The Salem News certainly likes to beat up on Peabody. Some argue it is only in a Pro-Bonfanti way, I disagree and feel that the Salem News, with its libertarian anti-government at all costs ultra-right wing point of view simply HATES Peabody.
Read the Salem News editorial here.
Now, they actually DO have a point here. I was totally against the move by the City Council to limit the Cities options when dealing with proposed developers. They took away the ability of developers to "buy-out" of the affordable housing requirements by making a cash payment to the City.
The argument from some City Councilors against this one option was that the City had not yet created any affordable housing with this money (which, if I recall correctly) was only from the DeerBurn complex). The fact that the City was initiating a rather smart plan to use these funds to help support revitalizing abandoned or foreclosed properties in poorer sections of the City - with the creation of affordable units... was not considered good enough for the ever forward thinking City Council.
Thankfully the Mayor vetoed this action and the option remains in place when the City is in negotiations with any developer.
But now the Salem News is using this vote against the buy-out as evidence that they are "pandering" on the issue of the old School Administration building on Endicott Street. They are wrong in my view.
Now, the City Council is also wrong on this issue. But the Salem News is pretending that all the developers who have shown interest in the property were going to make these affordable housing units. THEY WERE NOT! McNiff was going to build 4 freestanding single family homes on the property and the other developer was going to build 32 market condos (with, probably, a buy-out from the affordable housing requirement.)
Shame on the Salem News for distorting this already ridiculous probelm into something completely ludirous.
Farewell Dark City....
11 years ago
4 comments:
i'm sorry, but i'm confused. how do two separate sites have the same web address? i go to www.peabodypatriot.com and i get the old web site which just came back online. however, if i click on peabody_insider's link posted in his comments, i get redirected to a site - peabody roundtable - but it has the peabodypatriot.com domain. forgive my ignorance...can you explain this PI?
No. I can't.
As far as I know...
The www.peabodypatriot.com URL is/was owned by one of the Fred's. He has control over where it points to (i.e. to whatever web address he choses.)
The actual blog that was called Mr. Peabody and is now retitled The Peabody Patriot, is actually at peabody01960.blogspot.com. This is the address I always try and link to the actual blog... because the owner of www.peabodypatriot.com could change it at any moment (this has happened before.)
My two blogs are these:
Peabody Insider which is at insidepeabody.blogspot.com This is a personal "test" blog where I was trying things out for a while and posting things that I would link to from the old blogs.
The other is the Team Blog called the Peabody Roundtable which is found at peabodyroundtable.blogspot.com
OH WAIT A SECOND! I GOT IT NOW
You are asking why the URL of your BROWSER (like Internet Explorer or Firefox) DOES NOT CHANGE... right?
This is because Blogger (or blogspot) uses FRAMES to make the pages you see... and the main frame (the bar at the top) remains the same... thus even when you GO TO A LINK... it will display the old header URL.
If you do a right-click and then Open in a New Tab, you will see the correct URL.
I hope this helps!
PI...it does help, thanks. i thought i was imagining things. so, old/new fred is not the same person as mr. peabody? or, could they be the same person but posting on a new domain?
I believe that this person is the person known as Betsy Ross on Fred's Old Blog (because he/she admitted as much in a comment - I am NOT outing anyone)
One problem is that by saying FRED... you are actually referring to a rather large group of folks who went by FRED in turn. I think there were between 4 and 6 different Fred's at last count.
Post a Comment