Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
Live Blog!
I think this is the second to last meeting for the CC. I do not think they will meet Christmas week and New Year’s week. They usually don’t. Of course, unless you have issues with DOR and you have to be calling for a number of special meetings. Yes, this is a shot to the previous administration.
The meeting was preceded by a Auditor/Clerk Sub-Committee meeting. I will post about that later, our Auditor Sheryl Wright, is an outstanding professional and she deserves recognition.
Motion suspended to allow Fire Chief address Council on change of policy regarding how personnel is deployed. You may remember that the Fire Chief would take pre-cautions when sending our firefighters to answers calls of routine flu calls. My opinion, stop sending out the fire fighters with the EMTs.
CC Martin asks: Why do we send a fire truck with the flu? Great question!
And answer, over time dispatcher got used to. So now we have dispatchers deciding policy decision; they are trained to figure who to send but to send everyone, maximum service, has to stop.
I fully support Chief E. Pitta; good for you for bringing this to our attention.
CC R. Mercier asks how did this issue get in the paper? Before Pitta answers, I think Erin Smith of the Sun needed to write a story that day, that is why this is a story. And then the Sun decided to give the story weight by writing an editorial.
Pitta answers that these are trained dispatchers; policy has been in 5 weeks. Not one dispatcher or Police Department has complained about this protocol.
Now all are wondering why this was brought up? My answer see above. CC K. Broderick asking why do we send everyone and asking CM to look at protocol; “overreacting” to non-emergency.
CC A. Mercier hit the nail on the head…it is the story and the perception of the story.
I am not sure what the Mayor’s outburst was towards the Fire Chief. I guess all memos written by the Fire Chief to the Health Board need to be sent to the CC. Mayor Caulfield: Plan E; Plan E; Plan E.
Public Hearing: No one there to talk about Minimum Residential Factor. Maximum Shift allowed passes. If you want to know what it is check out the City Council packet. The packet info on the City website is a great resource.
TIFF given to new company. Good news…new jobs opening up. CC J. Milinazzo explaining that if TIFF requirements are not met, the TIFF will be decertified. CC R. Elliott mentioning that we are creating new economic area for that area. Can we create economic opportunity area in other district. Assistant City Manager explaining that we are capped and limit area to those who are subject to TIFF.
Mayor is reading the transfer requests made by City Manager. If you want the details see my previous post and follow the links.
CC R. Elliott discussing the problem created by the School Administration on the lay-off/rehiring process by the School Administration that created problems for our budget. All transfers approved. Balanced budget!
Edwards Street order being read now. Editorial Comments: Why do we need another Wallgreen? Why do we need to increase the traffic in Middlesex Village? Issue moved to January 12th for public hearing. CC Elliott asking question, rebuffed by Mayor. Elliott tells him he knows but wants information from lawyer representing the development.
CC J. Milinazzo asking does this need to go to Planning Board? Lawyer answers questions. Need to come to CC first.
CC Broderick reports on Sub-Committee report on Auditor. “Got glowing reviews.” Her contract is extended for another 3 years. Oops! Need a roll call vote. 9-0.
CC Broderick mentions why they were not able to take up the City Manager contract. New form put together by Solicitor. Review will be done next Tuesday prior to meeting in Sub-Committee Personnel Sub-Committee.
CC A. Kazanjian announces resignation effective tomorrow from City Council due to family and business commitment. Wishes colleagues best of luck to his colleagues. I am not sure what this is about.
It is obvious that the Mayor knew about it because of what he said. I am not sure how this impacts the City Manager’s review. I do not think we can find Mehmed Ali in time to come to the meeting next week. I wonder if CC J. Mendomca will join?
Does this resignation make CC A. Kazanjian’s towing company available to bid on the contract? I do not think so. I think you need to be away from your elected position for a year or so. So, I do not think that was the reason…just in case someone was wondering.
Everyone is wishing CC Kazanjian the best as they walk out.
[powered by WordPress.]
42 queries. 0.500 seconds
December 8th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Why has councilor Kazanjian resigned?
December 8th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Maybe the heat’s coming down?
December 8th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Wow, I would have thought sure he’d want to stay on as long as his little fingernails could hold into the position to be a PITA. Especially with the Manager’s review.
Don’t let the door hit you on the and all that.
December 8th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
That’s a suprise… I was sure of the same thing Lynne and that he’d give him a scathing review as the door hit him in the butt.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
So Joe takes the seat or do they have to wait for Ali to be contacted and officially refuse?
December 8th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
I think Kazanjian has been ill and doesn’t want to say, and that’s why he is resigning.
December 9th, 2009 at 12:28 am
Cuz maybe you’re all wrong about Councilor Kazanjian. And as far as our “dispensable” delegation goes- Mike Capuano acknowledged it tonight-standing with a friend when it takes some guts to do so and when it really matters.
December 9th, 2009 at 1:36 am
Good point concerning Mehmed Ali Mimi. Does this mean that effective tomorrow, he is officially a Lowell City Councilor? I would assume he would have to be sworn in. Is that correct?
Nonetheless, someone might want to get in touch with him and tell him the good news.
December 9th, 2009 at 6:35 am
I need to speak to the Walgreen’s issue and I am glad ,Lynne, to see that you have questions. I don’t want to go off on a rant here but I I live in Middlesex Village within 2 blocks of the project and as far as our areas is concerened Walgreen’s can take a flying leap off the Rourke Bridge. TRaffic ias horrible here at certian times of the day and there are times when en emergency vechicle would have trouble getting through . LYSA is supporting the building because Walgreen’s promised them they could park in their lot and I know Elliott is involved with the program - but when I ran into him a while back the LYSa had nothing in writing that would guarantee them the parking. If W does a turnaround- those people would have even less places to park ( serve them right). I see a future of even more accidents by the bridge and by the “new” Edward’s Street. I also know that those houses have the same water problems the rest of us do that have gotten worse with the developments in the area - so I see all that paving sending water right down onto the soccer fields. end of rant. Read your CC notes - I too, would have thouhgt K would stick it out to the bitter end. Wonder why he didn’t.
December 9th, 2009 at 8:23 am
in regards to councillor towtruck resiging
did you ever hear of a TARGET LETTER. from the
da office. stay tuned.
December 9th, 2009 at 9:06 am
Filling a council position is based on the election that the current city council was seated in. Mehmed Ali was 10th so he is next in line. He would have to be sworn in to become a member of the council. It’s seems like a waste of time for 1 possibly 2 meetings. How is he going to rate the Manager when he hasn’t worked with him at all? Even if he declines and Joe Mendonca is sworn in he hasn’t worked with the Manager either.
From my understanding Alan’s father (Sonny) is very sick and lives in Florida.
December 9th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
I am thinking the other shoe is about to drop and someone suggested to AK that he resign so the headlines won’t read City Councilor…former city councilor makes the city look better.
If he is really resigning for family health/business reasons what is the point? There is only 1 possibly 2 council meetings left before the new City Council is sworn into office, he could have just pulled a Lenzi and stayed home.
December 9th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
With tow contracts coming up, Councilor Kazanjian’s resignation eliminates any conflict-of-interests which would allow him to put in a bid. Wait, why would that matter to him? Nevermind…
December 9th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Why hasn’t LIL mentioned that Lowe’s, now under constrcution on Chelmsford Street, has been sold for $ 23.5 million? Who approved the Lowe’s site???
Why hasn’tLIN lowell mentioned that 148 Central Street, Lowell, which Saab sold for $2.8 million a few years ago was just taken back by the Canton bank for $1 million?
December 9th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
to billprint..what on earth are you talking about?
December 9th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Huh?
December 9th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
As for 148 Central St..that’s where the Bank of Boston ATM building and a parking lot is located..seriously, sounds like the buyer paid WAY too much money for that property. Given the fact that any revenue received from BofA and revenue received from the companies that hold parking spots in that lot, would likely NOT cover the note..well, not so surprised that it may have been taken by the bank!
December 10th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Who are the Tanglewood Investment partners may be the question that billprint is asking?
December 10th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Maybe because LiL is a f-ing volunteer-run blog and we never claimed to know everything, and as to who approved the Lowe’s site, duh, it went through the regular channels I imagine, ZBA, Planning, etc.
Good lord, people, if we don’t discuss something here, it’s not a goddamned conspiracy!
December 10th, 2009 at 10:23 am
Funny how since the election Alan hasn’t been the target of the Lowell Sun…water over the dam? I doubt it…as for the other shoe about to drop…nah…it would’ve dropped by now. Enough is enough…get over it and move on. Mehmed will not be taking the spot nor will Joe M. They’ll leave it until 2010.
December 10th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Hey Big Dog . . . read today’s paper.
December 10th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
billprint:
Can you let us know what is going on? Obviously, it is news to all of us. I am not so much interested in what happened but the analysis of what happened. Thanks.
December 10th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Well I guess that Joe taking over now makes a small bit of sense…..but not a lot.
December 10th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Maybe I’m being an ass here (it’s happened on occasion) but I feel that the real issue here is the one nobody’s talking about. Diversion politics at its best? The tax rate for single family homes has increased while the tax rate for 3-deckers has decreased. I’m not buying all the intricate mumbo-jumbo from the assessor’s office that usually accompanies something this stupid. Will somebody just answer this question: Why is my law-abiding, senior citizen grandma subsidizing the slumlord owner of the tenement next door? Her taxes increase, he makes more profit. Sound fair to you?
December 10th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
I don’t think there’s a different tax rate. My understanding is that the value of the 2 and 3 family properties has dropped more than single families. Do I wish I could pay less? Of course. Do I wish my value dropped more? Of course not. I bet if you looked back over time the opnes that are dropping so much now were probably rising more than single family. It isn’t that complicated. And it isn’t some big conspiracy. And I bet most of the 2 and three families are owner-occupied.
December 10th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Don’t know how I’ll spend the windfall… my condo taxes dropped $17!
December 10th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
This is hysterical! Kanzanjian just showed what a little bitch in a dress he really is!!!!!
December 10th, 2009 at 11:35 pm
Prince,
There is one residential rate. If the value of multifamily dropped far greater than the value of single families, when that rate is set the burden will shift and there will be a drop in multi-family taxes that will be offset by the increase in single-family taxes. While the overall increase will remain under the limits of prop 2 1/2, changes in individual properties can be significant.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:28 am
Prince Charming, in the case of being an ass, admitting and accepting your problem is the first step towards making a full recovery. Good for you. Possibly, you and Alan can start some type of support group.
As dodo said, there is one rate for residential property and another rate for commercial/industrial/personal property(CIP). The residential rate is for all residential units, including multi-families. The value of the two families has been increasing at a quicker pace than the singles over the past few years. It stands to reason that their value would drop more when all values dropped. In addition, rentals are an overabundance in the current market. This would also effect the value of the multi-family dwellings.
December 11th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
148 Central St. That property was purchased by a downtown developer in 2005. I wonder if Canton Bank will continue to rent the parking lot to El-Rincon on the weekends?
December 11th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Actually Kami, K-man and I are seeing Hayden to work out our issues.
December 11th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
HOW ABOUT REP TOM GOLDEN WORRYING ABOUT THE LAWRENCE MAYOR!!! TOM WHY DON;T YOU START REPRESENTING YOUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD,YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING FOR YOUR OWN DISTRICT! WAKE UP!
December 13th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
to post #32..seriously? since we as taxpayers (very heavily) subsidize the City of Lawrence, we should all have a say in what happens.
The bill that Tom has filed, perhaps should go farther in actually reforming the system as a whole, rather than targeting just one scenario.
I do have more to say on this issue, however, this particular situation opens up a pandora’s box of discussion, which would be better suited in its own thread
December 13th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
The man can not do (1) job and get paid for (2) jobs…We are paying for (2) positions and only getting (1) person..BOO!
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20091210lawrence_bigwigs_call_on_mayor_to_quit_state_rep_job/srvc=home&position=0
Golden is RIGHT! like him or not
December 14th, 2009 at 8:07 am
The people of Lawrence were dumb enough to think he can do both jobs well. They’ll have the opportunity to vote him out next time around.
December 14th, 2009 at 9:36 am
Tom’s Bill in theory is a great start. No person should hold 2 elected offices that are full time pay for full time work. However it should be expanded to include not holding two elected offices period. It should also include not being able to serve as a state legislator and represent any city or town in a legal capacity nor any union negotiating with a city , town or institution that receives state monies that a legislator gets to vote on.
This eliminates a lot of potential conflict of interest situations (Like Rep Murphy getting his wife a raise).
December 14th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Prince Charming…you know what they say…you get what you pay for
December 14th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
I was going to write a post commenting on this but I will say, give credit where credit it due, Golden is doing something right here and my point of view is that I think it’s a conflict of interest to be both a state Rep and a municipal leader, regardless of the double dipping (which is infuriating to a large degree).
Though in both cases (being mayor and being a Rep) you are representing your constituency (that is assuming that the Rep seat does NOT represent parts of non-Lawrence!) it is different sorts of representation, and there are potential places where your legislative duties might conflict with your muni ones, therefore I say you should have to step down from one or the other if elected to both.
if the Rep seat represents non-Lawrence municipalities, EVEN WORSE! Then you really have a conflict of interest in funneling money towards your mayoral duties rather than to your district as a whole.
December 14th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
Oh and fyi: you have been warned…no all caps posts please.
December 16th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Gerry… I happened to hear Murphy dance around that on city life on morning. Didn’t hear the whole discussion but Murph sees nothing wrong with it at all. Hope his constituents think otherwise.