Left In Lowell

Not again?

13 Responses to “Not again?”

1. Gerry Nutter Says:
   January 30th, 2010 at 10:15 am

   Mimi,

   How can we get mad at a working stiff doing a favor when we have a former City Solicitor and current State Representative continuing to engage in Conflicts of Interest and nothing is done to him.

   I speak of course about Kevin Murphy , on my Blog I go after him for his latest incident of conflict of interest, but how about for example when Rep. Murphy represents the bus driver’s union in Lowell, in contract re-negotiation talks with the Lowell Regional Transit Authority (LRTA.) The LRTA receives a quarter of its operating budget from state funding–which Rep. Murphy gets to vote on.

   He even represented Lowell’s four assistant school superintendents in contract renegotiations one of which was his wife. (For which Rep. Murphy secured a $10k raise two years before his wife’s contract expired and he clearly benefits financially from that) how is this not a conflict of interest?

   It probably is a good thing the Manager is doing but it’s hard to fault a guy for helping a family member when you have an Elected Official constantly grabbing cash regardless of apparence and no one does anything about it. Why is it okay for him but not for a working class guy?

   Where’s your post on Murphy getting a salary as a State Rep , a salary from the Dracut School Board and yet representing a private business appearing before the State run ABC (Murphy gets to vote on their budget) against the town of Dracut 9which funds the School System that pays his salary as their Lawyer) Why is a trash collector worth tearing apart but not this State Representative?

   Where is State Rep. Golden who was quick to take a stance against a State Rep. from Lawrence, what about a guy from his own city. He is supposed to be the Dean /Senior Member of the Lowell delegation how about showing a little leadership and going after a guy in your own back yard before crowing about how wrong it is for a guy in Lawrence?

2. Mimi Says:
   January 30th, 2010 at 10:41 am

   Gerry:

   I agree that the State Reps should face the same scrutiny as other elected officials and City workers. I find that some who constantly criticize Obama or Deval, give local officials a pass. But that will change also; I really do believe that the Mass Legislature is the last institution to face the voters, taxpayers and residents anger but their turn is coming up this year.

   And as far as Rep. Murphy, the Sun has written dozens of articles on him; and continues to do so. He is not getting a free pass, far from it.

3. Eleanor Rigby Says:
   January 31st, 2010 at 12:55 pm

   Don’t worry, the parking clerk can get work driving a tow truck now that the former councilor, who apparently has no problem employing city workers and using city facilities/services for his own benefit, has won a city tow contract again!

   Seriously…I find the fact that AK obtained a tow contract after the things he has been caught doing with city employees and services outrageous!

4. Maggie Says:
   January 31st, 2010 at 7:15 pm

   Lynne and all - I know the parking clerk and am having trouble believing that she is guilty. They seem to have changed the “charges” . And no one is calling for an investigation into one of her bosses who fouled up the exise tax bills causing hundreds of people anxiety. Since the information apparently came from a statement from the clerk - I have to wonder about retaliation. I know that 2 other women have been harassed out of that office in the last 3 years and another is ready to quit as soon as she can find another job.

5. Lynne Says:
   January 31st, 2010 at 7:32 pm

   Maggie, I didn’t write this piece…I wish people would be more careful looking at bylines before blaming one or other for any particular post.

6. Lynne Says:
   January 31st, 2010 at 7:33 pm

   Gerry, give it a rest. We’ve covered all that stuff in the past. Can you tone down the outrage? God.

7. Maggie Says:
   February 1st, 2010 at 1:04 pm

   Hi Lynne - my comments were directed at all and were intended to be statement of my feelings .I guess I put your name first because I consider this to be “your” blog. Mimi has a right to her opinions - it’s just that I feel everyone is condemning Judy before getting all of the “facts” ( which seen to keep changing). And the trash collector is not the first to be caught picking up someone’s “special” trash - and that includes several past and present city officials.
   And last- where do I get those cute smily faces- we all know I am technologically challenged.

8. Lynne Says:
   February 1st, 2010 at 2:37 pm

   You just do a colon : and a parenthesis ) right next to one another and the site will automatically create one. Like this: :) turns to

9. Lynne Says:
   February 1st, 2010 at 2:39 pm

   Oh and yeah, I get it, but if I didn’t write it, it’s not my opinion, so I’d prefer to be left out if there’s a rant about it. Mimi’s blog posts are her own…as are mine, not reflective of hers. Not that we often disagree, but still.

10. Maggie Says:
    February 1st, 2010 at 5:51 pm

    Mea culpa

11. Mimi Says:
    February 1st, 2010 at 7:32 pm

    Maggie:

    I am not sure if anyone on this blog has condemned anyone but you would admit that two City employees being put on administrative leave in 1 week is news.

    I am glad that the City Manager is establishing a code of conduct which has zero tolerance for work for private people by city employees on city time and utilizing city resources.

12. Maggie Says:
    February 2nd, 2010 at 1:21 pm

    I have heard nothing about the 2nd incident - but feel that Lynch is very quick to make publicity about cleaning up before there are even charges filed in the Judy’s case. As I said earlier - I have know her a long time and was around for the Martha incident . Judy was very upset by that and felt it reflected badly on the whole office. She is even more upset now feeling that she is being singled out because she mentioned that she was not responsible for the exise tax debacle and that it was the Asst. Treas who blew that one.
    JW does not take criticism well and is known for demeaning her staff ( and some of the public). If Lynch wants to clean house - fine,but stop calling the press every time he ” discovers” something. And while he is at it, he might want to see who else is doing favors for their friends. He also needs to deal with the behavior of a couple of “titles’ in City Hall. I am waiting to see what happens with Inspectional Services as well. Not everyone in there is a problem but a thorough housecleaning is in order. The people that are being picked out now have their reputations ruined permantly and there is no way to take that back.

13. Huh Says:
    February 2nd, 2010 at 3:58 pm

    Not sure Lynch is “making publicity” as much as responding to the press. In fact I don’t think he was willing to give out names. He simply confirmed the situation and stated the position of his admin on these types of things. Count me with Mimi of supporting a code of conduct. Enough of the old way of doing things.

Leave a Reply