Grand Hustle: Providence Street Playground pt. 3

I love how the Telegram and Gazette, with Rondo-sized assists from Paul Clancy, District 3 Councilman, Robert Antonelli, Assistant Commissioner of Parks and Public Works, and Robert Moylan, Commissioner of Public Works and Parks, are reporting that the playground on Providence Street is "only" costing between $200k to $300k.

These are the same men that said that there would have to be improvements made to the surrounding area, sidewalks installed and the cost would be around the $455k mark.  Nice way to coveniently forget about $255k to $155k!

The kicker to the T&G article is, "Mr. Antonelli acknowledged that some neighbors remain opposed to the playground, though Mr. Clancy said he had only received one negative e-mail about the project since construction started last year".

Mr. Antonelli has a better memory than Paul Clancy, because he can remember the push-back from area residents at the meeting that took place at the Vernon Hill School on February 27, 2008, where residents in attendance told them they were full of shit building a playground when there were better ways to spend more than $100k.

Maybe the money didn't come from property taxes, but the playground was proposed as,"gesture to show the city's gratitude" to the residents affected by the expanded Ballard Street compost site. Neighborhoods such as those in the areas of Gibbs Street, Granite Street, Dane Avenue and Svenson Avenue, to name a few, are affected whenever the compost site emits odor.

The then principal of the Vernon Hill School, Ms. Joanna Bowolick, was all for the playground because it would benefit her students directly, but she wouldn't be a the school long enough to see the first backhoe at the site.

 The BIG kicker came in December 2008, when the proposal for the playground was approved by the City Council, after Paul Clancy very slyly had the proposal brought up at a City Council meeting right before Christmas.  Hey, he knows when people are sleeping and he knows when they're awake, and Paul Clancy banks on the fact that most of his constituents are asleep at the wheel.  True Masshole modus operandi.

The playground was approved, Clancy is pleased, Moylan is pleased, Antonelli is pleased and the people that live in the area are pleased, but do they know that they've been Grand Hustled?

Arizona: Here I Go!

It's time to put this out there and there's no reason to tip-toe around this fact. There are racists in the United States of America and many of them are the leaders that are elected by the people of the United States of America.

While I've met my share of prejudice and racist folks in Massachusetts or New England, for that matter, I know that not all folks are bigots.

What I struggle with today, more than ever, is that if you have a problem working with women, Latinos, Asians, Blacks (Yes, I use the word "Black" because I'm not a politically correct asshole that thinks Ronald Reagan was the best President and praise him for introducing "African-American" to our vocabulary.) and a truly diverse group of people, then you are going to struggle and you're going to have a very frustrating life. Believe that!

The debate that's taking place involving Arizona and Senate Bill 1070 is very interesting because there are people on the left, people on the right and, of course, people smack-dab in the middle. The folks in the middle are caught in mental double-dutch.

While I think that what the City Council pulled last week spearheaded by District 3 City Councilor, Paul Clancy, is truly a "bitch ass move", we have to STAND UP for something and decide what side of the debate the City is on.

Now, just as in life, we know that as more information is shared our position may change, slightly, but that's the beauty of all of this......we can debate and change our minds. It's called free will.

I think the Tea Party that protested outside City Hall last week do serve a purpose, but I do have an issue with their belief that their position is the ONLY position. We can agree to disagree and that's what a democracy is. (Hey, you don't have to stick your head up a horses ass to see shit; we can all agree we can look around and see it everywhere.)

Let the debate continue.

Worcester Retirees: All We Got for Christmas is Screwed

When Virginia Ryan goes at City Council and the Councilors, you never know what you're going to get, but rest assured that she's not afraid to "mix it up" with the best of them, more notably District 3 Councilor, Paul Clancy.

Here's what she had to write in this weekend's Coalition of Worcester Retirees & Workers United:

GARY ROSEN will be covering Peter Blute's show on WCRN on Monday, Tuesday and
Wednesday from 6-9 AM. Paul Clancy is his co-host on Monday. You might
want to call on Monday to chat with Paul. 508-438-0965
Mike Germain is cohost on Tuesday and Rick Rushton on Weds.

ASSIGNMENT FOR RETIREES: Call Monday and ask Councilor Clancy when he is going to retire. He filed our petition for Section 19 right into the basket at the December 1st City Council meeting (see Clancy Lowers the Boom on Workers United) below. Former longtime Worcester City Parks Commissioner Nugent would often say to people who asked when he was going to retire, about 8 PM tonight.

Make sure Councilor Clancy understands your question that is, when is he going to retire from the City Council and enjoy a true retirement, traveling and going to a warmer climate in the winter. Frank Beshai ran a great campaign and came in second with I think 40% of the vote in that district.

Secondly, those of you who receive no Social Security checks and will begin paying $110.50 a month (see attachment) as you are not being "held harmless" should also call Councilor Clancy tomorrow morning. Your Part B Medicare is much higher than mine. Thank Paul for co-sponsoring Section 18 along with former city councilor Mike Perotto. I understand Mike is going to run for Rep. Spellane's seat.

Thirdly, don't think I am going to do it for you. This is your homework.
Fourthly, no City Council meeting this Tuesday. School vacation. Huh?

Worcester Medicare Cost 2000-2010

City Council Pay Raises: A gloved slap in the face

I happened to read the news about the City Councilor's pay raises over at Daily Worcesteria and while, “It was the right thing to do. How could we do otherwise in this incredibly difficult time?,” says Councilor Kate Toomey. I had to write a response on Daily Worcesteria as well as post my response here on Worcester Is MAJOR!

The playground dubbed "The Grand Hustle" goes back to a meeting held on February 27, 2008, and written about on Worcester Is MAJOR! on February 28, 2008. Read that post here. Also, here's another post titled "The Great Divide" from October 16, 2007, so that you may get-up-to-speed on the history regarding the playground.

This is somewhat good news to read and hear, but when we have Councilors such as Paul Clancy pushing through, on the sly, the approval of $300k for a playground at Providence Street School, I guess not taking the pay raise is only a velvet-gloved slap in the face.

The amazing great act was played out prior to Christmas when most folks were still reeling from the ice storm and the snow storms that hit us all hard.

Mayor Lukes and the entire City Council should be ashamed, because in tough times, a playground is the last thing we need. There are good folks loosing their homes, struggle day in and day out to put food on the table and they have the audacity to approve a $300,000 playground?!

It's no wonder why Worcester is known as 'Wormtown'.

All the good people of Worcester have to get involved and call City officials to be responsible, especially when spending with reckless abandon is not the course we need to take during these lean times.

As in Latin, we must demand and expect Magis.

It's Official: Providence Street Fire Station to Close

Word was dropped like a gauntlet last night at the City Council meeting and City Manager O'Brien spoke about what had been rumor for many months....the Providence Street fire station is slated to be closed as soon as the Franklin Street Fire Station opens later on this year.

The rumors have been swirling for some time and everyone pleaded the 5th similarly to Ollie North, but now that the information is out there, it's time for residents of the Grafton, Vernon and Union hills areas to raise Cain.

If the Providence Street Fire Station is closed, imagine what the response times will be like for the area? A typical response time of 2-4 minutes would now be extended to 5-8 minutes. The extra 3-4 minutes could make the difference between whether someone lives and/ or looses their home.

So, what can you do? Call City Manager Michael O'Brien's office and let them know you oppose the closing of the Providence Street Fire Station at (508) 799-1175 or send mail to City Hall Room 309, 455 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01608.

You can also contact the City Council at council@ci.worcester.ma.us, or by calling (508) 799-1049.

WIM: One Man's Thoughts

Participate in the Worcester Is MAJOR talk show Thursday nights at 9 PM EST.

Round of Applause

There was a meeting for the Compost Advisory Committee today at the Ballard Street compost site and to say that it was the best meeting that I’ve been to in years, it would be an understatement.

We at Worcester Is MAJOR have to give a star-studded hat tip to Ed Kochling who’s been manning the helm and making sure that the compost site doesn’t smell nor disrupt the lives of those abutting the compost site. Thank you.

We can’t forget Commissioner Moylan and City Councilor (District 3) Paul Clancy, thank you for attending the meeting this afternoon and listening to the residents.

Keep up the good work and we look forward to a non-odoriferous winter and beyond!

District 3 Candidate: Susan Kiely

Dear Resident(s) of District 3,

Please allow me to introduce myself, my name is Susan Kiely and I am
a candidate for District 3 Councilor. I am aware, as I'm sure many of
you are, that running for the councilor seat in this District is a
formidable task to undertake. I am asking you now to please take a few
minutes to read through this letter so that my reasoning for seeking
a seat on Council is better understood.

Starting in 2004, until present, I have had cause to interact with the
City Council and a number of Committees. While the issues that
brought me to that interaction were important to me, they
are not the reason I chose to run for Council. It was the interaction
itself with both Council and Committees that brought me to this
candidacy. Residents in District 3 neighborhoods were frequently not
being notified and/or included in projects/decisions being made by
Council/Committees until those projects/decisions were at a point
where the inclusion of residents was merely to cover a legal
technicality. Frequently, there was an adversarial stance taken on the
part of City officials when information was requested by residents.
And, far too often, the information obtained was subject to change
without residents’ knowledge.

It is my belief that there needs to be a change of perspective on City
Council. District 3 voters are a major factor as to whether that
change occurs or not. I believe there are functional aspects in the
way that the present City Council works that need to be revised in
order for this City to develop in a productive, harmonious way. Some
of these aspects are:
Councilors accepting or voting on items based solely on a Committee's
recommendation without having any, or full, knowledge of the item
they are voting on, particularly when that item holds the potential
to have negative ramifications, be they financial or quality of
life, for residents of the City.

No restriction as to the length of time a Councilor may remain
Chairperson/Member of a particular committee. This lack of
restriction on appointed time allows for a Councilor to become
dictatorial in the area he/she is Chair/Member of. It disallows input
from fellow Councilors and limits the inclusion of residents. This is
particularly detrimental to the City when the Committee is one under
which a number of City departments with high priority and high cost
issues are covered.

A District Councilor is not required to recuse themselves from a
Committee when that Committee is addressing an issue of concern to
residents in the District that the Councilor represents. Residents
of that District lack representation on Council when the issue is one
that holds conflicting interests, i.e. positive for the City, negative
for the District neighborhood.

Discussion of item(s) at a Committee meeting when that item(s) is not
listed on the Committee agenda available to the Public and with no
notification given to residents affected by that item(s).
Insufficient documentation of what occurs at Committee meetings not
televised.

My stands on certain issues are as follows:

The "Vision" for the future of Worcester: In reading through hundreds
of City documents I found that the visions of City Officials were
often dictated by a Field of Dreams mentality, "Build and they will
come". Repeatedly "they" did not, or are not, coming to Worcester.
Projected revenue was/is lost. As was /is revenue from City fees for
construction permits and connections when decreased fee rates are
part of the bargaining factor. Visions need to be reality based in
order to succeed. The reality is that Worcester is neither an affluent
community nor a tourist mecca. Far too often, after following a paper
trail for a project, it was apparent that City officials
viewed "Worcester" as an entity independent of its residents. Yet we
are the ones that feel the financial/quality of life burden when
these visions fail. A project such as City Square looks admirable on
paper. Yet so did the Blackstone Valley National Heritage Corridor,
the Northern Gateway Visitor Center, the Quinsigamond Village
Revitalization and the Rte 146 Greenway projects in 2000. Seven years
and multi-million dollars later the 146 Greenway is overrun by weeds,
littered with trash and the fence along the roadway is falling down.
The proposed Blackstone Corridor Bikeway, the Gateway Visitor Center
and Quinsigamond Village will all be dwarfed by a Wal-Mart
Supercenter. I believe that residents should have the right to vote
on projects, such as City Square, when that project requires the City
to take on substantial debt.

Small Business: It is recognizable that large businesses are essential
to the City for their revenue and employment, yet so are
small businesses. In a city where public transportation is limited to
buses, small neighborhood businesses are an important asset to
residents for both the convenience of purchases and employment. Small
businesses should be encouraged to start-up by being afforded the same
financial incentives as large corporations. A case such as the Hilton
Hotel/Restaurant developer being charged $25,000 for sewer connection
fees while a local person looking to open a small business is told
their connection fees will amount to $117,000 is unacceptable. No one
can project with certainty the longevity of a business within
Worcester; therefore the size of a business should not be a
determining factor in what incentives are extended.

Section 18/Retiree's Health care: Worcester, as is true with many cities these days, is experiencing financial difficulties. While it is necessary to cut costs, it is not right to lose sight of prior commitments made when making those cuts. In regards to
Worcester's retirees’ health costs, I do not believe that the way in which Section 18 was adopted was the correct way.
Persons in retirement now, or due to retire within a certain length of time
after the adoption of Section 18, should not be required to assume
additional health care costs. The financial overburdening of the
elderly is becoming a national epidemic for which I believe we will pay a much higher price later for any savings realized now. I am not, nor is any member of my family, a City retiree or employee.

Low-income housing: Worcester exceeds the State mandate for required moderate to low income housing units. However, the low income population within Worcester exceeds the affordable housing available and this population continues to grow. In recent years, the City Council has approved restrictive zoning changes (includes part of District 3) and,
while there can be benefits to restrictive zoning such as encouraging a higher-income population to remain in or move into that City neighborhood, it tends to limit the building of affordable housing units in an already overbuilt and congested area.

Councilor's raise: The saga of the on again-off again pay raise
fiasco, how fortunate Councilors are that the Section 18 discussion
came up. Sarcasm aside, after dealing with numerous City Councilors for 3 years now, I am well aware that they put in far more hours than are required. While the raise was ill-timed and rather devious in nature, the raise itself would appear to be an appropriate wage for the job done. With that said, I am under the impression that the raise will be rescinded and am running for Council based on a compensation of $18,000. If elected, I would not accept more than that amount, but would not judge poorly those Councilors who do accept the raise.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I hope you now
have some idea of who I am and why I am running for Council. Please know I will not be fund raising nor will you will see signs with my name on them. I will go door-to-door to meet people and you are free to call or email me should you wish to know my stance on an issue of importance to you.

Thank you and take care,



Susan Kiely
25 Gibbs Street
508-579-1125
kjs72@juno.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We at Worcester Is MAJOR! appreciate Susan Kiely allowing us to publish her letter to the residents of District 3 and residents of this great city!

Wal-Mart: The battle continues

The proposed Wal-Mart in Quinsigamond Village has caused a heated debate on either side of the coin. Many residents in Quinsigamond Village feel that a Wal-Mart Supercenter is not the appropriate business to be built in the City nor in their back yard.

There have been articles in the Worcester T&G and certainly on the Worcester First website, but what I find interesting is that few people are calling for Mayor Lukes, City Council and, even, City Manager, Michael V. O'Brien, to give their opinion on the box store and what impact, if approved, the store may have on the City.

With this year being an election year, it seems as if city leaders are in a "wait-and-see" mode, because with the recent vote (7-2), to move Medicare-eligible municipal retirees to a Medicare supplement plan for their future health care coverage, City Councilors aren't the most popular people in the City at the moment.

This is coupled with the City facing a $5 million budget deficit, and the Council wanting to cancel the August 7th meeting and wait until the August 28th meeting to decide how the City is going to address the deficit. One council member, Frederick Rushton, representing District 5, put words to paper and stated, "We can’t wait until Aug. 28 to figure out how we’re going to deal with a $5 million budget deficit. We’ve got to face the music and make some decision as soon as possible. Now is not the time to go on vacation. The longer we wait, the deeper the cuts will be", as told to the Worcester Telegram & Gazette.

District 3 Councilman, Paul P. Clancy, Jr., chose to recuse himself from the vote due to having immediate family members who would be affected by the council's vote. Some people may say that Councilor Clancy and Rushton, made the fact that immediate family members may be affected by the vote as a cop-out, but due to a law dealing with conflict of interest, Clancy and Rushton chose to recuse themselves.

So, the City of Worcester is facing some hard times, but I've been told that the City has faced dire times and has come up with viable solutions. I certainly hope so and remain optimistic that the Council, will make the best possible decision for the City.

Be sure to listen to Episode #2 of the Talkcast regarding this topic and hear what listeners think about Wal-Mart.