City sues a CPC member

Oh good grief ... why does the Daily News insist on putting such interesting news stories in its Saturday edition?

Saturday is the lowest readership day ...

Now there's this whole thing about Norbert Carey and rail trail land and wow.

The piece does not say it, but Carey sits on the Community Preservation Committee - you know, the committee that decides who gets funding through the Community Preservation Act.

I looked on the city's website and it says his term expires in 2008 (I'm assuming that it has not been updated) so perhaps his new term is up in 2010, or sometime soon, I would imagine ... here's what Mary Baker Eaton had to say in April 2006, when Carey was re-appointed to the CPC:

First of all I couldn’t believe that Norbert Carey was on the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) in the first place. Mr. Carey is a developer, is developing a very controversial piece of land–the Russell Terrace project, and has had some not so good looking run-ins concerning land for the Rail Trail Project (whole other post.) All of this would, in my mind, create a conflict of interest. Seems to be a no-brainer to me.

It might be worth looking up who exactly was on the City Council and voted "yes" to approve this appointment.

And here is the original 2003 easement document, which I also found on the city's website after typing "Norbert Carey" into the little search box.

I'm not that up on easement documents but this situation is sort of reminiscent of the Host Community Agreement with New Ventures, for the landfill. Former Mayor Al Lavender also was in charge of that.

I have heard Carey's name several times in connection to the CPC and the land he owns over by the old access road for I-95 (another contentious parcel). It's a name that kind of sticks in one's mind.

Planning director

An anonymous commenter on this blog asked me about whether I had any knowledge of a possibility of one or both of the candidates for mayor bringing Nick Cracknell back as planning director.

I don't think, from a personal standpoint, that asking that question of the 2 candidates is very respectful to our current planning director, Sean Sullivan.

How would he feel if one or both of the candidates replied that yes, he or she would not re-appoint him and would instead bring Cracknell back?

I know, I know, it is an important question and someone should have asked it. But I was not assigned to interview any of the candidates for the paper, and I did not write the questions for the CEB interviews.

I'm a naughty, evil, bad blogger.

Having said that, I've done a little research and it looks to me as if both James Shanley and Donna Holaday strongly supported Cracknell while he was the Director of Planning.

I don't know Sean Sullivan all that well, but I have learned through experience that both he and Nancy Colbert (his predecessor) are/were creatures of the mayor (Sullivan perhaps a little less so than was Colbert).

I mean that in the sense that the person in the position does the mayor's bidding, not that they are actual "creatures" in a pejorative personal sense.

Nick Cracknell, from what I read in the aftermath of his not being re-appointed by Mayor John Moak (and which was right when I started writing for the Current), resisted being Moak's creature.

The Director of Planning is a political appointment.

Perhaps Sullivan is scrambling as I write, to find a new position.

I could guess that at least one of Holaday and Shanley would consider Cracknell, if not outright appoint him ...

You have to look at certain elements of the situation - those being who is all for some development along the waterfront and has expressed the notion that they have an "in" with New England Development and who perhaps is being a little more prudent (in my opinion) in that regard.

This all depends on whether voters like one viewpoint over the other, whether they liked Cracknell, and whether they want any more buildings on Merrimac St., along the waterfront.

I found it rather interesting that someone such as Mary Harbaugh (wife of Jim Stiles) would clap so much more enthusiastically for Shanley than Holaday at the last mayoral debate - he wants the buildings (not that many of them, but buildings nonetheless) and Harbaugh is all for open space.

(Of course, she can be fickle - she does not want the senior center to go at Cushing Park one minute because the parking lot there is "open space," but she objects the next minute to the parking lots on the river because they are not "open space." I don't know of much that's more open than a parking lot, but ... hey.)

By the way (and not related to Harbaugh), someone recently used the term "dark sider" to me, and I had to ask what a "dark sider" is. Here is a part of the definition, as presented by the P. Preservationist (click on the link if you want to read the full explanation):

The dark side believes that Newburyport’s future lies in industry and not in eco-tourism and heritage tourism. A dark sider reminisces of a community with busy factories providing steady though not perhaps wealthy income to the workers in town. They imagine that after a hard day at work, the family could stroll the streets and live in a safe community where everyone knows everyone else. There were few outsiders. Dark siders after all are about family and financial security. It may be observed that they tend to have the money-like the Great Depression generation, the harbinger of poverty is ever before them – their mantra is jobs and growth. To them, craftsmen and bankers and developers must be given an absolute free hand to do whatever possible to generate money.

The dark sider sees no value in aesthetics – a manicured lawn is no value to them – a job is everything and the appearance of your house means nothing. They do not understand equity and care nothing of raising property values – to them it’s only an excuse to raise taxes.

Bringing in buildings that do not fit Newburyport is okay with them – we must build, build, build. Open space is wasted space – we must build, build, build to raise more tax revenue. To them, the act of construction and industry is the ticket for the future of Newburyport as the dark sider is forever seeking what was lost in the mid-twentieth century: seeking the old Newburyport of the past filled with large factories.

What do you all think?

What was my point, again?

I read this item in today's Daily News, online ... it's about the Ward 1 race.

This bit, way down by the bottom, caught my attention, especially since there has been some chat on Tom Salemi's website about Karp supporting campaigns (this bit is about challenger Allison Heartquist):

Among her supporters, according to the campaign finance report filed this week, are Mark Roland, the owner of the clam shack that McCavitt battled in court. He gave Heartquist's campaign $150. Also, Newburyport Marinas, a company owned by Stephen Karp and New England Development donated $100 to her campaign ...

Heartquist said yesterday her treasurer, John Brooks, has been overseeing her campaign donations and referred questions about donations to him.

It's unclear if the donation from Newburyport Marinas was given as a donation from a corporation, which is prohibited under campaign finance law. Brooks said yesterday he did not have the information on the Newburyport Marinas donation in front of him, but said it was given by a person who is part of the marina.

What does that mean, "it's unclear?" If it says Newburyport Marinas on the information her campaign supplied, then it was Newburyport Marinas who made the donation, right?

Not necessarily, but ...

Even if it was by a person, they obviously screwed up in the reporting and haven't got a clue about campaign finance law.

Dog park flares fire

I had to laugh when I read this little post on Tom Salemi's blog, complete with photo ... and as I'm sure that was his intention, good work, Tom!

In the matter of a dog park, I was surprised this week to hear some vehement protests against any such thing being established here.

Sometimes I think big issues flow on by while the smaller stuff gets people over-heated.

I don't see any problem with a dog park. Sure there are streets to walk your dog down (one of the arguments against) but dogs do need to run, and play, and sniff around randomly ... I don't own a dog, by the way.

So lighten up and let the doggies have a park.

When I lived in Boston, dog owners appropriated one corner of Boston Common as a place to let dogs run free and people went ape-shit. Sometimes I would pause while walking by to watch the dogs play - and the owners socialize.

What better way to get to know your neighbors? I might even rent a dog, if we do get a park, and wander on down to chat with people.

The mayoral candidates

I have decided that in lieu of any endorsement that I'm reluctant to make, I'll say one thing each about the mayoral candidates that I most admire and one thing that I do not admire, and you can take that for what it's worth.

Echoing the sentiments of many people, I really think that both these people could perform well as mayor (How's that for a tepid statement?). That is, I think there is equal potential for either of them doing a good job or either of them doing a lousy job, only in different ways, if you get my drift.

So here goes, in alphabetical order:

I think that Donna Holaday is brilliant. She knows facts and figures and can throw them around in an impressive manner. I also think, however, that she is too trusting about what she is told as backup for those facts and figures. In an ideal world, you would not have dept. heads who were trying to deceive when explaining why they needed funding for this project or another - but this is not an ideal world. She needs to be more cynical.

I really admire how James Shanley, when I would write something critical on here about one of his councillors, he would write to me and defend them, but only where he thought defense was in order. That may sound like nothing compared to 'oh, she's brilliant,' but it shows something about his character that I think is just as important in a chief administrator (and yes, I think the mayor is both an administrator and a leader). Conversely, I think he's a little too cynical and thus he often comes off as being dismissive.

I will add (again) that I did not like both of them saying they would not run for mayor if John Moak was running for re-election.

I also think - although I have no proof of this - that something really bad happened to their good relationship. Holaday avoids looking at Shanley, if at all possible, and he looks at her in the same way that a man looks at a woman he's been previously close to but has done something she thinks is unforgivable. I'm not sure he understands why she thinks it was unforgivable, given his expression. Most men don't.

It makes me kind of sad, because in 2007, I witnessed Shanley on election night 2007 practically running through the BluWater Cafe to reach Holaday, who was in the downstairs bar. When he reached her, he was jumping up and down and laughing with joy ... he had run unopposed in Ward 3, so it was her victory he was sharing.

Shanley, like me, has a very expressive face. It's been very interesting, to say the least, to watch his facial expressions during City Council meetings. Oh I have to stop adding extra bits in here.

So that's it. Oh, except for the Current has endorsed Holaday.

I had nothing to do with that decision, by the way, and I only checked to make sure after I had written this complete post, except for the line above this one.

Election night

The PortMedia people confirmed tonight that we will, indeed, be broadcasting live from City Hall on election night.

That is, they will be broadcasting live, and I will be delivering the color commentary.

Forget Richard Jones attempting to strangle me with his bow tie and think Allison Heartquist attempting to strangle me with her bare hands. Even if she wins.

Did I mention that she and I share the same birthday? She's only the second person I've ever known who shared my birthday.

Anyway ... I don't know how much this has been advertised, if at all, so consider this your warning ... er, I mean your notification.

What do you think? Humorous or serious?

Me and my theories

I went to the final mayoral debate tonight because I was writing a campaign wrap-up.

They both look tired out ... and wow, poor James Shanley was out of his element. In this case, that is.

I guess it all boils down to how you feel about funding for the schools and where the money will come from, given that the state is not being very helpful in this regard.

Shanley wants paid parking and Holaday wants grants and "efficiencies." I hate that word, along with "transparency."

Anyway, we're down to the final days - and frankly, I don't see much passion for either person. There's not even that many campaign signs.

Apathy is not good.

I proposed to Holaday that the infamous "Khaki Crowd" (so dubbed by, I believe, Bubba) was more for Shanley and the people who think things like the Rail Trail, although quite nice, are a waste of money given the condition of the city's infrastructure and thus prefer her.

She did not agree because, as she correctly pointed out, that money was earmarked for the Rail Trail and could not be spent on anything else. But there was the CPA money.

Oh, well ... So much for another of my wonderful theories ...

DN goes for Shanley

The Daily News is endorsing James Shanley for mayor. Read all about it here.

Pissy pants

Just for everyone's information - What a week this has been! - I don't post comments on the Daily News website (although I do read them).

And even if I were to do it, I would use my real name.

(Ooops - falling off my high horse - I did once post something anonymously to the DN website, using the handle "FrmrFlintoid.")

This McCavitt-Heartquist thing is getting out of hand. If you don't like McCavitt, you should have challenged him for his seat or encouraged someone more qualified to do so.

Knocking me only shows your desperation to make her look qualified ...

Question

Is anyone else having problems with Internet Explorer? Every time I get a Windows "update," IE gets crappier and crappier.