Left In Lowell

Well friends, we have had enough campaign kickoff parties to get a sense of where we are headed. And the litmus test du-jour is whether or not a candidate will be a “rubber stamp for Bernie.” This even comes up in School Committee events.

Seems the old spirits of a bygone era are not happy in exile. The din of the disgruntled, murmurs in the local watering holes. The effete, pinkies up, pooh pooh this so called “professional government.” From the high hills to the tenaments in the Bowl, conspiracy boils for the way things used to be. When a permit was on a wink and a nod. When a job was assured for politcal loyalty or what family you came from. When contracts were finagled and the City budget was the meat wagon your pals feasted from.

Can you feel them out there? Can you feel them wanting? The way it used to be?

For this note, I will be labeled. “Mitchell holds Bernie’s coat.” “Jack carries Bernie’s water.” Hmm? That just may be. But if you have ever talked to me, I’ve told you, “I don’t care if Bernie goes. It isn’t him that I support, it is the way we now conduct ourselves.” Go ahead and hand Bernie his pink slip tomorrow. Will I gripe? Not if you give Adam Baacke his job. Hire anyone that will truly carry on the momentum of what is going on. I really don’t care.

But don’t try to bullshit me and say Kevin Murphy is that guy. Come on. You read the blogs, just like I do. The names of the “preferred replacements” are out there. Lowell thrives on whispers. But now the whisperers comment on blogs. Trust no one.

The hamfisted haters that do their best to use our City to butter their bread are good at being against something. They may even be cohesive enough to get rid of a few “rubber stamps” on the Council. But it is easy to be against something. Wait until it comes time to set up Bernie’s successor. Then their fellowship will splinter from mistrust and clan allegiance.

Remember the level playing field, oh ye of olde Lowell. You just may find yourself wishing for what we have now.

See you at the next kickoff. I’ll be there.

… you place the flowers in the vase that you bought today.
Staring at the fire for hours and hours while I listen to you
Play your love songs all night long for me, only for me.

As a kid growing up in the late 60’s and early 70’s, I remember these lyrics from the CS&N song, “Our House” with great fondness. I was the youngest, born in ‘65. My brothers and sister were in their teens when all that you think of that iconic time was going down. And my family was smack in the middle of it. Hell, my sister made the front page of the Boston Globe, labled a “hippie.”

The song was calm and reassuring. It whisphered of a peaceful America. One where turmoil was outside. The promise of sanctuary in “Our House” was something we may or may not have known, but there was a promise offered by the songsmith. If the popularity of the song meant anything, many of us in that time hoped for that promise to be fulfilled. I realize that the song is not for everyone.

In late 2010, a woman sold her house on Livingston Avenue to a company out of Acton. The land was subdivided and the company made due with the laws on the books, wedging a second home onto a small strip of land. Well, you likely know as much about this debacle, as I. *sigh*

The neighborhood is outraged, they say. The City elders are flailing at “How can this happen?.” The luminaries chat in their personal columns:

The “oh, well” tone is exactly what tells good families that maybe it’s time to give up on the city.

Maybe government has become so professional that we have lost the human touch that defines a community.

Yes sir. We have lost a certain touch. That touch would be cronyism and patronage. That touch littered my neighborhood, Centralville, with condos wedged onto tiny strips of land. Sucks don’t it? Hey, Highlands! Welcome to my fuckin Lowell, pal.

But they prattle on:

City Councilor Edward “Bud” Caulfield has called on the city administration to do all it can to stop the Livingston Avenue project. Baacke, however, said it would be unethical and illegal for the city to deny a permit to a project that conforms with the zoning code.

“It is not within our power that if we don’t like one of the laws, to choose not to enforce it,” he said

Let me break it down for you folks. As Nutter pointed out, this is a huge NIMBY snafu. See the good folks that live on the high ground around this city are not used to getting the shit end of the stick. And at 113 Livingstone Ave, that is exactly what they got.

What really has the insiders shocked is that they have always counted on being able to cheat the rules, so they could get things to work out in their favor. That is why they are so upset that this administration is shrugging its shoulders. The law is the law? Not for some.

So, when you watch this play out, imagine it from the other side of the proverbial tracks. Rules are made to be broken by those that have the juice. Those with the juice are normally very glad to keep this all under the table. wink, wink and ching, ching. All the way to the bank.

But not when an outsider does it, in THEIR neighborhood.

Ya see, peace and tranquility, keeping the outside out, is the promise offered by the song. But it isn’t for eveyone.

Tonight, I attended Paul Belley’s kickoff event. It was well attend and there were more than a few Lowell pols there.

I like Paul and plan on doing my part to get him elected. Why? Mostly because he tells you like it is:

I do not seek this important office because it’s on my bucket list. There should be no doubt; this campaign isn’t about creating a stepping stone for bigger things. I’m running because Lowell is my home. It is my heart. Like you, I love this city.

Here is the video:

Another quote I liked, as it really sums it up for what makes Paul different:
Please know, I possess the drive, the insight, the commonsense, and compassion to be effective Councilor. I can fully envision the big picture of our great city. But more importantly, I can clearly see the little guy, in that big picture. All that I have done has been to give those people a fair shot at enjoying what they have made for themselves.

A level playing field and a fair shot. Ya. That is what I am looking for. Thanks for getting it, Paul.

There just may be a rip in the space/time continuum. C.Mercier and I are on the same page:

Councilor Rita Mercier said she could not support the muzzle law in any fashion because it discriminates against one breed. She said the city should place more focus on enforcing its current dangerous-dog ordinance, which is not breed-specific.

Jack -

Facebook comment, 5/20: The problem is punks with dogs. Responsible dog owners will be punished. If you muzzle Pit Bulls, the punks will drop their PBs in your neighborhood and go get a Dobie.
&
Facebook comment, 5/23: The problem is humans, not dogs. Enforce the laws on the books, imho.

I’m not searching for a hug from Rita. She might kick me in the shin, if I get too close. BUT, she made a good call, imho. She deserves props.

Campaigns for both City Council and School Committee are gearing up. I’m hearing some literature is out there, left behind on door knobs. Nothing yet on mailers, as far as I know.

Please, if you get something from a candidate, take a digital photo of it and e-mail it to me at sleeping.giant.stirs (at) gmail (dot) com I’ll then put it up on LiL. (I’ll only credit you for the image , if that is your wish. And, I won’t spam you with Lowell politcal crap.)

…

And the bet is this, which City Council Candidate, incumbent or challenger, will be the first to release lit with a photoshopped image of Bernie with a crown on his head? There seems to be a desire to run a negative campaign against the CM. No?

I’ll pick Doyle. The prize is bragging rights. Or a drink, if you want to stand next to me for 15 minutes. I’m sure we could talk. ;v)

As I mentioned in the previous post that Municipal Election campaign season has begun, former Mayor Armand Mercier’s intentions of running for a City Council seat adds another element to the race. I think that is good news. The larger and more diverse the pool, the better the election process. I believe that all of the incumbent City Councilors, except for CC Bud Caulfield, are running again. This morning Ted on radio WCAP recounted his discussion with CC Patrick Murphy who has indicated he has not yet decided. Patrick: Please run at least one more term. The work is not completed. Also, take the stipend. Too much of your time is spent serving the City and you deserve to be compensated.

Back to the challengers, in addition to Armand Mercier, the group includes John McDonald, Paul Belly, Freddy Doyle, Marty Lorrey, John Leahy, Van Pech, Corey Belanger and Vesna Nuon. I think I have everyone’s name.

Since the City Council has two major responsibilities, the budget and evaluating the City Manager’s performance, I would think that these will be the major topics of discussion. I look forward to the race and the impact social media such as facebook and twitter may have on the campaign.

And on the School Committee side, of course my friend Kristin Ross-Sitcawich (Disclaimer: I am on Kristin’s campaign team), Michael Hayden, and Robert Gignac have announced their candidacy. With an open seat on the School Committee this race should ben as interesting as the City Council.

Last week, while discussing social media with a well-seasoned politico, he reminded me that the majority of Lowell voters are not on facebook or read blogs for that matter. That is very true. However, both facebook, twitter and blogs, can introduce ideas and opinions into the general discussion. I think both School Committee Connie Martin and City Council candidate John McDonald both use facebook in a very effective manner. I expect others to rev up their fb account.

In the past, we had two media outlets, the radio and the newspaper. Now, because of facebook and twitter, we have hundreds of outlets. And let’s not forget City Life which we did not have in this format 2 years ago.

Furthermore with changes in demographics and population patterns, younger people (technically connected) are joining the voting ranks while elder ones, (not technically connected), are leaving.

And if Jack succeeds in getting more people to the polls this fall, then all bets are off the table.

Instead of discussing the upcoming City Budget, the talk of the town (at least in some quarters) is the public disclosure of resumes of the various applicants to the City’s regulatory boards.

It all started with the inquisitive collective minds of the Sun, not the City Council as some may think. I am sure that this crusade to find out the name and background of the applicants, is motivated by the newspaper’s desire to keep its readers informed and shed a light on government. Certainly this has nothing to do with settling political scores or trying to set the agenda for this upcoming municipal election. As for the City Councilors’ motivation: Municipal Election 2011.

In case you have not followed the latest attempt by the editor of the Sun to stick it to the City Manager, here is the chronology:

1. Tuesday, March 29th, CM makes new ZBA appointments
2. Thusday, March 31st, article trying to link ZBA appointment to City Councilor
3. Thursday, May 5th, Letter from Sun to City Solicitor requesting names
Thursday, May 5th, City Councilor Motion sent in to Clerk
4. Tuesday, May 10th City Council motion discussed
5. Friday, May 13th Letter from City Solicitor to Sun denying request
6. Tuesday, May 17th City Manager’s Response to Councilor motion and ensuing “discussion”

This is how it played.

Does the City Council have the right to look at all resumes? Yes, if they want. But to what end? What is the purpose of overseeing these resumes? Is it the same as it was 7 years ago? Basically a lack of trust and wanting to be sure that those who got on these boards were the most qualified. I know like most of you, my memory at times is selectively. But I do recall the Theresa Park incident back in 2007? Do we remember that back 7 years ago, all sitting Board members had access to the generous health plan that the City offered. Maybe back then the majority of the City Council had a reason to want to understand what was going on with the appointments.

But let’s fast forward to the Lynch administration. The City Council has the right to ask the Manager to look at the resumes. And the Manager has already indicated that they will try to come up with some kind of plan. The problem, as we all know, is any information given to the City Council is public information. So, some will be reluctant to throw their name and reputation out there if they are not the ones chosen. Also, as City Councilor Patrick Murphy indicated Tuesday night, in effect the City Council could by not approving the City Manager’s candidate control the appointment process. Both against the law and against the best interest of the City.

Why would after so many years and so many appointments, would this issue come up now? Because the 2011 Municipal Election season has begun, that’s why? And as much right as the City Council has to ask the CM for these resumes, we the voters have the right to ask, why now and why this particular appointment? Do you know how many confirmations this Council has gone through without asking for other resumes? Almost on a weekly basis. I do not remember the outcry that I heard on Tuesday. Why now? Has the City Council been negligent all this time?

As much as the Sun wants to paint this latest appointee as an FOB (Friend of Broderick), this person has donated not only to CC Kevin Broderick’s campaign but to other local politicians but that is not convenient for the Sun’s narrative. And if that is the criteria by which one is judged to be a friend, I have a lot of friends in public service. But why would it be beneficial to the Sun’s political agenda to try to harm the Vice-Chairman and prop another City Councilor. Check out Gerry’s take on the matter. It is not that much different than mine.

* Credit to CC Bill Martin

On Monday, the CM presented to the Centralville Neighborhood Action Group (CNAG), a slide show of the 2012 budget process. The slides presented can be viewed HERE.

Fortunately, I attended that meeting and brought along my trusty “shaky cam.” This will allow you to receive “the talk” that goes with the slides. The whole thing is just over an hour. So, below I have posted Part 1, fully embedded, and have links to the six following parts. Each part is, as YT makes me, under 10 minutes.

So, please, enjoy.

CM’s Budget Brief Part 2

CM’s Budget Brief Part 3

CM’s Budget Brief Part 4

CM’s Budget Brief Part 5

CM’s Budget Brief Part 6

CM’s Budget Brief Part 7

Folks, this is important stuff. We are this much closer to really knowing where the hell our money goes.

On tonight’s City Council agenda, Councilor Bud Caulfield has another motion regarding the cell tower issue. The motion requests a “Moratorium on Cell Towers until Ordinance drawn to restrict placement near parks, playgrounds, schools etc.”. As I had posted previously, there are plans to build one in my back yard, literally. I have spent a few Mondays at Planning and Zoning Board meetings and will do so when the issue is back in front of the ZBA at the end of June.

I think a few of my neighbors are planning to attend tonight’s CC meeting to show support for the motion. I too am in favor of this motion. But I have a disagreement with CC Caulfield and other City Councilors who “do not want to pay the piper.”

By that I mean, those motions from the City Council that we see time after time that require funds that are not in the budget. For example, during the past few months the City Council indicated to the Manager that they want additional funding for the veterans’ office; a stronger animal control office, and additional security at the library. All those cost money.

The choices are simple. We can find new sources of income, cut back on services, increase our taxes, or a mixture of the three. I have on a number of occasions stated that I am in favor of a small increase on our real estate tax so that our services are not reduced and our quality of life is not compromised.

I look forward to the budget discussions. I hope everyone backs up their words with action and faces the fact that we have to pay the piper, one way or another.

You ever wonder why it is like this?:

So did we. (h/t to OneLowell and Salem State University. The full study is here.)

Analysis shows that General Elections have the highest voter turnout in Lowell, while State Primaries have the lowest turnout. Voter participation also varies by precinct across the city. The highest voter turnout is typically in the outer, east and southwest precincts of the City. Areas of low voter turnout are concentrated in a crescent running through the center of Lowell. Geographic variations in voter participation are associated with several demographic variables. Length of residency in an area was the strongest predictor of voting participation, especially for Local elections. Areas in which residents have remained for longer periods of time showed higher voting participation rates than areas with shorter lengths of residency, regardless of whether there were more owners or renters. Voting participation was also correlated, respectively, with ethnicity and race, household income, owner occupancy, proportion of the population that is foreign born, education (i.e. 4‐year college degree or higher), and proportion of households that do not speak English (i.e. linguistically isolated). The findings of this report are consistent with previous research on voter participation.

The report reveals that there are areas of the City that experience consistently low voter turnout, and that low voter turnout is also associated with the following conditions

• Shorter period of residency in the neighborhood
• Higher proportion of non‐White residents
• Lower household incomes
• Higher proportion of renter occupied housing
• Higher proportion of foreign born residents
• Lower proportion of residents with a college degree
• Higher proportion of households that do not speak English

The results of this analysis are not conclusive, but rather suggestive. The demographic data upon which this analysis is based is the 2000 U.S. Census; the 2010 Census data was not yet available at the release of this report. The demographic characteristics of the City have likely changed. With the upcoming release of 2010 Census data, these analyses can be readily repeated and reexamined. We hope that this report can serve as a tool to understanding voting in the City of Lowell and help in the effort to improve that participation.

We started with questions. We got some answers, but those lead to more questions.