What do you want to read about?

This is the question that every reporter/editor/newspaper owner wants to know. So naturally, I want to know.

I'm asking - what do you care about?

I know Newburyporters love to talk and read about food, so we recently added a food section on Newburyport Business. This was mostly because once Loretta opened, the hits on my December story about the new restaurant went up, up, up. I noticed the same spike in hits on posts on this blog about Oregano, once Oregano opened.

Do you want restaurant reviews, or just plain stories? Do you want photos of the food? Do you want menus? What? Do tell.

Senior center decision & more

Monday is the day the Senior Center Building Committee imposed on itself as the day it will make a decision on whether to pursue the property at the Towle Office Building. The meeting is at 8 a.m.

I really miss Ed Cameron notifying everyone of these meetings ... although one click takes me to the city's website, where one may find notification of meetings.

I see where The P. Preservationist is listing a joint Planning Board/City Council meeting for Tuesday, Jan. 26 at 7 p.m. I don't see that on the city meeting calendar. The Planning Board meets on the first and third Wednesday of each month ... help, anyone? This would be the discussion of the revised wind energy ordinance and the changes to the ordinance relating to moveable signs (as in, the Germinara truck).

The Preservationist is also reporting that there is a movement afoot to not amend the wind energy ordinance.

A sample letter is being circulated trying to pressure City Council and the Mayor to not only not amend the present Wind Energy Ordinance but to loosen its restrictions even further! Supporters are already sending their versions using pure political frenzy to put pressure on our elected officials.

Does this have anything to do with the money the state is doling to implement rampant construction of giant wind energy conversion facilities?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for green energy ... but I see trouble ahead. (But then, as a journalist, trouble means good copy.)

Yes, I do know that!

I do know that the mayor recommends appointments and the City Council approves, or does not approve, them.

It's just that the City Council so rarely challenges any of them. Aside from the occasional Gary Calderwood and John Morris ... Cliff Goudey ... that's three that I remember as being even remotely questioned in the last couple of years.

No parking on Opportunity Way

OK ... so At-large City Councillor Tom Jones gave an impassioned speech at Monday's City Council meeting, explaining how it was, in effect, the ZBA's granting of numerous variances to Home Made Brand Foods that created the parking mess on Opportunity Way.

The city kept allowing HMBF to expand - right out of parking for the company's own trucks.

But now (I assume) it's HMBF that has nowhere to park its trucks because the City Council voted to ban parking on the side of the road.

I get that the trucks were causing problems for other businesses. I get that the road was being destroyed (I mean, I accept that it is).

What I don't get is why a city that keeps crying and moaning about not enough businesses coming into the industrial park is simultaneously sending the messages of "yes, expand, we'll accommodate your trucks on the roadway" and "stop expanding, dammit."

So, what the City Council is saying is that the Zoning Board of Appeals is not doing its job?

Well ... that was the body that granted the variance for the wind turbine ... and allowed a huge house to be built on an undersized lot at the end of Old Point Road, out here by me ... but what the ...?

And what about when I go over to Opportunity Works, on Opportunity Way, for one of its outdoor events? I often have to park on the side of the road because the parking lot is being used for activities and tents and such.

ConCom questions sand pipes

Reader Bubba has written in to ask about Newburyport's Conservation Commission (or ConCom) and whether it has, in fact, denied access to Newburyport's beach for this beach nourishment effort in Newbury.

According to Mary Reilly, the conservation person in the Planning Dept., the discussion on the Notice of Intent filed with the city has, in fact, been continued to ConCom's next meeting, July 21.

Reilly said they hope someone from the Army Corps of Engineers will be there to answer questions.

She said commissioners had 'a lot of questions' about the pipe that will carry the sand from the mouth of the river to the Newbury town beach. These are some or all of the questions/concerns:

1. The pipe, which I understand will be of some kind of plastic material (couldn't get a confirmation on its width, although 2-3 ft. was suggested), will be on the beach for 2-3 months, during winter when of course they are a lot of coastal storms. Will the pipe be able to withstand a storm?
2. What happens if it should break?
3. Exactly where will the pipe be placed? The Notice says above mean high water, but erosion around 55th St. makes that kind of sketchy.

Reilly said there were also concerns about the barge(s), which will necessarily be in the channel at the mouth of the river and will have floating pipes through which the sand will flow to the on-shore pipe.

The Merrimack River Beach Alliance has a meeting scheduled for this Friday at 10 a.m. at PITA Hall (Plum Island).

You'd think someone from the ACOE would have been there on July 7, which is when the last meeting of ConCom was held.

I like our ConCom - they are not a rubber stamp.

Some comments on Cronin

I'm not a huge fan of the Harbor Commission - way too much testosterone at those meetings.

Well, at the one meeting I actually attended. I think it was just the one.

They were talking about floating docks and Chuck Lagasse (of Newburyport Development and a local bigwig) stood up and started yelling at, I think, Larry McCavitt, who was addressing the commission and talking about (what else?) Chapter 91 rules and regulations ... those are the ones that govern state waterways.

I'm not sure if Bob Cronin was at that particular meeting, though.

I do know that he, as did all the harbor commissioners, opposed the re-appointment of Cliff Goudey to the Waterfront Trust and that he is a Moak supporter (or was, when he wrote this letter to the editor of the Current in 2007).

I think those 2 things are contradictory in the case of the Goudey appointment, since Mayor Moak put Goudey up for re-appointment.

Why am I singling out Cronin for comment?

Because the harbor and the waterfront are places that are near and dear to my heart. And the mayor is all for development on the river.

I look forward to hearing from him on these two "challenged" aspects of our city.

Plus I think he's a real challenger for the post, as is Andrea Jones.

Election update

Robert J. Cronin of 126 Merrimac St. #46 for Ward 3 and Kathleen O'Connor Ives of 5 Market Square #1 for Councillor-at-Large (re-election as).

Bob Cronin ... Bob Cronin ... why does that name sound so familiar? Ah ... Harbor Commission.

Don't let your fingers do the talking

*NOTE (I should have said this before): I'm not publishing any more comments on the topic of James Shanley and his appointment to the NRA.

Both 'sides' have had their say and that's it. I'm the only one allowed to cast aspersions on other people's characters on here!

But I take your point, Tom (Ryan): Why choose the City Council president when you could have picked any one of thousands of people who were not already in a position of power?

I'm not going to fault Shanley for accepting the appointment, though, even if he had promoted himself. He is deeply interested - and has educated himself - in all matters related to parking. And I happen to mostly agree with his positions on the subject (not crazy about the Green St. plan), so ...

But it will be interesting to see who is elected chairman of the NRA now that Nat Norton is not seeking re-appointment.

If it's Shanley, I may bitch and whine (especially if he becomes mayor).

Burn notice

A recent comment has compelled me to further expand on Council President James Shanley and his appointment to the Newburyport Redevelopment Authority, or NRA as it is mysteriously known here:

From what I understand (or my own knowledge of events), Mayor Moak suggested James Shanley to the Governor as his (Gov's) appointee on the NRA after (Ward 4 City Councillor) Erford Fowler stepped down from the board when his term expired, in 2008.

As a quasi-governmental board and a vestige of urban renewal, the Governor gets to appoint one member to the NRA. The mayor appoints the rest.

And from Shanley:

John Moak called me and asked if I would be willing to serve on the NRA, filling in for Erford Fowler, who was the Governor's Appointee during the Romney administration. When Erford's term expired, it was highly unlikely that the Patrick administration would appoint a life long Republican.

I didn't seek the appointment nor install myself has Mr. Ryan has implied. I had to give the appointment a lot of thought, as its yet another responsibility on top of all the other things I have going. The first person I discussed this with was my wife Karen, as further involvement in city life would have a direct impact on her and our business. She was supportive. My next conversation was with the State Ethics Commission, who cleared my being both on the Council and on the NRA.

Here's a bit from the Daily News (May 12, 2008) that also might be helpful:

It has been more than a month — since March 31 — since Erford Fowler's term on the Newburyport Redevelopment Authority officially ended.

But the former city councilor is still serving in the position since Gov. Deval Patrick, who is charged with making the next appointment to the NRA, has yet to do so. According to a spokeswoman for the governor, there is no appointee, no short list and no time line for a new appointment to the board ...

Fowler, who was also a long-time city councilor, could not be reached for comment.

And neither could Nat Norton, the chairman of the NRA, so it remains unclear if there is any worry about Patrick's delay in making a decision.

Mayor John Moak, who along with Rep. Michael Costello, D-Newburyport, both are endorsing James Shanley, president of the City Council to the position.

But in the meantime, Moak said he is fine with Fowler still serving.

"He is still there and he has done a great job," Moak said of the former Ward 4 councilor. "I think he's brought a lot of the open meeting law aspects (to the NRA). I have no concerns" about his continued service.

But Moak added: "I'm sure James Shanley would like to get started on his appointment, but that is up to the governor."

As Shanley says, Fowler was appointed by former (Republican) Governor Mitt Romney. Politics, you know? Shanley is a Dem.

I leave it to you, dear readers, to decide for yourselves. If you even care, that is.

No way out?

There is a trend emerging here, to my mind ... my earlier post was about the brewing Oregano debacle.


Now here comes attorney William Harris, protesting the mayor's re-appointment of Cliff Goudey to the Waterfront Trust. Harris claims this is all about Goudey's lack of fiduciary responsibility, but somehow it emerges that there is some other debacle here, about access to Waterfront West ...


And it makes me wonder if the real problem with Waterfront West is that it turns out Karp & Co. have no way to get to any proposed development, without the cooperation of the Redevelopment Authority and the Waterfront Trust.


It's not easy to get financing for a project that is land-locked, even though it is on a river ...


Dear Readers, it has been proposed that perhaps the old central way to the waterfront should be re-established to allow one-way access to this (on hold) development because it turns out that a private entity may own part of the drive that runs along the Davis Electric property.


In fact, the owner(s) of Davis Electric appear to own 40' of it. It's all there, in the Essex Co. Registry of Deeds. The Lagasses had a right-of-way only through the drive, to access their property at 38R Merrimac (the building where the Chamber of Commerce is located).


And you will recall, said owner(s) put the Davis property up for sale last year, but NED (New England Development, Karp's company0 did not bite. Perhaps that decision has bitten them on the butt.


The Redevelopment Authority (locally known as the NRA) wants to make a park out of its parking lot, which is also right there in the fray area.


This central way would cut right through the parking lot/park - the original opening to the street is across the street from the entrance to the Green St. parking lot - and then swoop through Riverside Park, which is owned (or is it merely managed, questions the new planning director) by the Waterfront Trust.


* Keep that "merely managed" thing in your mind as events progress - because they will. This is about larger issues that no one is talking about, perhaps even larger to some people than whether Karp has access to his development. Although I'm guessing the access will be the eventual outcome. *


Now you might ask, as did I, why can't they (NED) just come in from the other direction?


I'm guessing that they can't make a 2-way roadway through there (wetlands), so they can only do a one-way drive.


Although it seems inconceivable to me that Karp's people did not 'vet' all this beforehand, it does appear to be somewhat of an issue.

Something stinks in Denmark

This whole Oregano outdoor seating/serving alcohol outside thing is now "snowballing," to quote City Councillor Katie Ives.

Here is the piece I wrote for last week's Current.

To be clear - Licensing Commission chairperson Peggy Brown was not at the meeting where the commission approved the Oregano application, but she had been briefed on what had happened and had minutes from the meeting in front of her while we were talking.

Now it seems the application was sent on to the state's Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission for approval. Peggy Brown is getting back to me on that ... but I already talked to the ABCC.

So this is what we have:

April 1 - Oregano owner goes before the Licensing Commission for a public hearing on his application(s) to serve hard liquor and to serve alcohol at the outdoor seating. His application to serve alcohol outside is approved by the local authority with members' understanding that owner has City Council approval for outdoor seating and with the caveat that the fire department has to sign off on it because whatever barriers they have to erect under state law cannot impede access down Inn St., for fire vehicles.

April 7 or thereabouts - I speak with Claude Elias, owner of Oregano, about his new executive chef and he tells me that not only does he have a new chef, he also can serve hard liquor and that with approval of the fire chief (and the state, which actually issues liquor licenses), he can serve alcohol at the outdoor tables.

April 13 - The City Council approves the outdoor seating based on sketches showing tables along the side of the building. They are necessarily situated partly on city property, which is why the council has to approve it in the first place.

Ward 2 Councillor Greg Earls announces to the rest of council - and to the public - that no alcohol will be served at those tables (including the other tables approved that night, at Upper Crust). *ding ding ding ding* <---- That's the sound that went off in my head.

April 14 - I speak with Earls and then Ives, on the phone. Neither is terribly happy to hear that alcohol may be served outside at Oregano.

Later I speak with Peggy Brown. She is somewhat surprised that the City Council had only approved the outdoor seating the night before. She says that according to the minutes, Council President James Shanley (who attended the hearing) told the commission that the outside seating had been approved.

April 15 - I speak with Shanley, who says he misunderstood and so forth (you can read it in the story).

On Monday, I believe, I called the state liquor commission, where someone confirms that they received the application for Oregano on April 6. That would be before the outside seating was approved.

As I said before, I'm not necessarily opposed to people sitting outside enjoying a meal and a drink.

But I am disturbed by this whole fiasco.

You can see now that everyone and their brother can cite a precedent here (if the state even approves the license). Agave, Upper Crust ... anyone who got approval for outdoor seating on city property can come back to the City Council and claim they should be able to serve alcohol outside, with the appropriate barrier in place.

I hear that Agave has been seeking approval to serve alcohol at its outdoor tables "for years."

Can you imagine State Street, with planters and fences all along it to block the outdoor seating from the general public, as is required by law?

Remember a few years back, when Fenway Park "appropriated" a part of Yawkey Way so the owners could sell alcohol outside the confines of the park? They erect barriers and turnstiles on game days ... well that was approved by ABCC ... so here we go.

(I think the argument there was that the park established a "right" to use Yawkey Way for a private purpose.)

You can also see that somehow, another business located in a property owned by Newburyport Development got something that no one else has been able to get - and call me whatever you will, but it was all done in a questionable manner.

Where's the story in the Daily News?

Oregano beefing up ... oh my

OK, they are having problems at the paper posting things to the website, so I'll just summarize the story on the liquor licenses.

The City Council on Monday approved outside seating for Oregano, that pizzeria/Italian restaurant on Pleasant St. (which coincidentally also has a new executive chef so the food should be better although it won't come faster because there's only one 6-burner stove in the minuscule kitchen).

But councillors did not know that the Licensing Commission on April 1 had approved Oregano to serve alcohol at that outside seating.

In fact, Greg Earls stood up after the vote and said that there would be no alcohol served at the tables.

Surprise!

Well, since I had just written the story about Oregano - and had owner Claude Elias tell me that, pending approval from the fire chief and the state liquor commission, they would be serving alcohol at the outside tables - this kind of put me on alert.

So on Tuesday I called both Earls and Katie Ives, neither of whom had a clue that this approval had taken place.

I ran into Ives earlier today, as she was walking up Inn St. The tables have been put out - and she also was a little put out.

I'm all for helping local businesses increase the customer base and I really don't see a huge problem with serving alcohol at those table, but honestly? This really disturbs me.

The council needs the full story before they approve what appear to be routine things.

At this time I'm not going to claim this is a Karp/Lagasse-related incident because the commission also approved the same type of license to the River Merrimack Bar & Grill(e), which of course is in The Tannery.

I'm sure they'll sort it all out (not really) but in the meantime, give Oregano another try for food. This new chef guy used to work with Todd English at Olive's in Charlestown and also used to cook at my favorite North End eatery, Pomodoro ... best chicken carbonara ever ...

Tiptoeing down Toppans Lane

I have to say, I was happy to read this in today's Daily News - the Planning Board rejected the proposed development on Toppans Lane, at the site of a former farm.

I know that development is part of (financial) forward progress, but honestly - I was driving through Newbury as usual for a Thursday (coming back from Gloucester) and I was paying attention so I noticed how much of the farmland has been broken up for development.

I'm not blaming anyone; I just think it's a shame.

Especially now, when local farms are coming back through community supported agriculture and other initiatives that are being embraced by people looking for food not tainted by chemicals.

On a related note, I can't wait for the Farmer's Market to open, in June. Boston has - or had - one at Copley Square every week and I used to bop over there after work to pick up fresh veggies and baked goods.

And even Flint, when I lived there oh so many years ago, had a permanent market in an old mill building on the river ...

I'm happy to see that, at least for now, some open space has been preserved.

Hello again

I have some comments on stories appearing in this week's Current - but since I don't think the paper is out yet and the website hasn't been updated yet, those will have to wait.

Meanwhile, remember when I posted this, about the Literary Festival and Earth Day? Ye olde conflicting events?

I got some private feedback and it seems there is some bruising ... so I did some reflecting.

And it seems to me that there is not a whole lot of communication and/or cooperation going on - not just in this matter, but in general.

I don't think it's necessarily deliberate, I think people just forge ahead and do whatever they want, in some semi-haphazard way.

Good grief, the Eco Collaborative (hosting Earth Day) didn't even get City Council permission to use Bartlet Mall for the flower market until last Monday ... what if someone had objected?

(Although I have to add that the letter from the Bartlet Mall Commission to the City Council was dated in early March, so I'm not sure who/what was being haphazard in this instance.)

Stepping on toes ... everyone is stepping on everyone else's toes.

And coming up later, on the same topic:

How is it that the City Council did not know, when approving outside seating for a certain restaurant, that the Licensing Commission had a couple of weeks before approved the place for serving alcohol at said outside seating?

And not only that, but the Licensing Commission, when approving the license, was under the impression that the place had already secured permission to have outside seating ...

Who's to blame for a party gone out of bounds?

City Council stunned by more controversy

Last night's City Council meeting was one of the more bizarre meetings they have had ...

I don't know, maybe it was just me, but they all seemed kind of "off." Being kind of "off" myself this week (so far) I can relate.

But perhaps it was the start of the meeting that got the whole thing off to a bad start.

Three people stood up in public comment and spoke against the re-appointment of Cliff Goudey to the Waterfront Trust.

Shades of Building Inspector Gary Calderwood ...

The councillors seemed gobsmacked at this turn of events. (All except Tom O'Brien, who seemed kind of amused. I've been chatting a little with O'Brien recently, and he's actually quite amusing in general.)

Then came a period of confusion over what they could do with appointments made by the mayor, and when they could do it without suspending the rules, which they hadn't done.

If you've got a spare hour, I would recommend watching the video of the meeting. That would paint the picture far better than can I.

Humph

I just read this story in the Daily News about a "familiar face gets behind Taffy's spatula."

Local restaurateur Jim Noyes is the new owner of Taffy's on State Street and hopes to reopen the eatery in April.

The funny thing is, I was introduced by City Clerk Richard Jones to this Jim Noyes just yesterday, when I was picking up the City Council agenda. We were discussing how I could write a story and what a scoop it would be.

I guess he went home and called the Daily News ... because he said at that point (3 p.m.) that they did not know.

This happens a lot and it's understandable.

As not the paper of record, the Current is at a distinct disadvantage as far as people calling in tips goes. In my experience, tips are phoned in after the Daily News has rejected the tipper.

That's what happened with the PI sewer thing. The person who tipped the Current off (hereafter known as "Tipper") had called the DN and been told it wasn't a story. Then the DN decided there was a story there, probably after Tipper called them back to say the Current was on the case.

I'm guessing here based on the fact that there eventually was a story in the DN.

Speaking of which, I attended the Sewer Commission meeting last night, as did Victor Tine. The chairman guy (David Hanlon) always announces that the press is there ...

Anyway, in the PI sewer update they discussed debris getting in the lower pit, which I found amusing. Now they want to put a pipe in the hole so debris doesn't go down the hole. Sounds like a big hole.

And they want AIRVAC to drill the holes in the test pits and run tests on how the holes would affect the integrity of the plate between the two parts of the pit (actually, they said that at the March 12 meeting).

And they're taking a field trip down to P-Town to see how they addressed their problems (the ones that Mr. Burke - their WWTF and collections manager - told me they didn't have).

Oh well.

I'm still thinking ...

Wow, you know?

That Sewer Commission meeting was one week ago today. The Current had already put its Feb. 27 edition to bed, so there was no way a story about the Plum Island sewer was getting in that issue.

I've been darting about City Hall, talking to people and whatnot and watching, listening and waiting this whole time for the Daily News to catch on.

We almost made it to print without them having a clue.

And what I think is that one, you've got to cover meetings. Right there on the agenda for the SC meeting, it says "Plum Island" as part of the new business.

Not that I saw the agenda before I went to the meeting, mind you. I was tipped off by someone who I assume is pissed off at the Daily News and thus did not alert them.

Which brings me to my second thought, which is that you try not to piss people off too much.

Last year, when I was having all those difficulties with the (then) editor of the Current, I wrote a story about the Harbor Commission. She insisted that I change it around to imply that someone from the commission was lying, because she concluded that he was.

I did not think that was such a good idea - I had presented two opposing statements and left it up to the reader to decide who was being honest and who was not.

But no - she changed it.

Now the person from the Harbor Commission I'm sure will never speak to me again, if I need to talk to him about some issue. And I caught some flak from the mayor, who was not pleased that the Current had maligned a citizen who volunteers on a city commission.

You want to present the truth, of course - and I've found that you don't get into that much trouble with reasonable people if you print the plain truth of the matter, even if it makes them look bad - but you don't want to be unfair.

So because the DN was even what I considered to be unfair to this person, I think he gave me the heads up and not them - although he usually goes straight to them.

That happens more than you'd think.

It's all an intricate dance.

Rules is rules

The City Council last night once again suspended its own rules and allowed another mayoral appointment to go through with only one reading.

So far since I started paying close attention again, they have done this at least 3 times: with the new Planning Director, with some other appointment that I can't recall off the top of my head and now with last night's Erford Fowler's appointment to the Board of Water Commissioners.

I understand the board has been operating without a quorum since losing two members, and the mayor can't find qualified people to fill the vacancies.

I don't know if it's a good thing that former Ward 4 Councillor Fowler is stepping up to the plate, or if it's a not-so-good thing. I don't know Fowler that well, except I know he was always on the side of the older population in the city.

Speaking of which - the last time I attended a water board meeting (last month), George Lawler was openly sympathetic to one Mr. Robert Finneran, the guy who bought the former Mike's Sub Shop building and who wants to turn it into - a sub shop.

Well, he also wants to add a second floor, for office space.

The problem is, his family trust has not hooked into the PI water/sewer system and DPS will not approve his building permit ... well, the building permit is being sought by an entity of which Finneran is the sole officer.

It's a city law (Is an Executive Order a law?) that if you owe the city any outstanding fees on one property, the city shall not issue a permit for another property owned by the same person.

The issue now is whether Finneran's interests in the entity First Ocean and Realty Corp. and his interests in the family trust (including that he lives in the house in question) make him an owner of both properties.

Which reminds me, I have to pay my water/sewer bill! Yikes!

Au revoir, gophers.

So much to write about today!

Well, here we go!

Question: Whose responsibility is it to inform new boaters of boating rules in the city where they live?

In this story in today's Daily News, the saga of Harbormaster vs. Marinas continues. People didn't have permits on their boats, they got tickets.

As boating season begins to ebb, the city's harbormaster is issuing dozens of tickets to boaters who failed to purchase a waterways permit this summer, to the frustration of local boaters and marina operators alike.

Harbormaster Ralph Steele says he's been out on the water since the close of Yankee Homecoming, issuing tickets to any boat docked or moored in the city that doesn't have a blue 2008 permit sticker on its stern. He's handed out between 40 to 50 tickets so far, he said, adding there are plenty more boats he plans to visit in the coming days.

"We're planning on visiting the boats that don't have them, and they will be getting tickets," Steele said. "They're violations of city ordinances."

Kinda makes it sound like it's only a Newburyport thing, huh?

Not to mention the lede, which makes it sound like the frustration for boaters and marina owners is that the boaters didn't get a permit.

Anyone with half a brain knows that if you put a boat in the water, somewhere you owe money to the city administrating those waters. And if you're putting the boat in the water at a marina, the marina should tell you what is your responsibility vis a vis city permits.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that they should not be issuing slips until the boat owner has the proper permit(s).

Many boaters have been taken aback by the citations, however, especially boaters new to the Merrimack River. Newburyport Marinas Dockmaster Jay Larcome says between the company's five marinas, at least a dozen boats have received citations in the past week or so. Since most of those boaters are unfamiliar with the ordinance, he said charging them $100 without warning isn't a great way to welcome them to the city.

"They're mostly new people who aren't aware of (the ordinance)," Larcome said. "In my opinion, they should have been warnings instead of tickets. In the past it's always been (Steele) has put warnings on the boat, because there's lots of new people."

Windward Yacht Yard owner and manager Butch Frangipane said he's equally frustrated with Steele's policy of ticketing first, asking questions later.

"My biggest complaint, and I've brought this to the commissioner, is that we feel they should issue a warning and give people a week or two weeks to comply. Then if they don't comply, go ahead and issue a ticket," Frangipane said.

Well, that works with driving without a license, so I guess they have a point.

The two marinas cited in this piece are both owned by the same entity, so of course the two people are going to say the same thing.

Frangipane explained one of his customers was issued a slip just two weeks ago and received a $100 citation a week later. When Frangipane called the Harbormaster on the customer's behalf, Steele informed Frangipane he should have warned his customer. While most of the time he does warn boaters, Frangipane doesn't feel he should be charged with collecting money for the city...

How about obeying the rules of the city in which you are operating a business, Butch? Just a thought...

Ah, I'm wasting my time. Butch told me when I ran into him at the Post Office that he doesn't read blogs (whatever they are). He's a fiesty dude.

My take on the "Liberator"

I was at Tendercrop today, they had copies of the Liberator on sale, so I bought one. Somehow, I expected something on newsprint (not sure why; maybe because it's something I had thought of).

It's nice that Jim Roy referenced 3 stories I wrote for the Current. Let me clarify:

Minnesota Redux (about the Whittier (I-95) bridge): Our mayor prefaced his comment (about having confidence in MassHighway keeping the bridge open) by saying he was not an engineer, and then followed it up by saying he sees MassHighway crews out there all the time, working on the bridge. Mayor Thatcher Kezer of Amesbury also said the bridge is not in eminent danger of collapsing and got pretty technical about it.

Plum Island Sob Story: The people who bought the house on Plum Island were told by mayor (prior to completing the purchase) that the city would do something to get them access to the property. Now here was an opportunity to slam the mayor (for promising something off-the-cuff and then later realizing he'd opened a can of worms).

I'm Seasick (about mooring fees not being collected): This (and the Karp floating docks debacle) was the Harbor Commission's lapse, not necessarily that of the Harbormaster, Ralph Steele. He, in fact, was quite snarky about the fact that marina owners were being given a "pass" in paying the mooring fees, both in the meeting and when I talked to him the next day. Some long-time members of the Harbor Commission wanted to keep things the way they are. I know, the Harbor Commission is all volunteers - but in at least this case, there seems to be a definite bias towards protecting the people who make a living off the waterfront.

So you see how, no matter what you write, people are going to put their own interpretation on it?

(And despite my talking to Will Courtney about following up on the PI and moorings stories, the Daily News has not done so. The people in the PI case were talking about hiring a lawyer when last I spoke with them ...)

Well, I'm sure I do it myself. So let's see how it goes, shall we?