Kazanjian Can’t Talk About “Safety”
Here we go again. Anything to use as a weapon against this administration, which plays by fair rules and makes decisions in a far more open fashion than “they” (the GOBs) would like, eh? Anything to get a quote in the paper against Lynch and anyone who has ever dared just do their job.
Opportunistic. I suppose that makes some of these people politicians, though not in a good way.
The fact is, C. Kazanjian should be the last person throwing stones about safety. Not by a long shot. Here are some photos of his (condemned and empty) properties on Market Street in the Acre. You can click on the photo to see a bigger version. Tell me honestly, how are these properties not contributing to blight, safety problems, or poor economic development in this city?
Every time Kazanjian speaks about safety, theft, or economic development, I’m going to post this photo. If he continues, maybe I’ll photograph some of his other equally blighted properties. Just keep doing it until it sinks in, or people finally realize what the definition of a hypocrite is.
Now, to address the actual complaint. I’m not diminishing (nor is anyone) the seriousness of theft at the library. However, are we now going to bar the doors, go on lockdown, and spend all sorts of money on (more) security details? Thefts, as unfortunate as they are, especially for the person who lost their expensive equipment, happen. The library is near the police HQ. It’s got security measures in place, including cameras. How is the fact that the library has expanded security guard hours “turning a blind eye,” exactly? If Kazanjian’s so concerned about the library, why isn’t he offering a solution, instead of just attacking the administration? Oh, right. Maybe he’s not interested in a solution, but an issue to pretend to run on in the next election.
As to the “numerous letters” he’s received about safety at the library, it seems that all the reports that have been investigated have indicated that actually, the library is not the drug-filled crime haven he would like you to think it is. As Mimi posted (bold mine):
I have come to my conclusions based on the facts. I read the 7-page report (dated 2.29.08) prepared by Assistant City Solicitor, Bryan Leahy. He prepared this report, (which looked at LPD records regarding the Library for the past 3 years) in response to a Council motion on the Pollard Memorial Library security and safety.
The report outlines all of the type of calls made to the LPD, even those that had nothing to do with the Library but because they took place near the building, there were assigned to it.
This is his part of his conclusion: [LPD records] “show that generally speaking the Library is safe, secure and crime free. Any allegations that crime such as drug, arson, vandalism, assaults and threats to employees or (patrons) regularly occur at the Library are unfounded.”
Take it up with the LPD or the Assistant City Solicitor if you want to disagree with their findings, but you’d better back it up with facts, not rumors and innuendos.
And if you want to talk about fixing the safety issues this city faces, you maybe should take the log out of your own eye instead of accusing everyone else of not caring.
April 8th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
good for you lynne, this guy just listens to all the
malcontents at the sac club, trying to embrass lynch
councillor towtruck is just carring the banner of the
cox gang , good for you post it every time!!
April 8th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Good for you Lynne. You’re a better reporter than any on staff at the Lowell Sun. I applaud you for your efforts. I can’t believe people are so blinded that they can’t figure out Kazanjian is just grinding Cox’s ax for him. He is such a negative force. He offers no solutions just criticism. The theft in the library was unfortunate but not earth shattering. Sadly, petty thefts happen everywhere now-a-days. He should fix up all of his run down buildings before he critcizes anyone else’s efforts. I don’t even believe he got numerous calls about the Library. I think it was one whiner.
And this motion other motion he has on tonights agenda is very suspect. According to the Sun he is seeking to appoint a special architectural review committee to examine redevelopment plans for the Hamilton Canal District produced by Trinity Financial. What’s in this for him and what friend is he trying to help? This project has already been awarded by an RFP process. How can they change the terms of the agreement now? Something is not right here.
April 8th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Could he be trying to derail the award after-the-fact?
April 8th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
It’s worth noting that that vacant, abandoned building he owns abuts Cummisky Alley, the right-of-way that he proposed to close because it was “dangerous.”
Chutzpah: a man who kills his parents then asks the judge for mercy because he’s an orphan.
April 8th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Yes, actually, though minor, Kazanjian violated ethics rules by bringing forth the Cummisky Alley motion, then sticking around to discuss it, then sticking around to voting on it.
I wonder how many more conflict of interest statutes he’ll violate before the end of his term?
April 8th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Oh, and RE the motion, that sounds very dangerous. Like a derailing, as Mr. Lynne says.
If in doubt, delay and derail, I’m guessing.
April 8th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Joe, I was thinking the same thing when Lynne posted this.
April 8th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
I’m not sure what the original problem is but I used to spend 90 minutes a day, two days a week at the library while our son was at MCC and I mostly used the stairs but would use the elevator when I had knee problems. I saw no crime at all. I didn’t see any suspicious persons. And I saw staff in the large reading rooms.
The only thing that might have been a concern was in the late afternoon when groups of kids were loitering on the steps outside. But I don’t recall hearing about any incidents.
What’s Lowell’s policy on condemned buildings? In a commercial district such as the one in the picture, shouldn’t the owner be given a certain amount of time to remedy the problem or be forced to tear it down? I can’t imagine that it’s good for the business of the other stores in the area and could be a hazard. I’m surprised to see something like that in Lowell.
April 8th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings but those buildings aren’t there anymore.
April 8th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Do you have any idea how much money this city has spent demolishing and rehabbing vacant buildings in order to keep them from being crime-magnets?
April 8th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Lowellian - actually only the white building has been demolished. The other is slated to be fixed up.
April 8th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Yahoo! It’s about time!
April 8th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Great story on Kazanjian. For the most part I like the Councilors, but watching this guy in action has been painful. Perhaps it’s just because he’s new, but he doesn’t seem like one for details. I can’t count the number of times he’s brought something up only to be corrected or informed by the city manager that the issue of concern has already been addressed.
His idea to have the Trinity people “work with the local architect’s” is just one example of him missing the boat.
There have been many very well publicized open house meetings held by Trinity for input. Some of the ideas brought forth in those meetings have lead to design changes in the project (like the Dutton / Fletcher Street interchange), so it is clear that Trinity is open to suggestions. The gentlemen that represented Trinity at one of the Council meetings told Kazanjian if he wants the local architects to have a say, they should attend one of the remaining meetings.
How he was not aware of these meetings, or chose to just ignore them is beyond me.
In reference to safety at the library. My wife’s friend recently saw one kid hand his gun to another at the entrance of the library. I guess this was an effort to get rid of it before going through the metal detectors.
Not sure if that’s supposed to make one feel better or not, but my wife’s friend got right back in her car and drove away. Both my wife and her friend now refuse to go there.
April 9th, 2008 at 6:26 am
-b:
I liked your analysis. You are right, let’s not get the details get in the way of the discussion.
As for the incident, that you relayed that occurred outside the library, is not simply an library problem but a City problem. If we turn the Library into a fortress, the issues will still be here. It is easier for some to blame the CM and the Director of the Library but the problem is much more complicated. So instead of focusing on a city-wide problem, we beat up on the leadership of the library.
April 9th, 2008 at 7:02 am
-b
Your anecdote re: the gun passing incident sounds a bit “urban-legendish.” Did your wife’s friend report this incident to the police? Is she sure that it was gun that was passed or could it have been a cell phone or Ipod or something else? These stories always have a way of being second-hand reporting — “My cousin’s wife’s brother’s girlfriend saw…” As Mimi said this is a *CITY* problem not a library problem. I do admit that youth congregating on the library steps can be somewhat intimidating but guess what? I have walked past these kids many times and never once had anything bad happen. I would be willing to bet that the sector cars who cover the downtown sector have been told at rollcall to keep the kids moving from the areas around the library especially with the increased attention this area is getting now.
April 9th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Yes, Lowellian, the white building is gone. It was demolished on a Saturday morning (around 7am), a couple of weeks back, with one of his workers directing traffic in the middle of the street. Nary a police detail to be found.
Looks like he supports the use of flagmen at construction/demo sights.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
I guess something like that could happen around the library. I’m constantly amazed at the level of crime in Lowell. I read the UML Police logs for the last month and it seems like crime spikes on Fridays. Most of the crime seems to be south of the river and east of the river where it runs north-south.
Comparatively speaking, I read about far less crime in Pawtucketville. Perhaps it’s more residential?
When you read about the recent fight with gunfire involving teenagers, it’s not that much of a stretch to believe that kids are carrying guns.
April 9th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
I remember crime being a lot worse in the late 80’s and early 90’s. I even remember fatal gang shootings at the basketball courts at Father Maguire Park north of the river.
Most of what I have read about crime indicates that it closely tracks with economic indicators… more than that it tracks with indicators of upward mobility potential. Wish I had a citation, its just what I recall
April 9th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
KRS, Did you call it into the PD or did you just drive by so you could complain about bit later.
I agree with you on most things but when it comes to AK your personal problems with him leaves some doubt as to credibility.
April 9th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
RE the building, great, so it’s gone, and hopefully the other one might get fixed up. But how long did they stand there like that? How long before all the other properties around town get the same treatment? How long before he stops building those horrendous condo projects that crowd onto a small lot? (Wonder if that’s the idea behind demolishing the aforementioned building?)
*shrug* The list goes on.
April 9th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
“I remember crime being a lot worse in the late 80’s and early 90’s.”
It always happens near the end of a Bush Presidency.
April 9th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
You remember correctly.
Lowell experienced the largest drop in crime of any American city during the 1990s.
April 9th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FADAqlvNlak
April 9th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
so much for democratic. you hate kazanjian, so that means that everything at the library is unfounded, rumors and innuendos. just so you know, for the last time, every single incident that is mentioned has at the very least an internal report and in some cases several, as well as a police report. dont’ assume you know that goes on at the library. you don’t work there. they are valid cocerns brought up to various administrations and nothing has been done, which is why there are still issues today.
lynne and mimi, you just looove to spout how right you are and just bash those who don’t agree with you. such a shame that you two can make assumptions and believe one person’s report, who works for the city (gee so unbiased) over the people who work there day in and day out.
April 9th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
I have no reason to doubt my wife’s friend. And it was my wife friend who told her what she saw, not my wife’s friend’s sister’s cousin. Given the area it seems 100% plausible. I don’t think she reported the incident, as the story was told to me she went back to her car and drove away.
I do agree these issues are a city problem and not a library problem. This one just happened to be at the library entrance.
I have no issue going to the library downtown. But my wife refuses, and I guess I can understand where she is coming from.
April 10th, 2008 at 6:48 am
So, Lowellian, here’s the scenario….
A Saturday morning, approx. 7:30am… (on my way to MB on Broadway, after having gotten my coffee at TD),who am I going to call? The LPD? What are they going to do?
It was an observation. Building coming down, equipment on the road and a person not in uniform, in the middle of the road, directing traffic…
This was an observation…no personal “issue” or issue of credibility.
I’m sure, IF there was supposed to be a uniformed officer on site, than that would be in LPD records, correct? I know, were it researched, records would confirm my observation.
Had Lynne not posted on this subject, I likely wouldn’t have brought it up. However, my comment was germaine to the discussion.
As for credibility..everyone who blogs on LiL, knows who I am and I do not hide behind screen names…um, like, Lowellian.
I am many things, a liar, I am not.
April 10th, 2008 at 8:26 am
“Most of what I have read about crime indicates that it closely tracks with economic indicators… more than that it tracks with indicators of upward mobility potential. Wish I had a citation, its just what I recall”
I attribute the huge drop in crime back in the 90s to the implementation of easy, cheap abortion in the 70s (re: Freakonomics).
Since then, the crime seems to go in cycles as hard criminals are put away and come out, and as new waves of immigration brought back the gang activity (this has happened with most waves of immigration.. its a measure of people trying to fit in and find connections, as well as a measure of organized crime using them).
Within the communities, gang activity tends to lessen as new generations meld in.
But the continuing drug prohibition still creates a culture of illegal activity that cannot be solved until we stop it at the source.. end the prohibition so that there is no financial incentive and use shame and education to end the demand (as we basically have with smoking).
April 10th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Immigrants commit crime at lower rates than native-born Americans.
April 10th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Thanks Joe, I’m so sick of these biases against immigrants, driven by less than fact.
“lynne and mimi, you just looove to spout how right you are and just bash those who don’t agree with you. such a shame that you two can make assumptions and believe one person’s report, who works for the city (gee so unbiased) over the people who work there day in and day out.”
Oh, too funny. You come on here with an anonymous nickname, posting what appears to be for the first time, yell at us, and then accuse us of bashing people who disagree with us. Here’s a thought. Produce the facts to back up your assertions that the library (if you’re to be believed) is the most dangerous place to be in Lowell, and we’ll be the first to agree with you. However, it appears that someone is interested in either a) blowing things way out of proportion using incidents that spread out over years and years or b) making stuff up out of whole cloth. Sorry, it takes more than a couple anon postings on the internet to change our minds.
RE the gun incident -b talks about, doesn’t it sort of prove that the library’s measures are working? If the reason that it, if it were a gun, was being handed off to someone else before entering, doesn’t it follow that this means that the gun wasn’t making into the library to threaten the lives of its patrons?
We still have a lot of problems to solve in Lowell regarding safety. People like Kazanjian just make it worse by making a lot of noise (in what appears to be a cynical attempt to play politics) but solving nothing by it.
April 10th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Shhhh! Don’t tell the kids on the front steps but… those so-called “metal detectors” are not there to prevent someone from smuggling *in* large metal objects; they are there to prevent thieves from smuggling library books OUT!
April 10th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Paul, I think you may be right…
Good thing punk kids with guns don’t read this blog too often.
April 10th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Or Walk/Don’t Walk signals.
They don’t read those very often, either.
Pet peeve.
April 10th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
So Joe you have seen the teens in the city doing the slow stroll on green? Drives me nuts every time I drive up Fletcher St a group of teens crosses on the green light and stops and talks to each other. AAhhhh! Don’t they know I still have a 20 minute wait to get over the bridge?
April 11th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Again, Councilor K. and his advisors are loose with the facts and lazy with the research. Kami and Lynne are right on target.I heard the CM speak at a foum last night on Gang Violence. This was the first time i came face to face witht the CM and heard him speak. He was articulate knowledgeble,and passionate. No pauses,or fumbling hesitations, no dees dems or dos in his entire 20 min. or so oratory. I’m not canonizing the fellow, just stating that this man is a professional. And if people in Lowell don’t get or stay angry and vigilant and put these Councilors (Kazanjian, Mercier, Caulfield) in check who have no other agenda except to make him look bad he will be gone.
April 11th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
You guys all need to relax.
April 12th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Kazanjian is the worst kind of political hack. He is the poster boy for the old school “I do a favor for you, you do a favor for me” mentality. Why would this tow-truck driver, I mean “businessman” get invovled in city politics? Out of a sense of duty in the great traditions of Jefferson, Adams, and Washington? Not likely. The man leaves a slime trail behind him.