I just came in from the Lowell Downtown Neighborhood Group meeting. Towards the end there was a poignant discussion regarding the need for more protocol, or a mutual respect for all who share our downtown. Somehow, that spirit has been lost as hordes of partiers come to lowell to cut loose on weekend nights … the numbers seem to keep growing.

I don’t criticize the emerging dance culture … “Lowell is a City” as was said, and people like to go out, drink, dance and have fun. But the problem is that there are people who aren’t interested in that kind of lifestyle, who still wish to be out and about on a weekend night without intoxicated free spirits knocking them over and taking their belongings. Or they may want to stay home and read a book or be with someone special and not have music booming or other forms of crude noise and actions. 

The problems have grown recently, and people have had just about enough. Efforts have also escalated by the police and the establishment owners who are trying to keep order. So what can we do as residents?

Admittedly, there are so many revelers in the general party group that frequent the constantly growing scene, that its difficult to manage them so that others who do not partake can also enjoy a relatively peaceful and joyous lifestyle in the way that they like to live. Happiness is not a one way street.

Yes Lowell is a City, but instead of resigning ourselves to that fact and doing nothing, downtown residents can consider starting other informal groups or subgroups. A seed for an idea was planted, like a “Share the Streets” group that advocates for protocol in the streets so that all can safely and peacefully enjoy the amenities of downtown 24/7.

For example, if Downtown is now a major draw for young partiers from all over region each weekend, they need to be held accountable for wreaking havoc fueled by demon alcohol. A group could form to study the issues and come up with some ideas for enhancing their own lifestyles while countering irresponsibility. Several examples immediately came to mind and were discussed (and it felt good).

Food for thought. It’s a start …

George DeLuca, ComeToLowell.com

Check out the Sun’s Column Blog Today. Mayor Patrick Murphy spent 90 minutes meeting with the Sun Editors and staffers answering questions.

Here’s just a taste but click on the link above to read the whole Blog Post.

In no particular order, here are some of Murphy’s thoughts on issues of the day:

• He stands by his controversial appointment of new Councilor Vesna Nuon as chairman of the Public Safety Committee, despite Nuon’s recent out-of-court settlement of $50,000 against the Police Department for what Nuon claimed was a bogus disorderly conduct arrest. Nuon, he said, was the only councilor who gave him specifics of what he’d like to accomplish as chairman, such as working with the police department to establish better after-school programs.

On a similar issue, he also reiterated his support for Councilor Joseph Mendonca as chairman of the Finance Subcommittee. He said Mendonca has a solid grasp of the numbers gleaned from his years as a School Committee member.

Nuon OCPF Report Update

I received a nice note informing me that Councilor Vesna Nuon did indeed update his filings with the OCPF in the late afternoon on the day of my BLOG Posting.

Filed on 1/20/2012

with 13 Itemized / identified Contributors and clarifying his expenses.(See attached)

I also would like to point out to fellow blogger Lowell resident this line from a Glob Story involving Lt. Gov Murray in yesterday’s paper.

State Law bans cash donations of $50 or more, and cash donations of any amount must be itemized and the donors identified.

Jan24 Council Agenda

18. C. Elliott- Req. City Council adopt a policy to require the City Manager to submit resumes of applicants for all Boards and Commissions that require City Council confirmation.

Finally City Councilor Rodney Elliot has brought forward a motion to settle the Resume Issue, hopefully once and for all.

I don’t think resume of unsuccessful candidates should be made public but I give Councilor Elliot credit for finally bringing forth a motion that will allow all Councilors to either publicly vote Yay or Nay and we can move on from this matter regardless of what the final vote is.

It is time for all 9 Councilors to either say Yes we want to see all Resume’s or NO we do not need to.

I hope the Councilor gets more specific and states WHEN the council should receive these resume, BEFORE or After the Manager submits a name? The final policy may clear up that question but at least we could see an ending to this issue so the Council can move on to far more important issues.

Thank You to City Clerk Michael Geary who emailed me a copy of the Agenda this morning and informed me he was having issues getting it posted to the website but says it should be up now.

I attached the complete Agenda as a PDF.

Neighborhood /Flooding Activist John Nappi sent this to the Editor of the SUN and forwarded a copy to me to share in the event the Sun chooses to NOT publish it.

Campanini,

Thanks for the opportunity to challenge the editor and the Enel plant on the virtues of debating the facts. If you set aside a minute your “romantic notion” you have about the “save Lowell” mechanism (aka: inflatable dam) I offer the following rebuttal.

Fact 1. Does it make sense to “raise and lower the river’s flows at the touch of a button”. Well actually it does. In fact the inflatable can be lowered within 15 minutes. And, then you wait. This past episode where the flashboards were down and had to be repaired, the local hydropower company waited 7 days before they got a crew out there. So tell me again, what was the value of taking the dam down in 15 minutes? That was followed with the crew working Saturday in the middle of the winter. After 2 and one half days it looks like they are done. Now I bring this up because it was Enel’s major contention in defending the proposal re: “we can’t repair the flashboards in the winter.” Appropriate credit to Enel’s VP Mr Engel to avoid plagiarism.

Fact 2. “He (Comeau) actually makes sense”. Mr Editor what part makes sense? Is it the part about sic … “to improve conditions affecting flooding upstream . . . ” Too bad Enel doesn’t claim that. In fact Enel disavows that claim. “the inflatable is not a flood control device” Again appropriate credit to Engel.

Fact 3. “Lowell National Park just announced they refuse to participate in a MOA”. This is a juvenile attempt to selectively focus on out-of-context quotes. See Mr Peter Aucella’s more detailed, accurate and professional account including the University Ave bridge. I could send you copies if need be.

Fact 4. “FERC put forward in a MOA numerous steps required to ensure protection of the historic . . . “. Well now, lets see” they offered to encase the dam in concrete and “paint the inflatable to look like the flashboards” and have a plaque that said something like – this is what that old dam used to look like. I wonder why NPS was upset? Oh about the FERC quote; it was plagiarized from Enel.

Fact 5. sic .. “installing modernizations to lighting … ” Really? I heard it from a good source they are going back to candles. But then again I could be wrong. It happen before. Oh, and about the “access for disabled visitors”. Where’s Comeau coming from: is he for safety? Or, is he just against NPS?

Fact 6. “We see a pretty clear double standard being applied.” Comeau; you see Enel’s standard and the editor believes the flashboards are history. I’m glad neither one of you are in position to influence FERC.

Mr Editor Yes, I can write a letter just like Comeau. How about we start with his comment about community groups praising the virtues of the inflatable. How about MVEDC? How about Williamsburg’s increase flood insurance rates.

I welcome your response. In or out of the newspaper.
Keep those cards and letters coming.

John Nappi