| Author |
 Topic  |
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 03/04/2009 : 08:56:33 AM
|
From today's Independent:
Building Inspector gives Wood Waste 30 days to ‘remove all outdoor storage’
By Keith Spencer
In a more aggressive move within his tackling of the controversial issue, Mayor Carlo DeMaria recently asked Building Inspector James Sheehan to issue a zoning ordinance violation to Wood Waste of Boston owner William Thibeault. The mayor also called for reform to different areas of the zoning ordinances, including fines for violations.
While the mayor maintains that the city does not have jurisdiction over the pile’s heights, he recently admitted that his administration became aware of other possible zoning violations at the Wood Waste facility. At last week’s board meeting, Mayor DeMaria admitted that the building inspector had not realized the business was violating an ordinance, and vowed to rectify the situation.
Building Inspector James Sheehan provided notification to Wood Waste’s owner William Thibeault of the violation at their site the following day. After a recent inspection of the property, a letter was sent to the Boston Street facility last Tuesday, February 24th, giving the company thirty days to rectify the situation. Sheehan had the violation sent via the US Postal Service’s standard and certified mail in addition to a hand delivered copy.
According to a copy of the letter, Wood Waste of Boston at 85-87 Boston Street is in violation of City of Everett Zoning Ordinance Section 21 Industrial Limited District (a) Uses. Section 5. The section reads as the following: “Storage of goods in containers where all storage is contained within the building, not including storage of any raw or natural materials”.
The letter goes on to inform Wood Waste that they must “remove all outdoor storage within 30 days”, and failure to do so would “result in daily fines for all violations” as called for by the City of Everett’s Zoning Ordinance Section 13 Violations and Penalties.
According to the section, Thibeault’s violation of the ordinance after the thirty days notice “shall, for each offence, and for each and every day that such offense continues, shall subject to a fine of not more than twenty dollars ($20.00)”.
In a brief interview with Mayor Carlo DeMaria late last week, the Independent asked DeMaria if he was happy with the $20 fine attached to the zoning violation. DeMaria responded that he was “absolutely not happy” with them, declaring that the zoning fines were “not up to 2009 standards”. DeMaria assured that his administration will continue addressing a number of zoning issues, “especially where we’re trying to attract more developers to the city”.
The mayor would not venture to comment on whether or not thirty days was enough time for the removal of all the outdoor storage at the Wood Waste facility. The piles have gathered for quite some time with the company’s representatives indicating at past City Council meetings that it would be a long process to remove all of the materials safely. DeMaria would also not comment on whether or not Mr. Thibeault would remove the piles out of his own general interest at this point in the controversy.
While he hopes Wood Waste will “comply with the violation” so that “we’ll see progress soon”, DeMaria and his administration are continuing to prepare additional measures to get the site into compliance with all applicable city and state ordinances and laws.
After a meeting with state officials from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) last week, Mayor DeMaria also indicated his office would be looking to potentially issuing a cease and desist order in addition to the minimal fines. The mayor indicated that his administration is “intensely investigating every additional step possible” to get the piles into compliance.
With no discussion of the topic at this week’s meeting of the Common Council, it is sure to come up at next week’s meeting of the board of aldermen. Mayor DeMaria asked the board last week to wait and see if Wood Waste owner William Thibeault responded to a March 1st good faith gesture deadline to submit construction plans of an enclosed facility at the Revere Beach Parkway site.
DeMaria has previously stated he has seen the construction plans, noting that they incorporate using the former Adam’s Furniture building located on property adjacent to the current facility on Boston Street. The topic is likely to come up at next week’s meeting in addition to DeMaria’s consent agreement, which has been under negotiation for more than two months.
Since the last meeting, DeMaria has also initiated plans to establish better contact with those residents and abutters directly affected by the Wood Waste issue. The mayor is asking that these constituents contact his office and provide information regarding their complaints.
The mayor asks that residents include their name and address in the typewritten complaint sent through the US Postal Service. The mayor’s office will also utilize the city’s website and email so that residents may submit their letters electronically.
All residents who would like to submit written complaints regarding the Wood Waste facility on Boston Street may mail their letters to:
The Mayor’s Office
484 Broadway
Everett, MA 02149
“I’m going to ask all affected residents to submit a written complaints to our office,” said Mayor DeMaria during the interview. “I want to organize these complaints, and finally put together a paper trail that will be necessary in later steps.”
If Thibeault does not comply with the violation, Mayor DeMaria and the city solicitor have indicated that their intention would be to file a short order notice in superior court to get an immediate cease and desist order against Wood Waste. According to the DeMaria administration, the collection of complaints will create a paper trail that will help the city and state agencies in future stages of this dilemma.
A Note to Our Readers
In last week’s article “Mayor: Wood Waste violates zoning ordinances”, the writer referred to Newburyport resident Gillian Stewart’s blog “The Porter Unlimited”. The paper apologizes to Newburyport Current writer Gillian Swart for misspelling her name, and improperly identifying her blog, “The Port Reporter Unlimited”.
"Deb" |
 |
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 03/04/2009 : 11:38:19 AM
|
I don't know about anyone else, but I found the reference to the particular ordinance that has been violated by Wood Waste a little difficult to understand taken out of context. So I included the text of the entire section of the ordinance below for some context:
Industrial Limited District
(a) Uses. In any Industrial District, as indicated on the zoning Map, no building, structure or premises shall be used and not building or structure shall be erected which is intended or designed to be used in whole or in part for any use except as provided herein:
(1) Hotels and motels.
(2) Research and development facilities.
(3) Retail uses where goods are sold or services rendered primarily at retail.
(4) Offices and banks.
(5) Storage of goods in containers where all storage is contained within the building, not including storage of any raw or natural materials.
(6) Light manufacturing entirely contained within the structure with no associated emissions of noxious odors or noise.
(7) Heavy manufacturing by Special Permit providing there is no outside storage work and there is no emissions of noxious odors, smoke or noise, and no vibration discernible on the exterior of the building.
The other thing that you need to be aware of is the area of the industrial limited district. It is generally the area between the Revere Beach Parkway and the MBTA railway bound on the ends by Bailey Street and the Chelsea line. A more specific description is found at the beginning of Section 21 of the Zoning Ordinance.
To me, there seem to be a lot of businesses in that area that don't fall into the description of what is allowed there. The only logical explanation that I can think of for that is that this zoning is relatively new and these businesses are grandfathered in under the old zoning. The current ordinance itself doesn't give any indication of that however.
Since I was the one to criticize them for it, I was glad to see that the paper printed a correction to last week's Wood Waste article. Right move. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 03/04/2009 : 11:51:38 AM
|
The Everett Independent, Wednesday, March4, 2005
Editorial
THE MAYOR AND WOOD WASTE
Mayor Carlo DeMaria has shown a great deal of interest in making certain that Wood Waste of Everett conforms to local regulations and ordinances.
With great difficulty, over a long period of time, the mayor has been able to do that, but not to everyone’s liking.
There are those who simply don’t want to acknowledge Wood Waste’s right to exist, who believe, also, that Wood Waste shouldn’t have any rights in court or even in the court of public opinion.
There are those who don’t believe Wood Waste serves any kind of purpose except to ruin the city of Everett, which, frankly, isn’t the case.
When Wood Waste emit’s a powerful odor , the city jumps to have it controlled.
When Wood Waste appears to have extended its use beyond the regulation, the city jumps to have it controlled.
Bottom line, the mayor has the ability to exercise his judgement when it comes to Wood Waste - and he often has.
During this time when the economy is in a dramatic downward spiral, Wood Waste is still willing to explore further investments in Everett.
It, is our judgment that a company willing to invest money, hire employees, and contribute more taxes to the city of Everett should be given that chance.
And when they run afoul of the law, they should be made to comply.
Those asserting that the mayor is responsible for Wood Waste ought to remember that Wood Waste has been in Everett a lot longer than Carlo DeMaria has been mayor.
The mayor is doing a good job in the down market.
He has also done a credible job of forcing Wood Waste to conform.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
charm
Senior Member
264 Posts |
Posted - 03/04/2009 : 9:02:32 PM
|
| I think the mayor wants this to go away and he is going to do nothing the smell will be there for the next 20 years I do not believe anything Carlo says anymore |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 03/04/2009 : 9:30:17 PM
|
It been hard but I've held off commenting on the above editorial from today's Independent. It pretty much made me livid but I thought that I would give others the opportunity to respond to it before I did. But now it's my turn. So, let's get to it.
In response to an Independent editorial about two months ago, I wrote the following: "But what they shouldn't be allowed to do is to go back and rewrite history to suit their own agenda." Looks like that may become a statement that I may need to keep in my back pocket when discussing Independent editorials.
While Mayor DeMaria has given great lip service to making certain that Wood Waste conforms to local regulations and ordinances, up until a couple of month ago, the Mayor's self professed method of dealing with Wood Waste was to work with them to get what the city needed from them because "you get more bees with honey".
Yes, it's been a difficult situation over a long period of time, but can the Independent please tell us how the Mayor has been able to get Wood Waste to conform with local regulations and ordinances? One statement that I would to agree with though is that the mayor's handling of the Wood Waste situation has not been to everyone’s liking.
But that's not the only statement from the editorial that I agree with. Yes, there are those who simply don’t want to acknowledge Wood Waste’s right to exist and believe that Wood Waste shouldn’t have any rights in court either. The same is true of the court of public opinion but Wood Waste doesn't seem to have many defenders there.
Yes, there are those who don’t believe Wood Waste serves any kind of purpose except to ruin the city of Everett. But if that isn't the case, what is? Personally, I feel that the city is nothing more than a pawn in Mr. Thibeault's efforts to maximize profits. There's nothing wrong with making money, as long as you do it the right way.
The city "jumps" to control Wood Waste? That's why it took a resolution by the BOA to have the Mayor, thru the Board of Health, slap a cease and desist order on Wood Waste before the idea of a consent agreement was ever explored in any meaningful way. That's why it also took the BOA to initiate the removal of the piles because of a zoning violation. And how many times have we heard the words "It stinks down there!" from the Mayor himself? Doesn't sound like a lot of jumping to me.
Their bottom line isn't that far off the mark. The Mayor does have some right to exercise his judgment when it comes to Wood Waste and there is no doubt that he often has. That doesn't mean that the voters of the city are going to agree with his actions.
Yes, Wood Waste has been in Everett a lot longer than Carlo DeMaria has been mayor and he shouldn't be blamed for all of the problems associated with Wood Waste. I don't think that most people do that. For the most part, I believe that people are just critical of his handling of the issue since he has been in office, which is their right.
With all that said, I don't know how the editorial can end with the statement "He has also done a credible job of forcing Wood Waste to conform." If the subject of this editorial had been praising the Mayor for his sudden, new found interest in seemingly actually coming around to finally doing what a majority of people want done with Wood Waste, I probably would have found myself writing a very different commentary tonight. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 03/04/2009 : 11:45:25 PM
|
I was so disgusted with that propaganda editorial that I had to walk away from it. I agree with your post but I also think you were too kind.
After seeing that paper today and the way the article, "Building Inspector gives Wood Waste 30 days to" ‘remove all outdoor storage’ was literally buried on the obituaries page, just made me ill. With an editorial like THAT, he is turning into "The little Advocate" |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 03/18/2009 : 08:01:11 AM
|
Separation Incentive May Reduce Layoffs
By Keith Spencer
In an attempt to battle difficult economic times ahead, Mayor Carlo DeMaria offered some city employees a ‘separation incentive’ last week to leave their employment with the city of Everett. The Mayor discussed the program, the shaping of his next budget, and the projects submitted for consideration of federal stimulus funds in a sit-down earlier this week.
“We are offering cash incentives for city employees to retire or to separate themselves from their appointments here in Everett,” said Mayor DeMaria. “Our goal is to not have to fund those positions again.”
The separation incentive program was established to encourage veteran members of various city departments to retire early or to separate themselves from their positions within the City of Everett. This ‘special incentive’ was offered to all city employees, excluding school department and housing authority employees.
If an employee chooses to separate themselves from the city, the employee will be entitled to a “one-time bonus payment”. Members of the police and fire departments will receive $25,000 in addition to any unused vacation and sick leave buy back entitled under union contract if they are retiring. All department heads will receive a one-time bonus of $17,500 in addition to any vacation or sick leave buyback.
Other full-time employees and non-Union, non-department heads are entitled to a bonus payment of $12,500 while part-time employees that are non-elected officials could see a potential $5,000 bonus. Those employees interested must file their intention to separate from their employment no later than March 27th. Those employees choosing separation will end their employment on May 1st. Bonuses will be paid out on May 22nd.
If employees separate themselves, the position will not filled according to statements from Mayor DeMaria. If department heads leave their posts, “city employees from within the department will be elevated” and their positions will not be filled. Although public safety is “a major concern” for his administration, DeMaria also noted that any positions to open up in the fire or police departments as result of the incentive program will be left vacated as well.
While the mayor expressed his belief that this new program could alleviate the total number of layoffs, DeMaria acknowledged, “It will not solve the problem”. According to the Mayor, the city may face a cut of up to $2.5 million if there is no movement on Beacon Hill in the coming weeks. With increases to healthcare costs, local receipts down, and several other problems, the city could face “a deficit of $6 to $7 million” in the coming year.
Required to submit his budget by May 15th, the Mayor stated that he can no longer wait for Governor Patrick and potential initiatives that could aid bay state towns and cities during the current economic crisis. DeMaria is “planning appropriately”, and hopes that local initiatives put in place like the incentive program will alleviate some of the burden.
“I’m not looking to levy your taxes for $7 million,” noted DeMaria. “So, unfortunately, we are going to have to make cuts. The only thing that I can really control is jobs… [layoffs] are inevitable at this point.”
“We are currently working on the new budget, and we are making cuts,” said Mayor DeMaria. “We are trying other avenues, like the incentive program, to get people to retire or to leave positions. However, it simply won’t be enough.”
In early January, the DeMaria administration submitted four projects to the state to be considered for inclusion in President Obama’s planned stimulus package. The city’s four projects amount to nearly $18 million in funding that would improve facilities in Everett and other critical infrastructure improvements. The projects included plans to renovate the Shute Memorial Library, to complete the Everett portion of the Northern Strand Community Trail, and to make street and storm water culvert repairs on Beacham and Market Streets.
In an interview earlier this year, DeMaria called all four projects “major improvements” to the city, and said they were all “absolutely necessary”. However, the Mayor expressed concern about the future of these projects because “no one really has a sense of what’s going on” after speaking with House and Senate leadership, Congressman Markey, and state officials charged with the task of appropriating the stimulus money.
The city included these “shovel-ready” projects that fall in with the state’s guidelines for the proposed stimulus projects. DeMaria has confirmed that all four projects currently remain on the unreviewed list maintained. According to the Mayor, who seemed frustrated over the situation, he should learn more about the status of federal stimulus money at his next Municipal Mayors Association Meeting on March 26th. The Mayor acknowledged these projects might have to be put on hold if they are not funded through stimulus money.
The impact of the economic crisis has been felt in cities and towns across Massachusetts who are also bracing for massive cuts and layoffs. In January, Governor Patrick announced nearly $130 million in cuts back to the FY09 budget and a $375 million reduction the FY10 budget.
DeMaria has already worked with department heads and other city officials to make $860,000 in cuts to balance the current fiscal year’s budget. However, the Mayor and his administration plan to dedicate an enormous amount of time in the coming weeks to preparing their budget.
“We are working hard on the budget,” acknowledged DeMaria. “It is certainly not an easy task when we are talking reductions of this size. We will do our best to put forward a budget that addresses the concerns of the city’s residents.”
"Deb" |
|
|
|
imbroglio
Member
47 Posts |
Posted - 03/18/2009 : 09:59:44 AM
|
| That editorial defending Marcus was nothing short of pathetic. The matter of an elected public official becoming involved in this sort of situation is absolutely newsworthy. Unfortunately, it was totally ignored by the three local rags. The Herald was simply doing their job and I appreciate that. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
 Posted - 03/18/2009 : 10:39:01 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by imbroglio
That editorial defending Marcus was nothing short of pathetic. The matter of an elected public official becoming involved in this sort of situation is absolutely newsworthy. Unfortunately, it was totally ignored by the three local rags. The Herald was simply doing their job and I appreciate that.
Agreed! |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2009 : 08:24:14 AM
|
The Everett Independent, Wednesday, March 25, 2009
An Interview with Ward 5 Alderman Robert Van Campen
By Keith Spencer
As a vocal opponent of the DeMaria administration’s Wood Waste policies, Alderman Robert Van Campen once again spoke out at Monday’s Board of Aldermen meeting. The ward 5 alderman sat down the Independent later that evening, and discussed the Wood Waste, Consent Agreement, the Separation Incentive Program, and a potential mayoral run.
Independent – You described your reaction to the consent agreement earlier this meaning about the controversial Wood Waste issue. What is your biggest issue with the agreement?
RVC – The agreement does nothing more than further prolong and delay this issue. The Mayor had a chance to resolve this issue once and for all, and he failed. In fact, if you go back to the Board of Aldermen meeting on February 23rd, this administration actually told the people of Everett that it would be pursuing a cease and desist order. That's the road we should be traveling with respect to this business. Unfortunately, this administration has flipped its position and chosen the less aggressive approach.
Independent – Do you believe the agreement provides the city with any "teeth" if it becomes involved in any future litigation with Wood Waste should there be any violations?
RVC - Alderman DiPerri and I specifically requested the inclusion of additional language dealing with fines and the imposition of a cease and desist order for any failure to abide by the agreement. The document that the board of health signed says nothing about those items, notwithstanding that this administration had been saying it would include the cease and desist language. Although the people of Everett have been reading headlines about what a great victory this is, one need only read the agreement to see that that is not the case.
Independent - Do you believe the load amounts established by the agreement will bring relief to residents and abutters affected by Wood Waste?
RVC - Any reduction in the piles, which are in clear violation of the City's zoning ordinance, will provide much needed relief to the citizens of Everett. Unfortunately, the agreement does not spell out the process by which the City will be able to verify how much tonnage is leaving the site. Recently, I believe the Mayor mentioned that there is about 80,000 tons of material on site. At a rate of 50 tons per week, it will take over 30 years to clear the mess down there! At that rate, who are we providing relief to?
Independent - Where do you and the BOA go next with this issue?
RVC - Given the less than complete agreement this administration has negotiated, the only responsible thing for the Board of Aldermen and the Common Council to do is continue pushing the Mayor and his team to issue a cease and desist order. Unfortunately, this consent agreement only allows this whole issue to drag along indefinitely without any real relief for the long-suffering residents of Everett.
Independent - You have also sponsored a resolution this week that called upon the mayor to discuss the separation incentive program offered to city employees. What is your reaction to the program?
RVC - In theory it sounds like a good program. Of course, it will only succeed if it results in a cost savings to the people of Everett. My hope is that the Mayor will be to update us once again, setting out what the benefits to the City will be, both in dollars saved and layoffs avoided. Until I better understand the Mayor's thinking on this, I cannot speculate on whether it will truly save money.
Independent – The mayor will submit his budget by May 15th, and it is obvious that the city will be facing some shortfalls. Do you for see cooperation between the City Council and the Mayor's office to get a budget that provides the taxpayers with the services they need and cuts costs in an efficient manner?
RVC - I foresee a very spirited debate about the budget. Within a month of his taking office, and knowing how difficult our finances were going to become, I pushed Mayor DeMaria to cut $1,000,000 from the FY09 budget. This would have drastically lessened the pain this year. Unfortunately, he failed to do that and added jobs and higher salaries to an already high budget. Given the massive reductions in state aid, his job now becomes much harder, especially given the jobs and salaries which have been added under this administration. I assume a majority of members will support the Mayor's budget, but that will only be after some very spirited debate about the city's spending priorities.
Independent – Anyone who follows Everett politics knows that many residents are speculating your involvement in this fall’s mayoral race. Have you made a decision regarding the race? If you decide to forgo the mayoral race, will you be seeking reelection to the board of aldermen?
RVC - It's always flattering to have people think of me as a potential mayoral candidate. At this point, I am enjoying my life, which involves spending as much time as possible with my wife Lisa and our daughter Lily, as well as continuing to serve the people of Everett as an Alderman. So, no decision has been made to run for Mayor. If I do not seek higher office, I will absolutely seek re-election in order to continue my service on the Board of Aldermen.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2009 : 1:58:38 PM
|
Anybody remember the issue of Boston businesses on this side of the river getting unmetered water from Everett's tab? I guess the city has come to agreement with Boston on how Everett will be compensated for this water. This is the first paragraph of the article from this week's Independent (The same info is in this week's Leader-Herald):
"Mayor Carlo DeMaria Jr. recently signed an agreement between the City of Everett and the Boston Water and Sewer Commission, requiring the City of Boston to pay a lump sum payment of $31,000 and make quarterly payments equal to 50 percent of billed water usage."
Huh?? Am I reading this right? Maybe the City of Boston is due some type of small administrative fee for being in the loop; but, 50% of the water bill? I'm sure that this will be hailed as another victory for the city. Another question. Who is picking up the sewerage tab for these places?
In this week's Independent's "In Brief" column, in the piece about the Governor's proposal to make up the short fall in funding foundation budgets from stimulus, there in a quote of note from old "friend", FFF. It reads as follows:
"This influx of money will lessen the impact of the shortfall in the fiscal 2010 budget."
Again, huh?? Unless the city is not planning to meet its school funding obligation, which I'd doubt, where is the shortfall? The article then goes on to say that the school department will be able to start new program and hire more people because their foundation budget was made whole. And still he complains.
And just because I am usually so harsh on the paper, I thought that the editorial on Wood Waste in the Eye on Everett column was very fair and balanced; I can't say the same about the other Wood Waste editorial though. But since the Wood Waste status quo has changed so dratically in the last couple of days, let's leave it at that for now. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2009 : 09:57:01 AM
|
An editorial from today's Independent:
Robert Van Campen's Interview
The Independent's interview last week with Alderman Robert Van Campen included a very telling political tidbit.
Van Campen, who has often been mentioned as a possible mayoral candidate, was careful to say that he will be seeking re-election as an alderman first while everything political he may be speculating about will remain in second place.
In saying so, he has virtually eliminated himself from the mayoral playing field in the upcoming election.
In doing so, he shows great common sense.
The mayor is riding a wave of popularity.
The perception among voters in Everett, and among businessmen and homeowners, is that the mayor is doing the right thing.
He's been an everyday mayor, accessible, proactive, and during his first term, the city has remained solvent during the down economics times the state is experiencing.
Had Van Campen decided to run this time around, we don't believe he could have beaten the mayor.
In fact, there is no one in politics in Everett today who could mount a campaign and beat the mayor.
The mayor is on the rise.
Right now, he is unbeatable.
The Van Campen interview pointed to that.
Now, the question is, how long will Van Campen remain an alderman before getting to the real business of his life, which is the law? |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2009 : 10:38:34 AM
|
WOW..........I would not have believed that editorial was coming directly from the administration, if it wasn't for the very last line...that was a dead giveaway.
Robert Van Campen has not been making it a free ride for them, like 80% of the city council, for what ever reason, and they think baby editorials like that can change facts of the behavior of the mayor, and his people.......We are smarter than that.
They should look at their ethical judgments before this crap goes to print. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2009 : 10:56:21 AM
|
Does the editorial writer for the Independent read his own paper? Although the full interview is available a few posts back, let's look at the actual text right here as it pertains to Alderman's Van Campens's current political intentions.
Independent – Anyone who follows Everett politics knows that many residents are speculating your involvement in this fall’s mayoral race. Have you made a decision regarding the race? If you decide to forgo the mayoral race, will you be seeking reelection to the board of aldermen?
RVC - It's always flattering to have people think of me as a potential mayoral candidate. At this point, I am enjoying my life, which involves spending as much time as possible with my wife Lisa and our daughter Lily, as well as continuing to serve the people of Everett as an Alderman. So, no decision has been made to run for Mayor. If I do not seek higher office, I will absolutely seek re-election in order to continue my service on the Board of Aldermen.
Huh? Did this editorial writer have the Mayor interpret this interview for him after His Honor finished with the consent agreement? I'd agree that the interview, at best, gives nothing more a lukewarm possibility that Alderman Van Campen may still run for mayor but it is, in no way, what is described in the editorial.
Maybe I live in a very sheltered part of the world where I get most of my information from the various Everett message boards. But I just don't see the support for the Mayor the same way as the editorial writer. Has the Mayor done some good things in his time in office? I think that it would be disingenuous (been using that word a lot lately) to say no. But it also be wrong to say that he has done more than a few things that many appear to be in disagreement with. Is the mayor accessible? I don't know personally: but, if the posts over on Topix are to be believed, the people that are upset with situation at the Rec Center would tell you no. Is the city insolvent. Of course not. Was the city in better shape to handle the 9C cuts better than other cities and towns. Apparently so. The only immediate cutback in this fiscal year that has been confirmed is a cutback in hours at the Shute Library. But remember how the cuts where absorbed. By cutting money from the budget that maybe wasn't needed in the first place. Sure, some of the cuts were possible due to the way things played out over the fiscal year but over $800,000 was cut with apparently little impact.
If Alderman Van Campen did run for mayor, would he win? I haven't got a clue. It is a tough, expensive decision that he has to make. And though, at the present time, I would most likely support him over the Mayor, I also have my issues with him as well. I almost agree with the Independent that there are very few others currently in Everett politics who could mount a serious campaign against the mayor. The only other possible candidates either have there own flaws or haven't shown that they currently have a strong desire to hold the position. Someone who is currently on the outside looking in on Everett politics would also have a very hard time unseating the Mayor.
I guess what infuriated me the most about the editorial was its last line which is essential asking when Alderman Van Campen is going to remove himself from the Everett political scene. It really makes you wonder what this editorial was truly about. You might not always agree with Alderman Van Campen or his agenda. But, he is intelligent and usually prepared. Everett city government needs more people like him in every elected office, not less. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2009 : 4:10:31 PM
|
| Do we know what exactly what was cut with the $800,000.00? How an administration can just do that in a whim bothers me. I never really heard an explanation. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Everett Independent
