Left In Lowell

MLF Releases a Set of Considerations on the CM Contract

14 Responses to “MLF Releases a Set of Considerations on the CM Contract”

1. openyoureyes Says:
   April 28th, 2010 at 8:52 am

   Just curious exactly what is the point of this blue ribbon committee. If grad students are compiling the stats what is their job? It was simple enough to do. Check out the various cities and towns and find out what they pay their manager. It seems councilors (which they are paid for) could have done that with a few phone calls and a few hours on the internet.
   The truth is the council, i.e. mayor and manager want a RECOMENDATION in name or implied that he is underpaid in order to move forward with a long term contract and hefty pay raise. Fine, if that is what you believe say it. But the gutless wonders on the council know this would not be popular in the current financial climate and nobody wants to take the bullet. So they have created this committee of everyone who knows better than us to say we have to or GOD FORBID “He may leave for another community which pays more.” Duck and cover politics has hit a new low.

2. Lynne Says:
   April 28th, 2010 at 9:55 am

   Whine whine whine whine whine whine.

   No really, why do you post here? You really don’t say anything useful.

   If you read our document (which we put together as voluntarily in order to contribute to the conversation), you’ll notice that it’s fairly simple, isn’t very long, yet addresses some VERY complex ideas and situations.

   That’s just a taste of what a study of this sort can do for the city - looking deeply into different types of contracts and how they might be adapted to the city isn’t just able to be done “with a few phone calls and a few hours on the internet.”

   You are being naive.

3. openyoureyes Says:
   April 28th, 2010 at 11:07 am

   Really, I thought this was about compiling info as to what other CM’s made period. I know you are a bit full of yourself but if you noticed I didn’t say anything about your document, reason being I do not care what is contained within. My point is the larger truth behind the creation of this committee. Your may be right about it not being useful because I am only stating the obvious to anyone with any brains who can see right through this charade. Those who choose to ignore the obvious and be NAIVE can continue to believe the rhetoric.
   Look in the mirror to find the definition of naive or complicit.

4. Lynne Says:
   April 29th, 2010 at 8:57 am

   You’ve got a comment history here, I hate to say, and you’ve undermined your own credibility on everything you’ve commented on on every turn, so why should anyone believe a word you say?

5. openyoureyes Says:
   April 29th, 2010 at 12:43 pm

   I don’t know what you are refering to here Lynne but again your typical response when you have one is to ignore the pertinent question and mudsling. O.K. you love to dig into issues so much let me ask you this. Professor Lynch is now going to be teaching at Umass Lowell and will be on its payroll. Is it fair to even question (I suspect you will say no) that maybe, perhaps,possibly, he may have been bargaining from a compromised position on behalf of the city when he negotiated the deal for the arena? Pull off the rose colored glasses for a second and try to see the forest for the trees.
   Question 2: Was their maybe, perhaps, possibly a conflict of interest or at least convenient when then councilor Millinazzo voted for a TIFF for Jean D’Arc Credit Union and a couple weeks later accepted a position with them. Obviously if he did not work there yet it was not but can you possibly see the quid pro quo. Or is it out of bounds to ascribe any ill intentions to the beautiful people in government. When any potential conflicts surrounding coucilor Kazanjian came up you were thrilled to announce them as evidence (although none was produced) of wrongdoing.

6. joe from Lowell Says:
   April 29th, 2010 at 1:31 pm

   “Really, I thought this was about compiling info as to what other CM’s made period.”

   You thought wrong. You also have to compare the actual duties of the different CMs, their time on the job, and many other variables.

7. Lynne Says:
   April 29th, 2010 at 5:13 pm

   Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound talking about Lynch and Meehan being on the same side? Honestly. You’d think you don’t read the papers.

   I don’t know about the circumstances around the Joan d’Arc CU item. You’d have to ask the question of the parties involved I suppose. However, if circumstances are all you have to accuse someone of something, that’s pretty flimsy. Give me something concrete and then we can talk.

   Remember, I have a history of, say, people hiding DoR audit letters to prove malfeasance and questionable ethics on my side of the coin here.

8. openyoureyes Says:
   April 30th, 2010 at 9:53 am

   So you are telling me Lynch got hired and Meehan new nothing of it. Would you at least agree that if Meehan disliked Lynch as much as you feel he would have the final say as to if he were hired. But again you casually dismiss what is clearly a conflict of interest. I know CM Lynch is the “professional” manager and no such shenanigans would ever happen on his watch. He is clearly the best professor for the job and his desire to teach would never affect how he negotiated. I may be wrong but I don’t think I have heard of Bob Healy teaching any courses and receiving pay from one of the colleges in Cambridge with whom the city does business.
   As for the second item I accused nobody of anything, I just asked a question. In addition I don’t think there is anything flimsy about it check the the issue and the time line doesn’t pass the smell test.

9. Lynne Says:
   April 30th, 2010 at 10:45 am

   And you’re assuming that because they don’t get along with regards to how to run the city (and they don’t, I can assure you), that Meehan wouldn’t want someone of Lynch’s experience and education teaching at the school.

   That’s a pretty stupid assumption on your part. You know what they say about people who assume…

10. Paul@01852 Says:
    April 30th, 2010 at 11:27 am

    As I said in a previous post on a different thread I had “PROFESSOR” Lynch as an instructor way back in 1983, which was a year or so before he became a professional town/city manager. And… he was a top-notch professor at that!

11. Jack Mitchell Says:
    April 30th, 2010 at 11:38 am

    What does Lynch teach?

    I like the model that takes folks who are applying themselves in the “real world” and putting them in front of a classroom.

    In the trades, they have apprenticeship programs. We should have more folks that are out there where the “ax meets the grindstone” available to the next generation.

    This appearance of conflict is superficial and is being hyped by foes.

    We don’t live in bubbles. NEXT?

12. openyoureyes Says:
    April 30th, 2010 at 1:12 pm

    I’m just asking that we be consistant in our application of appearance of conflict. As usual you avoid the uncomfortable nature of the question and go right to the personal attacks. What is it about liberals when confronted with legitimate questions you lash out at the mean spirited, conservatives. Because as we all know Bernie Lynch is beyond reproach. You trumped up the connection of cc Kazanjian and Sandy Ames and how Ames inspected many of Kazanjian’s projects as city plumbing inspector and how this was a clear conflict. What you conveniently left out was that Ames was the ONLY plumbing inspector for the city and obviously he is inspecting the work of plumbers not the builder himself, but that would not have fit the template to get Kazanjian out of office. All I am saying is what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and I think we need to take a gander at this.
    P.S. anyone hear about McBee or is that being swept under the rug still?

13. Mr. Lynne Says:
    April 30th, 2010 at 1:22 pm

    “What you conveniently left out was that Ames was the ONLY plumbing inspector for the city and obviously he is inspecting the work of plumbers not the builder himself, but that would not have fit the template to get Kazanjian out of office.”

    Really? This mitigates the conflict of interest because the plumber stand ‘between’ the inspector and the owner? The passing of the inspection has implications only to the plumber and not the project owner? On what planet?

    Also, when there is a conflict of interest there should have been a way to address it. I seem to remember a past Sun article on the issue that indicated inspectors from other communities are sometimes used for different reasons. Seems perfectly reasonable to me to have called in someone else.

14. Paul@01852 Says:
    April 30th, 2010 at 2:56 pm

    Lynch is now teaching a state & local politics course. When I had him it was PoliSci 101

Leave a Reply