Left In Lowell

Mimi and Dick have already posted on the absolutely silly Column that was in today’s Sun. But I wanted to put my two cents in as well.

Isn’t it completely obvious to everyone who’s agenda the Sun is pushing here? It’s obvious that Meehan doesn’t like Lynch, for some reason, or is at least pitting himself against him in this Tsongas arena matter, and the Sun, or at least its unethical editor, is pulling for Meehan - literally, in the pages of the newspaper he controls. You know, the guy whose house Campanini purchased? Let’s take a stroll through the rantings of an editor whose tenure at the paper has been marked by baby kingmaking efforts…(bold is mine and my commentary indicated in brackets):

THE STICKY thing here, however, is how involved should the manager be in Arena Commission negotiations? By statute, the manager is not a member of the seven-member commission. His role is advisory.

It’s questionable whether Lynch should be participating in closed-door meetings with the Arena Commission, an independent instrument of city government.

This brings up an ethical issue. The city manager appoints four of the seven commissioners — the other three are appointed by the UMass Lowell chancellor — so the manager could unduly influence his appointees by the opinions he delivers in closed-door sessions where votes are taken. [Uh, duh, this is the way the Commission is set up - the two stakeholders appoint people. Who they think will best represent the interests of said stakeholder. Are you really that thick?]

At present, two commissioners are holdovers and both are the manager’s picks. One’s reappointment is five years overdue. Do you think that person, if he wants to stay on the commission, could be influenced by the manager’s participation?

Furthermore, why doesn’t Chancellor Marty Meehan get to attend closed-door meetings? The university has as much a financial stake in both the arena and LeLacheur Park as does the city, because it donated the same as the city did to build both facilities and is recognized, by statute, as a partner.

The whole column reads like some sort of joke, and if it weren’t so serious, I’d be laughing at the poor composition.

BACK TO the communication issue, the most vocal of Lynch’s critics were Kazanjian and Councilor Mike Lenzi, both of whom said they were “starving for information.”

Holy crap in hell, Lenzi (as Mimi pointed out) was the one that wanted the Council to meet less. Because governin’ is hard work, don’tcha know? And he has a business to run! Poor, poor, poor Lenzi.

Lenzi complained that he has only received three phone calls from Lynch in his 13 months on the council, a number Lynch disputed. Lenzi said he does not consider e-mail, text messages or other forms of “modern communication” an appropriate way for the manager to communicate with the council. Lenzi prefers talking over the phone or face-to-face.

Bwaaaaaaaaahahaha! No, really, OMG, I’m holding my sides in. Hilarious. So an email isn’t a communication…tell that to the Bush administration…hahahaha…

Well, Lenzi, sir, where’s your motion to go back to weekly meetings, might I ask? If you’re so starving to get your hands more dirty, then why are you avoiding governing?

What is curious about Lenzi’s comment is that he has only filed one motion — to change the City Council meeting schedule from weekly to biweekly — actually lessening the time the councilors communicate face-to-face. A majority of the council approved the measure, believing that more thorough subcommittee work could get accomplished with two weeks between council meetings.

I bet you someone other than Campanini sneaked that last paragraph in. How much you all want to put up on that bet?

I know we are beginning to sound like a broken record ( my apologies to those of you who are under the age of 40) but this morning Sunday Column just reaffirms what Dick and Lynne have been writing about the editor of that newspaper.

First, the Sun does not publish anything on the discussion that occurred at last Tuesday’s City Council meeting on the communication issue between the City Manager and the CC; then it decides in its group-authored column to “cover” the story, Sun-style that is. Dick on his blog has a good analysis of why they sat on this story and he asks: “… did the powers-that-be want to hold the news for the Sunday Column so a particular spin could be placed upon the rollout of this story?”

Anyone who reads the Column today without knowing what happened is going to be confused. The facts got in the way of the commentary and cheap shots.

A former manager and a longtime political observer are quoted. If I had the names I could make my determination on the credibility of the comments. So as long as the sources of the Column remain anonymous, I am going to make the assumption that they are the editor’s imaginary friends and I will pay no attention to the men behind the curtain.

If yesterday afternoon Shawn had not told LiL readers that the editor was on the Warren Shaw radio show yesterday, I would have been further confused by the reference to the Saturday morning radio host. Instead of putting so much time and effort to go on a radio show to become part of the news, the editor should have made sure to provide accurate and timely news coverage.

The Column does question CC Mike Lenzi’s “starving for information” and “face to face” communications. I too am wandering how hungry can this guy be. His one and only motion was to cut down the number of meetings by half. And I do not remember seeing him at too many meetings of Sub-Committees he does not serve on.

And why is it that an intelligent, devoted community leader like Eileen Donoghue get the special treatment is it because they do not march to the tune being played by the editor of the Sun?