The future of Downtown: Medical Hub?

I have been trying to find out more information about the plan for a "Medical Hub" for Downtown Peabody that Councilor Bettencourt brought to the City Council several weeks back. I was not at that meeting and I do not have cable so I, like so very many Peabody residents, did not get the opportunity to see this plan as presented.

I do not like to critique plans I have never seem, nor would I wish to point out flaws that might have been addressed in some fashion during the presentation by Councilor Bettencourt. And so I asked (via facebook email) if he would share a copy of this powerpoint presentation either with me, or in some online venue, so that everyone might have the opportunity to see this much talked about plan for Peabody's future.

Sadly, but not unexpectedly, I received no response, nor did any such public presentation become available (to my knowledge - and I have been looking for it).

So I am going to give my response to this plan based entirely on the reports of the presentation made to the City Council which appeared in local media.

In general... bringing new businesses into the downtown area is a good idea for Peabody. We should be looking for a wide array of activities to populate our downtown.

We have some very old and decrepit industrial areas that are mostly underused and in some cases abandoned as this type of activity is not going to be done in places like Peabody for the foreseeable future (despite what many of the previous Ward 3 councilors have hoped and wished for... it ain't coming back.)

We have some areas that have been newly renovated - for better or worse - mostly in the southern area of downtown. We have a rather eclectic (bizarre?) mix of uses along the real Main St. area - some that seem to be serving limited populations (specialty toy train stores, fofo's, Brazillian fashions) while others are serving the community at large (drug stores, grocery stores, restaurants, services, etc.).

In general the more consumer oriented enterprises occur on Main Street and in the Square, while the more business oriented activities are on the Walnut Street side. This might have worked well in the days of bustling industry here in Peabody... but those days are gone, and good riddance to them in my opinion. It is time to stop looking to the PAST to try and find some hope for Peabody's future. But that is a rant for a different time and place.

So this brings us to the idea put forth by Councilor Bettencourt. My take on this is that he would like to see downtown become a 'medical hub' of businesses that are ancillary to the more comprehensive and brand new or newly renovated facilities that surround our area.

New facilities at Centennial Park and MGH North and mostly renovated facilities at Lahey Clinic, North Shore Medical Center and more. Councilor Bettencourt is correct that we have already become a medical hub of sorts for the North Shore region.

But lets examine why these places are where they are... and specifically NOT in downtown Peabody. All these new or renovated facilities are located where there is excellent access via the highway for patient, and business, convenience as well as tons of free parking . They are not locating in downtown Salem or Peabody precisely because access into and out of these areas is very difficult, if not impossible, at certain times of the day and space (thus parking) is at a premium.

So if I am a Doctor or an HMO and I am looking to locate my offices/out patient service centers... I am NOT looking to move into a decrepit, industry waste strewn, impossible to access, flood prone area in Peabody with little to no parking and no real connection to the facilities I am currently visiting (NSMC, MGH, Lahey, etc.) Why in the world would these types of higher end medical facilities look to move into downtown Peabody when much better locations adjacent to these main facilities already exists? They wouldn't.

So if the primary (hospitals) and the secondary (Doctor offices and HMO Centers - think MRI, CAT Scan, etc.) are not really going to be interested in Peabody as it is today... what medical uses might be of interest? Frankly, the only businesses that I can think of that would be interested in a location which is equidistant from these major hospitals is medical warehousing and medical reclamation (waste disposal). This seems like the most logical usage for the area if we are going to focus on 'medical hub' services.

And of course that would be a HORRIBLE IDEA for Peabody and the future of Downtown.

You know what... I actually LIKE people who are willing to think outside the box on issues. They often throw out outlandish ideas that may contain a little nugget of a great ideas at times! They also might be completely full of it! Councilor Bettencourt has made two of these VERY PUBLIC, very outlandish and very self promoting pronouncements in the recent past. I recall the idea that the Dearborn affordable housing funds be used to pay for low income folks energy bills as one of these ideas, and this is yet another.

Here is the RIGHT WAY to serve the People of Peabody when you get a GREAT IDEA but have no real clue if it is actually worth anything...

Step 1: Go to the City's Experts on these subjects
We are paying planners, engineers, assessors, lawyers, construction professionals, etc. to be part of the City's management team! Why would you a) work without consultation with these expert people and 2) in some cases work against their recommendations?

Step 2: Seek other inputs from outside City Hall
Arthur Gordon is (was?) the largest landowner in the Downtown area, but he is not the only owner who would need to "buy into" this idea in order to a) get it passed and ultimately to b) make it actually happen.

Step 3: Talk about your ideas to the people most affected by them to gauge their opinions, input and ideas
This is so important. People really do not like to see a brand new idea brought out in a venue like the City Council meeting as a Final and Complete Deal! It makes people nervous that deals were made and that few were considered in the thought process. I am not saying this is actually happening, but it is the perception. And in reality, it is the people who live and work and own businesses and drive through and visit and shop and eat, etc. in Downtown who will be the ones who will make this ultimately become a thriving community again... or just have this be yet another failed 'gee whiz' idea with no real foresight or long term plan.

Step 4: Present your ideas to the government body most appropriate to look into the matter and seek to begin the process of thoughtful public discussion

And this is why I was hoping that Councilor Bettencourt would release his plan... so we could all see it and think about the consequences of his ideas and then allow each of us to make our judgement of the idea on the merits, and not the rhetoric we will be sure to hear in the local media.

So, I for one, think this is NOT a good idea for the future of Downtown Peabody.

Congratulations Bob Driscoll

The recount is over and the winner of the Ward 4 race is Bob Driscoll... or is it? Well while there were some "issues" (two ballots missing per the Salem News, 10 missing per the bloggers), all involved have come to accept the new results as final.

Councilor Bob Driscoll has been
re-elected Ward 4 Councilor

The process may have had a few glitches in it, but in the end, I believe, the voters were fairly represented.

The Salem News: Peabody's Driscoll wins recount by 2

This was a very good example of real democracy in action. I was so pleased to see that BOTH candidates had decided to ask for a recount in order to ensure that the will of the people was being fairly represented.

I think that as far as City Council races in Peabody go, this was a very respectful and collegial race - two qualities that should be well heeded in many of the other races around this City.

I think Councilor Driscoll should be considering this coming term as his swansong and make sure to get done what he would like to see as his legacy on the City Council. I think it will soon be Mr. Grayson's turn to lead this Ward and to help steer the City.

My congratulation to both gentlemen for a well fought battle and for showing us how to act in both victory and defeat.

Election Results (From Salem News)

MAYOR
7,468 - Bonfanti
2,712 - Donovan

AT-LARGE
7,363 - Bettencourt
5,952 - Gravel
5,729 - Manning
5,725 - Garabedian
5,315 - Liacos
---------------
4,376 - Moutsoulas
4,238 - Aylward

WARD 1
1,083 - Osborne
0,993 - Forti

WARD 4 - RECOUNT?
1,150 - Driscoll
1,149 - Grayson

WARD 6
1,366 - Sinewitz
0,993 - Sheehan

SCHOOL COMMITTEE
6,297 - Dunne
5,655 - Rossignoll
4,936 - Hochman
-------------------------
4,167 - Nizwantowski
4,088 - Olimpio

MUNICIPAL LIGHT COMM
7,183 - Paras
3,914 - Wheatley
----------------
3,387 - Bonfanti
2,153 - Chancey

LIBRARY... all will get in

Peabody Patriot reporting election results live tonight

The Peabody Patriot is reporting election results live.

http://peabodyelections.blogspot.com/

City Council At-Large Predictions and Endorsements

At-Large City Council

These are the people we must rely on to help keep Peabody a vibrant and active community for all its residents and businesses. Sadly, this group spends most of its time bemoaning minor disturbances and rarely can see beyond the malaise and mediocrity that they have helped create here in Peabody.

I yearn for some vision and leadership amongst this important elected body... but instead I am ever disappointed by the nudge-nudge-wink-wink of back room shenanigans and petty turf wars.

Ladies and gentlemen... who ever wins PLEASE PUT THE GOOD OF THE CITY BEFORE YOUR OWN PETTY DIFFERENCES!

My Endorsements:

• Edward A. Bettencourt Jr.
• Anne M. Manning
• David C. Gravel

• And because he is at least smart (while I disagree with his demeanor and positions all too often): James K. Liacos

I have no 5th candidate I can support.

Michael Garabedian is really stupid. I have absolutely no idea why ANYONE voted for this man. He is an embarrassment to the City and yet (see predictions) he will be reelected. William Aylward is running on the ridiculous ideas of cutting taxes and improving the schools and city services (which can only be done in a campaign promise and not in real life) and James Moutsoulas was the Ward 3 crack pot before the CURRENT Ward 3 crackpot got into power. None of these people deserve to be on the City Council.

SADLY......

My Predictions:

• Edward A. Bettencourt Jr.
• Michael V. Garabedian
• James K. Liacos
• Anne M. Manning
• David C. Gravel

Same old, same old.

Please feel free to leave your own predictions and endorsements as well.

Election Forum: Wednesday, Oct. 21st. 7:00-9:00 at City Hall

The Salem News will be sponsoring a candidate forum at Peabody City Hall on Wednesday, October 21st from 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm.

This forum will feature candidates for the following positions:

• Mayor
  
  
• Councilor-at-Large
  
  
• School Committee

I only saw this as a brief mention at the end of one of Nelson Benton's opinion pieces and haven't seen much about it since then.

Now, sadly, a long standing work commitment will force me to miss this event... and I am very unhappy about it. This is exactly the type of forum I have been saying is needed in the City. I hope other's will share their opinions and viewpoints on how the night goes.

Ward Councilor Races in Peabody

I was asked to give some predictions and endorsements for the upcoming elections in November. Now, predictions are often rather easy here in Peabody... never bet against the incumbent. As for endorsements... well my though it who cares what I think? But I was asked so I will give mine below... BUT PLEASE add yours in the comments as well. Especially OG as you were requested as well.

But first... here are the 3 recent news articles from The Salem News on the three ward races with challengers.

Two campaign for Ward 1 council seat

Newcomer, veteran vie for Ward 4 seat

Ward 6 hopefuls tangle over temperament

So lets start with the sad news... Ward 2, 3 and 5 can't even muster enough interest to get a challenger to the incumbent,

Ward 2: Arthur Athas (unopposed)
Ward 3: Rico E. Mello (unopposed)
Ward 5: David R. Gamache (unopposed)

This is a sad state of affairs in my opinion. I like to see a vigorous campaign with lots of ideas being tossed around and a future vision of Peabody being discussed. Sadly this will not be happening in Wards 2, 3 or 5.

Ward 1

Endorsement: Rob Forti
Why? I think he has shown he has both an interest in his Ward and a high level of energy that he is willing to put into the job. When he used to post on the Peabody blogs, he was often a very reasonable person who made logical arguments and seemed willing to listen to others point of view. I think he would bring some new energy and responsibility to the council and Ward 1.
Prediction: This one could be close... but I think inertia will prevail and Barry Osbourne will emerge as the winner.

Ward 4

Endorsement: Jeff Grayson
Why? I have met both these candidates (I live in Ward 4) and while I personally like Bob Driscoll, I think he has lost real interest in the job. He is running hard (first time in a while) but I don't like what he has turned into as a councilor. He has sided with irrational and misguided neighbors over zoning issues in Brooksby Farms (going against the recommendation of the City's experts in order to placate a few vocal locals.) But more importantly, while I have heard him blame the CC for inaction on many issues... he is PART OF THAT PROBLEM and has been powerless to do anything about it for too long. Time to give someone else a chance to try.
But enough about why Driscoll has lost my support. I think Grayson has a future in Peabody politics. He is young and bright and full of energy and ideas... and idealism as well. And while idealism alone is NOT enough to change the world... it is better than a "No We Can't" attitude that the current City Council membership seems to rejoice in.
Prediction: This one will probably NOT be close... Bob Driscoll will win.

Ward 6

Endorsement: Barry Sinewitz
Why? Or rather... WHAT?? How can I endorse Sinewitz? I do not personally find Councilor Sinewitz to be either well informed or particularly gracious in his actions as a councilor here in Peabody. I certainly often disagree with his opinions and voting record, but mostly I dislike his reactionary style of politics. And yet I am endorsing him.
His opponent, Mr. Sheehan is perhaps a fine fellow... but he has yet to make that clear to the people. I NEVER FULLY TRUST what I read online... but then he goes and makes the Westside a linchpin in his campaign when given an open opportunity in the Salem News article. I am beginning to see why so many people see him as a non-candidate.
Prediction: This one will be a landslide and Barry Sinewitz will win easily.

I welcome comments and thoughts on the Ward Councilor races here. I will be posting additional posts on the At-Large and the School Committee races.

I will not bother to look at the other races as the race for Mayor is a joke and Bonfanti will win by a huge margin (with no real competition) and as for the other races????? Who cares?

Election Endorsements and Predictions????????? Good Idea...

A person posted here asking if I would be making any endorsements of candidates for office in the City of Peabody. They also wanted to know predictions about who I thought might actually win.

This is a good idea for a post. I will need to do some research into ALL the candidates first... at least those who are running in races against someone else.

Sadly, I (like Needham's Corner) have had few candidates visit my home. One was here (Grayson, Ward 4 challenger) in person and two others (Driscoll, Ward 4 incumbent and Hochman, School Committee challenger) left literature when no one was home.

I am very desirous of knowing what these candidates stand for and what they see as the future path for Peabody. I have read the local papers, gone to websites and facebook pages, I have even asked some directly for these answers... and received little, if anything, in return.

So while I do not feel that competent to discuss some of the other ward challengers, I certainly have an opinion on most of the existing ward councilors and the at-large folks. And the school committee as well... I know the incumbents, but VERY little about the challengers.

Then you have the two that are utterly meaningless... Library Trustee and Electric Light Commission... Frankly... who cares. Library trustee? As long as we don't get a book burner like Bev Dunne in that roll... I could care less. And light plant? I mean what DO they do anyway? That job seems like simply a Free Health Care Position to me.

So I will do some due diligence and start a post very soon on the endorsements and predictions... and I hope everyone will toss in their own two cents in the discussion as well.

I would also be happy to publish the websites of ANY candidates... so please feel free to pass them along in the comments.

More on this to come.

Election Posts - Updated

I have updated all the election blog topics (top left menus) to include the most current information on candidates running for these offices.

This is a place for talking, questioning and politic'ing... but likewise for people holding candidates to the task of explaining what they plan to do if we elect them.

Separate blog topics may be started for more news related items and as we get closer to the November election date.

Ward 1 Primary: Tuesday, 9/15/09

Congratulations to all the candidates in this primary.
And good luck to both leaders in the November elections.

Ward 1 City Councilor Primary was held Tuesday, September 15, 2009.

Peabody Patriot is reporting:

OSBOURNE 360
FORTI 294
CARLI 126

Just a public service here, no editorializing.

The Salem News: Carli says city residents aren't seeing any results

The Salem News: A newcomer, Forti says he is full of 'fresh ideas'

The Salem News: Osborne touts the ability to help his constituents

Peabody Polling Locations are in this brief article in the Peabody Weekly News:

The polls will open on Tuesday at 7 a.m. and close at 8 p.m. and are at the same locations as in citywide elections. Ward 1 residents in precincts 1 and 3 can vote at St. Ann’s Church on Lynn Street, while Precinct 2 residents can vote at Woodbridge Assisted Living Facility at 240 Lynnfield St. (The Precinct 2 poll is no longer at the Peabody-Lynnfield YMCA.)

Any voters who will be out of the city on Tuesday or unable to make it to the polls because of a physical disability or religious observance may vote by absentee ballot. Call the City Clerk’s office at (978) 538-5756 for more information

I am not a resident of Ward 1 so I have little direct contact with any of these gentlemen. I will say this - that I welcome political competition and dislike uncontested races. I also demand that if someone asks me for my vote that they explain exactly why I should vote for them AND why they are the better choice for the office.

Good luck and please vote Ward 1

Local Options: To Tax or Not To Tax?

= = = = = U P D A T E D = = = = =

Mayor Bonfanti says while he sees "both sides of the issue" the City could really use the added tax money.

The Lynn Item: Peabody in pickle on local tax hike

What I don't find very convincing is Mayor Bonfanti's justification for raising the taxes: that the Legislature will be mad at the cities and towns for NOT enacting the taxes while still looking for State relief. To me this sounds like grasping at straws for a reason BESIDES the fact that the City needs more funds... and it seems rather week to me.

The other assertion, that it would be easier if everyone were to enact the increase (Danvers has voted no while Saugus has voted yes) and has the Mayor wishing Salem would pass it to make it easier for Peabody to do the same... is NOT LEADERSHIP! It is being a follower. Stop it and just do the right thing because it is THE RIGHT THING... even if it hurts you in the polls.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The Massachusetts State Legislature has give Cities and Towns the local option to add a local tax onto hotel rooms and/or meals. This would add up to 2% to the cost of a hotel or motel room and up to 0.75% to the cost of a meal in a restaurant.

The Peabody Weekly News: Decision on local luxury tax hikes stalled until fall

Note: The PWN only has stories up for one week

The Salem News Editorial: Nelson Benton: Nothing tasty about meals tax
The Salem News: Megavoke OK'd, Meals tax denied in Danvers
The Salem News: Local Taxes may rise in tough times
The Salem News: Senate OKs hike in sales, alcohol tax
The Boston Globe: Tax options raise interest, with caution
The Boston Globe: Towns consider tax hike

The problem: State aid to Cities and Towns has plummeted in recent years.
The (one small?) solution: Give local communities the ability to gather their own local taxes with an increase in hotel and meals taxes.

This is not a perfect solution, but it is one way to allow Cities and Towns to gather additional income in very difficult financial times.

The reality of the hotel/motel situation is that adding 2% to the hotel room charges would equal around an additional $2.00 a day to the average hotel/motel room in Peabody. And since the vast majority of the people staying these hotels are from out of town... this seems a perfect way to recoup some of the losses in State funding.

The meals tax is a little more personal as it will mostly affect the locals who frequent Peabody restaurants. However, this additional tax is EXTREMELY SMALL... 0.75% in fact, so small that it simply can not be held up as a DETERRENT to folks seeking to have a meal in a local eatery.

The cost of eating out will change very little... in fact, here are some prime examples...

Breakfast at Dunkin Donuts:
Large coffee and a bagel with cream cheese:
$4.38 --------- + 3 cents tax! = $4.41

Lunch at Sonic (just opened on Rt. 1):
A Number 2 (SuperSONIC Cheeseburger Combo w/ medium fries + drink)
$5.99 --------- + 5 cents tax! = $6.04

Dinner at Sugarcane (for two):
Hot & Sour soup (2), Crab Rangoon, Orange Duck, General Gau's Chicken, and 2 (!) Scorpion Bowls
$64.00 --------- + 48 cents tax! = $64.48

Special Romantic Evening Out for 2 at Legal Seafoods
2 signature cocktails, oysters and coconut shrimp appetizers, shared large Caesar salad, surf & turf (shrimp & scallops), grilled wild salmon, bottle of wine ($45), 2 signature desserts and cappuccinos
$190.00 --------- + $1.43 tax! = $191.43

This should pretty much prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this additional amount of tax would do NO ONE any harm and indeed would NOT change anyone's plans to stop in for a quick bite... or an evening of fine dining.

Now on to the man who cost Peabody $300,000...
Thanks to Councilor Rico Mello - who seems perpetually stuck in some other reality - the City Council will not take up the discussion on these local taxes - NOT EVEN DISCUSS IT!?! - until the Fall... thus losing out on approximately $300,000 in additional City revenues that Mayor Bonfanti proposed applying towards desperately needed road and sidewalk repairs.

Now I am NOT saying I think we should allocate these moneys to ANY ONE project... and if we DO pick only one... roads and sidewalks are NOT the number one need in this City.

But for Councilor Mello to yet again show himself as the OPPONENT OF ANY CHANGE in this City is yet another reason to elect a better representative in the coming elections.

Water Tower... was Dearborn responsible?

I have been looking into this matter a bit. I can't find anything available on the web, or in discussing this with a few people who might recall, that shows that the property developers promised to install a new water tower. The best explanation I heard was that during the discussions and negotiations concerning the development that many different options were brought up but that the only one set into the contract was the (around) $350k that was to be used for "area improvements" and that was earmarked for installation of the pumping station.

The Salem News: Liacos: Peabody shouldn't have to pay for water tower
Peabody Weekly News: Mayor looks to bond for water tower, library repairs
Remember Peabody Weekly web stories do not remain active very long

This development is one of the unfortunate artifacts of the State 40B "snob zoning" rules that allow a developer to circumvent local rules and regulation to build large, multi-family housing developments in Cities and Towns that do not meet State requirements for affordable housing.

The original proposals (I believe) were turned down, and then the developer came back with the ultimate threat... work with us to make our project happen (and have a little bit of say in the matter) or we will go to the State and get permission to build whatever we wish up on that site. It was blackmail pure and simple.

And blackmail that was sanctioned by the State in its zeal to force snobbish communities like Concord, Boxford and Weston to allow ANY multifamily development. However, like many "good deeds" the new rules had a different affect - one that affected more modest communities that often already had quite a bit of affordable housing... but just didn't meet the very high standards set by the State.

So ultimately it comes down to the fact that the City decided to play ball with the developers in order to get some say in (and some concessions from) the development.

I guess there is a bigger issue here, well two actually.

The first is the issue of who really should be paying for public improvements in a City like Peabody? I mean when my house was built, the original owner did not need to pay for a water tower or treatment plant in order to construct this house. He rightly so assumed his taxes would be his contribution to the systems that service all the homes in Peabody.

Likewise, if the City decides it needs to widen a portion of a road in West Peabody, I would assume that my taxes (I live in Ward 4) would be used to pay for this action... and that the City would NOT bill only the homes along the stretch of road being widened.

So why do so many people think that when someone else wishes to use their property (for a single house, or a business or a development) that they should be responsible for footing the entire bill for the City services that will be needed to accommodate these new additions?

Is this just another iteration of the NO NEW DEVELOPMENT mentality? You know... the one that says... "It was OK for me to build MY HOUSE... but now that I live here... there are too many other people! SO NO MORE HOUSING!" This is the main attitude I hear from many Peabody folks... sadly they forget that their neighbors didn't want them to build their house either!

The second issue revolves around who we elect to be the stewards of our City. I mean, and I can't say this any other way, but why do we elect stupid people? I call someone stupid when they agree to, and then sign a contract, WITHOUT READING IT TO KNOW WHAT IT SAYS???? Now, maybe Councilor Liacos wasn't personally responsible for signing the contract (or maybe even approving these conditions) but if he was so adamant about protecting the citizens of Peabody (and he is sure screaming about this quite loudly right now) WHY DIDN'T HE READ THE FINAL LANGUAGE IN THE AGREEMENTS??

And to come back now years later and say, "but that's what I thought I heard" is not an act of good governanace, it is an excuse... and a poor one at that.

Peabody should join into the new North Shore Technical High School

Peabody needs to join into (and be a leader in) the new North Shore Technical and Agricultural High School (NSTAHS).

The State (finally) seems eager to move forward with the NSTAHS (the combination and expansion of Essex Aggie and the North Shore Tech HS) with at least $77 million dollars.

While the other cities and towns involved still need to finalize their involvement, they are all on the way to getting it done.

Except for Peabody which is dragging its heels and putting up false protests in order to delay the process... which will mean that Peabody will end up NOT participating in this most worthwhile endeavor.

Peabody Lynnfield Weekly: Peabody wants more info before joining voke merger

Remember, PLW stories are only online for 1 week

Salem News: New voke school will get $77.5 million from State

Peabody should stop the endless debating and commit to joining (and being the leader in) the new NS Tech HS. Peabody has the largest number of students in technical programs and people are turned away each year. The current facilities at the Higgins are woefully inadequate AND the State has denied funding for the Higgins in the past specifically because the Peabody Voke is located there! The current program is not currently meeting the needs of its students and the equipment and programs are quite far out of date. This program needs to be expanded and modernized and Peabody can not (and will never) do it alone. This is the perfect way to join forces with other cities and town to share the costs, as well as get the State to shoulder much of the responsibities for this good idea.

Now, I am not saying that the City is wrong to want good information about this project (and especially the costs the City will need to provide.) But the fact of the matter is there ARE no guarantees in this world and estimates are just that... subject to change without notice. The idea that in this one instance the City would need such a super fine level of detail in order to make a decision is NOT the usual way things work in this City.

Thus, the delayed decision making seems much more like a stalling tactic than good financial prudence. Basically... if the City waits long enough, the project will simply GO AWAY because the State will pull the funding and we can go back to underfunding the current crappy program we offer our students today.

And if you think this is simply my opinion... read Dave McGeney and Beverly Dunns comments (from the PLW):

School Committee veteran David McGeney, acknowledging that vocational instruction likely incurs higher costs, argued that Peabody’s current course offerings are poor, at best, and should have been addressed years ago.

“Under serving our kids to save money is not what we’re about,” he said, adding that vocational education is often viewed as a “stepchild” to traditional schooling, which he feels has been the case in Peabody as well.

“We’re doing a terrible, terrible disservice to that portion of our student population,” he said.

Dunne agreed, pointing out that vocational programs have been on a “shoestring” budget for decades. She said many of the teachers have to buy simple supplies for students, such as Band-aids and gloves, out of their own pockets.

Sadly these School Committee members can see the folly in underfunding programs when they occur OUTSIDE the School Committees budget - but they were only too happy to be part of the committee that has underfunded the Peabody School System for several years in a row, including this most recent kick in the teeth to the students of Peabody.

Rumor wrong - Doucette NOT running in Ward 6

Well it seems the rumor was wrong and that there was some organized group of posters (or simply one mimicking many) who wished to make it look as if Keith Doucette was running for Ward 6 Councilor. This rumor is and was false.

Here is what I wrote at Keith's Blog:
Note: I am not linking to Keith's blog at his request.

Keith...
I reported a 'rumor,' then it was 'confirmed' by many posters.
Then you pulled your site down.
This all seemed to fit.
Sorry if you feel wronged again.
Unlike many others I will state when I have made a mistake. This obviously is a mistake and I am sorry if I have offended you (yet again.)

That being said... I am not a paid reporter and do not have all the time in the world to check everything myself. I do not, for instance, call the participants in every news article to confirm the reporters veracity.

However... I probably should have been a little more vigilant when it comes to rumor passing by anonymous sources. I will try and do better.

Bonfanti budget a slap in the face to the future

Much can be said about this deep financial crisis that the world is facing... we are facing it here in Peabody as well. It is up to the wise people who we citizens have elected to make the difficult decisions that will impact each and every one of us.

What is terribly troubling to me is the very people we have entrusted to make these important choices: Will we fund THIS or THAT? Can this road go another season without repair or will we need to replace it completely later? Should we cancel 20 English classes or serve 27 students who wish to learn Greek? Do we buy a new fire truck or repair/rehab the 25 year old one? Should we dip into our savings safety net to pay for ongoing expenses or maintain our high bond rating which saves us money in the long term?

These are all difficult choices and we rely on these people we elect, and a bevy of professional experts to guide them, to come to the best possible answers for all the citizens of this City of Peabody.

So why does it feel like we just screwed all the children of Peabody in an effort to maintain the bragging rights of having the lowest taxes around?

We have decided to step-by-step dismantle the school system because it is the easiest target in the budget crunch game. And from where I have been sitting and watching it most certainly is a game.

The Mayor blames the economy. Patricia Schafer blames the State. The School Committee blames the Mayor. The City Council blames the School Committee. The Mayor threatens everyone. They all (with great regret and heavy hearts) vote to allow the Peabody Public Schools to become the Peabody Public Dump.

Now, like any good game there will be winners and losers.

The Winners:

The Mayor gets praised by everyone who doesn't have children in the school systems and who see lowest taxes as better than educated children. The Mayor wins re-election all the while claiming in his reelection speech that "...another of [his] priorities is education. He said that while new schools were built and MCAS scores are improving, the overall level of education can be lifted higher and the district needs to retool and deal with declining student enrollment." From: Peabody Lynnfield Weekly News

The City Council wins both ways...
~ If you voted FOR the budget you are seen as a proactive, fiscally prudent protector of the elderly and the middle class, blue collar folks here in Peabody... just like the Mayor (see above)
~ If you voted AGAINST the budget (either time) you are seen as a defender of the parents and children of the City of Peabody! Except... you really didn't do ANYTHING except grandstand about something you can't change in the first place. This was pandering and sticking it to the Mayor (or in some cases the School Committee) in order to look Pro Parent and Pro Student when you have done little if anything to help the situation.

Bottom line: Almost all City Councilors will be reelected no matter which way they voted on this matter because there aren't enough parents to change the voting numbers... and the children simply can't vote.

The School Committee wins as well.
Frankly, it doesn't matter if they all voted for the budget or not... the budget was given to them and they had no choice but to make cuts somewhere to meet the numbers. However they all approved the union wages which it turns out is the main reason that the school department was singled out as the only department that needed to make ANY LAYOFFS... everyone else who works for the City is INDISPENSABLE while 73 people in the school department (don't worry, they say it will be less) ARE COMPLETELY UNNEEDED AND UNNECESSARY.

But the School Committee did get to LOOK GOOD as they were destroying the schools... they saved THIS program and THAT position... usually to the cheers of some very vocal group of parents, teachers, admins, etc. So they too will look like the valiant fighters who went into a losing battle and were able to snatch a few key nuggets of education for our youths. They all get reelected.

Hmmm. Yeah if all these folks win... somebody has to lose, right? Sadly you all know who…

Our children are the losers.
And when they lose, we all lose.

Peabody, your taxes are too low and your priorities are misplaced. And sadly, your leaders are failing you while they leave the next generation of Peabody citizens to fend for themselves.

Mayor's Budget is in and it is 100% Anti Education

I was appalled when I read about the cuts the City of Peabody is planning for the 2010 budget.. 100% of the job cuts will be coming from the school department. 100%!!!

NO CUTS in the public services department. NO CUTS in the fire department. NO CUTS in the police department. NO CUTS in ANY OF THE OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES:

• Assessor's Office
  
• Auditor's Office
  
• Central Switchboard
  
• City Clerk's Office
  
• Collector's Office
  
• Community Development
  
• Custodian
  
• Emergency Management/ Civil Defense
  
• Finance and Administration
  
• Health Department
• Human Resources
• Inspectors' Office
• North Shore Home Consortium
• Office of Information Technology
• Purchasing Department
• Treasurer's Office
  
• Veterans Services Department
• Water Billing Office
• Workers Compensation Office
  
• Brooksby Farm
• Cemetery
  
• Legal Department
  
• Council on Aging
  
• George Peabody House Museum/ Civic Center
• Peabody Library
• McVann-O'keefe Skating Rink
  
• Parks, Recreation and Forestry or
  
• The Meadow of Peabody Golf Course.

That's right. The only place that had people fired because of budget reasons was THE PEABODY SCHOOL SYSTEM. NOT ONE OTHER DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY NEEDS TO MAKE A SINGLE CUT!

I think that this is the first time I will need to agree with the often repeated comment by visitors to these blogs...

MAYOR BONFANTI IS NOT THE EDUCATION MAYOR.

The Salem News: An Overview of the 2010 Budget
The Salem News: Bonfanti plans to weather another term

This is the systematic disassembling of the Peabody School System. I have no problem with the shrinking enrollments... in that case be SMART and close a school to consolidate students and continue to provide quality education. BUT NO. Instead we will hack away at the very people who provide the educational opportunities to our children that will lay the groundwork for the rest of their lives.

According to the article:

The school department has about 800 full-time employees compared to 457 for the remaining city departments. The school layoffs reflect the district's declining enrollment, Bonfanti said.

"You just can't keep hiring people," Bonfanti said. "There's got to be a point in time when you right-size."

City departments, he said, have done a better job keeping spending in check and leaving positions unfilled. "We've always run lean," Bonfanti said.

This is short sighted and will anger many in the community. However... it is politically saavy as Peabody's median population is over 40... meaning that the majority of voters in the City DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM ANY LONGER. Thus the Mayor is promising CUTS to the school system and making the seniors (and others) very happy with only a tiny tax increase.

Now to make matters worse... Bonfanti has now PROMISED to build a new ASSISTED LIVING CENTER on the property at the Torigian Life Center (senior center.) I have no problem with additional assisted living centers as I think it is good for our seniors to have choices for living arrangements. I do not think that the City needs to be the developer for such an enterprise - especially in a market with many opportunites readily available.

There are 8,398 citizens over 65 living in Peabody. And they have a realively new senior center for their use. YET... we have more than 8,800 children aged 5-19 living in the City (according to the 2000 US Census.) This administration (and others) have talked (and talked and talked) about a facility for these children - a teen center or a youth center - BUT NOTHING EVER HAPPENS. Yes, they do have a Skate Park (thank you Vera Kolias), but that is not enough.

Does this not serve as yet another indication that the children of Peabody are MUCH LESS IMPORTANT than everyone else in this City? You can NOT call yourself the EDUCATION MAYOR and do these kinds of things to the youth you pretend to serve.

Some New Life For Downtown?

Two projects were in the news concerning the Downtown area and they both are making me hopeful that we are on a path towards a better, more vibrant, Downtown Peabody. Now these things alone will not save or change anything, and let's face it, a CVS is just another separate parking, 'disconnected' store... but its a start.

The Peabody Lynnfield Weekly News:
Gateway site to city finally sees shovels in the ground
The Peabody Lynnfield Weekly News:
City moves ahead on second grant for Walnut St park
Note: the PLWN only maintains its web new for approximately one week

The Salem News: Legal spat aside, 'gateway CVS is a go


While I really can't imaging the need for an additional big-box drug store in Downtown (I mean we have the Walgreens on Main and the Walgreens just down the road in Salem) I will admit that I am not an expert on retail establishment real estate. So this new store will be just about half way between the two Walgreens.

The architectural rendering is very nice... but they always are. The proof will be in the pudding... will it look this nice when it is done? I certainly hope so. And let's face it, it is replacing a gigantic eye sore that has been looking worse everyday for the last 5 years.

I do hope that the city will be receiving some funding for the Riverwalk project (in land or $$$ - or both) as it will only make the area more attractive and thus better for all the stores in the area. Add this to the new gas station that Stop & Shop is planning and Howley Street will be rather spiffed up.

The Walnut Street Park is also back in the news - perhaps this time more for the fact that it DIDN'T result in yet another fracas at the City Council meeting.

It seem that Councilors Mello and Sinewitz have decided to not try and block the forward momentum towards building the park but, as Councilor Mello said, he is still against it.

“There’s no mistake that I was against this,” Mello said last month, adding that he now supported the plans with “great reservation.”

My guess is that " ...support[ing] the plan with great reservation" is code for I hate this project, but I better get on board because it is going to happen anyway. And I can only surmise that in the future one of two outcomes will happen:

1) The Park will be a failure: Mello will be handing out the blame saying "I TOLD YOU SO!"

2) The Park will be a success: Mello will be in the front of the line accepting the praise for his good work.

But enough about that. I am just happy that the majority of the Council and the administration recognise the wonderful potential this park holds.

Westside Restaurant Updated

It seems to me like the Peabody Weekly News is becoming a better source of good reporting than any other newspaper around. Here is an update from them regarding the Westside Restaurant special permit and the ensuing controversies

The Peabody & Lynnfield Weekly News:
Council postpones vote on alcohol license for Westside
Note: PLWN articles are only available for approximately one week

I sincerely appreciate Councilor Bettencourt informing the public as to the nature of the emergency that led to the recess of the City Council meeting that evening. I am especially glad to hear that everyone is now fine and that his family is safe.

I stand by my previous comments that the meeting should not have been stopped. The fact that one councilor was not able to be present for the meeting (even though he did attend part of it) is irrelevant.

A quorum is the minimum number of meeting members that need to be present in order for official business to take place. For the City Council that number is 6.

Now a special permit needs to have a super majority (in this case 8 votes) in order to be approved. Thus, with Councilor Manning choosing to vote no the die was cast for the special permit to fail.

This is why I called into question the shenanigans that went on with Councilor Bettencourt's emergency call. It was not that he was responding to a family emergency - of course any good parent would have left to take care of his family - it was the closing of the meeting to prevent the special permit from failing.

Aside: I have reviewed all my comments made concerning this matter. I find that I have consistently sought WHY the meeting was postponed instead of continuing and I questioned the legitimacy of such actions. I also stated that IF the entire emergency was a concoction used to postpone the proceedings, that such actions would have been reprehensible. And because of the actions by the Council AFTER the departure of Councilor Bettencout, I felt it was important that it be reported what actually happened.

And while this apparently angered a few readers, it seems Councilor Bettencourt also felt the need to share the reasons for his departure with the press.

UPDATED: Westside Restaurant zoning controversy

** UPDATED IN NEW POST **

I don't really have an opinion either way about beer and wine at the Westside. I've never eaten there and I don't know anything about the restaurant's relationship with the neighborhood.

But I wonder where Councilor Athas got his law degree?? He fails to account for the entire section 1.5 Nonconformance of the Peabody Zoning Ordinance.

The Salem News: Westside seeks alcohol license
The Salem News Our View: Councilor didn;t want to hear it
The Salem News Letters to the Editor: Alcohol has no place in residential neighborhoods

Note: This post is written by Peabody Roundtable member Needham's Corner and may differ from the views of the Peabody Insider

A little background: when the Mass. Legislature adopted the Zoning Enabling Act (the "modern" act mostly dates from 1975, but there was a provision for nonconformance in the 1920 Act as well), they wanted a way to make sure that then-existing uses and structures would not be made illegal by subsequent local zoning ordinances and thus be considered a "taking" under the state and federal constitutions.

Our Peabody ordinance has a similar provision. It reads in part as follows:

"Any existing nonconforming use of a structure…may be changed or extended…provided that the special permit granting authority [that's the City Council, folks] determines, after a public hearing, by the grant of a special permit that such change, extension or alteration:
has adequate provision for offstreet parking; [and]
is similar in character, intensity of use, effect on adjacent property [and] effect on public hearing, morals, or safety as to be not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood, than the existing nonconforming use…

Conditions may be placed on the special permit.

Westside is an existing nonconforming use, because it is in a residential district, and restaurants aren't allowed in that residential district.

But hold the phone: what this section of the ordinance means to this non-attorney observer is that the City Council COULD allow the restaurant use to be "changed or extended" to allow beer and wine IF (and only if) the Council found, after a public hearing, that there was enough parking, and that the restaurant with beer/wine was similar enough to a restaurant WITHOUT beer and wine so as not to be "substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood" (get out your dictionaries, folks).

Court opinions rely on dictionary definitions all the time. I'm no legal scholar but I've read a number that do. I guess Councilor Sinewitz hasn't read those. But maybe before he blasts City Solicitor Christopher (who IS an attorney) perhaps he and Councilor Athas would like to read the WHOLE zoning ordinance, not just randomly opine that because the restaurant is in a residential district they can't have beer and wine. Whine, indeed.

My bottom line: Westside is entitled to have a hearing. The Council should consider how detrimental beer and wine are to the neighborhood, and decide accordingly.

Changes in Peabody Square?

I must say I was a bit surprised this weekend when I saw that Peabody Square had finally gotten some new road stripes painted on the roadway. The old ones had been pretty badly worn away, but I just figured that this was yet another price we pay in Peabody for our unnaturally low tax rate.

THE OLD PEABODY SQUARE LAYOUT

So... hurray! They have finally restriped the road! But wait a second... The traffic entering the Square from Lowell Street can NO LONGER use both the left lane and the center lane to proceed straight onto Main Street...? And the striping that used to show two lanes traveling toward Salem on Main Street..., between Foster and Walgreen's are NO LONGER THERE!

THE NEW LAYOUT (FROM LOWELL ST)

What has happened? It seems that instead of discussing and debating the prospects of turning Main Street into a single-lane road... the new Director of Public Services has decided to start the process without the need for public or Council approval... is this the right way to do things in this City?

THE NEW LAYOUT (FROM MAIN ST)

Now, I am actually in favor of rethinking the traffic flow through downtown... and I very well may decide that the one-lane approach is the best one... but it needs to be discussed and debated and ONLY THEN should a change be made. This smacks of top-down arrogance to me.

Perhaps I am wrong about this... but this doesn't seem like the right way to proceed in these types of matters.