the expense side (i.e. no elimination of positions) and in January, they decry when taxes are raised. You cannot have it both ways. And those who propose using reserved funds, do it at the expense of future generations.

There are many ways of saving money without cutting back on services. Has the City maximized its consolidation of departments, eliminated duplicate efforts, reached its technological potential? Those are questions we should be asking ourselves.

And speaking of money, there are two “orders to borrow” on tonight’s agenda. Both are a necessity and I believe the expenditures have already been approved by the CC. The first is to borrow $4.7 for Capital Improvements and the second, $20.3 M, is to pay for the construction of the new Morey School.
.
According to a Mike Lafleur article in yesterday’s Sun, “the $4.7 million capital-improvement loan order would provide funding to replace the roof and boiler at the Reilly Elementary School, replace the boiler at City Hall, replace the roof at the Bartlett School, install new lights at Cawley Stadium, repair the heating and air-conditioning system at Lowell High School and purchase $1.2 million in new city vehicles.” All those are necessities.

Yesterday’s Lowell Column carried disappointing news for some of us who live in Ward 10 (South Lowell, Ayer’s City), former Lowell City Councilor and Mayor Eileen Donoghue has decided not to challenge our current State Representative, David Nangle, this fall.

Eileen’s name was mentioned earlier this year when it looked like Nangle would accept a job as Sergeant at Arms of the Massachusetts Legislature. Recently she joined the law firm of Gallagher & Cavanaugh and according to the Column, “she wants to settle in before trying her hand at another run for public office.”

The Column states that a “Nangle-Donoghue election would have been a bruising affair.” True, true but some political battles are worth fighting. But who are the “many political insiders” who told the Sun that Eileen’s chances of beating Nangle were “slim.”

Who are these “political insider?” What are their credentials? Do you need to start out as an “insider” then you move into the political realm? Or do you start out as a “political outsider” then move into the inner circle? Since I believed that Eileen would win big if she chose to run, I guess I would never make the cut.

As for Eileen’s future, I think by the summer of 2009 she should be ready to return to public service. She can always come back home to the City Council or maybe the School Committee.

The Sunday shows are all talking about the primary horse race (as usual). Despite the American voters’ need to figure out what direction this country should go on the issues, the talking heads once again spend 99% of their time on the former. And of course they usually get things wrong or miss the really deep issues of the horse race to boot.

To me, there’s two warring aspects to this elongated primary. One is about the way this standard circular firing squad, that has characterized Democratic primaries (as compared to the more hierarchical Republican manner, in their winner-take-all, get-on-board style, which while envious, is also sort of cultish and undesirable), is damaging our brand ahead of what will probably be an even nastier general campaign. While it helps vet our eventual nominee and gives them practice on combating wingnut attacks later, it also gives the other side fodder they might not have had, because it drives the negatives of both our candidates up ahead of schedule, making it easier for the Republican to define negativity on us later.

The other is the fact that the drawn-out process has really sustained interest in far more states than normal. Looking at the numbers of new registrations, one can make the argument that with the shorter general election season, we wouldn’t have time to get quite as many people fired up. I think once the losing side gets over the initial disappointment, they will be prepared to get fired up again. That’s a good thing.

On an unrelated front, the observation I’ve been making about the goddamn idiotic media-driven storyline is how Clinton had a blowout win in PA. Give me a break. How is going from 20 points in the polls in PA a month ago to a 10 point win a good sign for Clinton? Yes, of course Clinton’s spinning it as good, but objectively, she did not hit Obama as hard in the final count in PA than in previous OH, even though PA has far more of the sort of people who usually back Clinton - older Dems and blue collar. That’s a bad sign for her campaign. I have not heard one idiot talking head on the TV figure that out. Of course, they have a monetary interest in extending this fight as long as possible, because affiliates in upcoming states will spend inordinate amounts of money on ads. Just sayin’.