This past week there has been a couple of different issues that make me think we are about to witness a battle that has been brewing for 6+ years.
Old Lowell vs. New Lowell or Natives vs. Blowellians or Common Folk vs. Political Correctness or Boo Birds Vs. Lynch Pins call it whatever you want but the fight sure seems to be on.
This episode with Mr. Bayliss reminds me of the Supt. Scott vs. Regina battle of a few years ago. Regina is 100% Lowell girl versus the Politically Correct, proper, well educated, professional Supt. Chris A. Scott.
Regina talked trash as we native Lowellian are known to do (didn’t you see The Fighter?) and the “professional” Educator/Supt. took offense and took her to court. That School Committee turtled and didn’t at least publicly support Regina. This Council doesn’t have that luxury.
They are being forced to choose between a long time active, involved private citizen who over the years has contributed a great deal of his time, talent and financial resources to many city wide endeavors over “professional” behavior as deemed by the Manager.
To some degree, isn’t that what the City Manager is doing here to Mr. Bayliss? Mr. Bayliss speaks like the stereotype Archie Bunker Lowellian (one blogger referred to him as the new Fred Doyle) and the Manager has taken offense and deems him unprofessional and seeks to remove him.
Now cynics (or Boo Birds as my pal Jack calls us/them) might say that the Manager is doing so now to take away the spotlight from the Parking dept issue and the apparent lack of oversight of that dept. as long as the money was coming in or to be able to say to the Council should they support Mr. Bayliss that the downtown issue’s are on their head after he tried to make a change.
The same “Boo Birds” along with Mr. Bayliss’s Atty. will point out that the Manager didn’t fire the Head of the Water dept. who used city equipment and personal at his home or the Asst. Treasurer who was out on leave due to sexual harassment charges and who just happen not to be from Lowell but are “professionals”.
I believe the Manager truly feels that Mr. Bayliss has been less than “professional” but if no one has complained (I have asked and am waiting the answer if there has ever been a formal complaint filed against Mr. Bayliss) and the Manager never called Mr. Bayliss to express any concerns about his behavior is his lack of “professionalism” or sense of humor based on the Manager’s judgment a justifiable reason to remove someone?
Are we now so PC correct that there is no place for Walter Bayliss or John McDonough (who allegedly made a joke that riled the Left in Lowell PC crowd) to say something because they might offend someone? If no one complains are you still offensive? Is humor only allowed for those who are on the proper side of the PC crowd?
It seems to me that the Lynch supporters will claim that this is the BOO Birds going after the Manager even if the Manager is the one who took the first swing asking for a resignation that just about everyone who has ever met Walter Bayliss knew would not be coming.
The Manager has shown to be a very smart politician and usually knows he has the votes before he starts anything. I’m not sure this is his smartest political move and even if he “wins” what message does that send to all boards and commissions? Stay PC or else you’re fired? What happens when someone makes a joke? Can the Manager say that is okay but Baylis’s humor isn’t?
If we “wins” 4-5 is that still a win or will the Boo Birds say he is through? Is George Anthes correct when he says some Councilors may lose an election because of this vote? Will they remember who started the fight and does it matter?
I’m in no way saying that everything Mr. Bayliss has said or done is proper or correct or should be tolerated but here in the private sector I know 1st hand that you have to document, document, document your case and if no file of complaints and no communication to Mr. Bayliss is on record, how did he know the way he has spoken for 5-8 years without any warnings all of a sudden is not tolerated? The Manager re-appointed him. Was he not watching the meetings before then?
I haven’t been in Mr. Bayliss’s company for close to 23 years but to me he doesn’t seem to have changed any. He speaks his mind and says what he thinks and doesn’t care who gets upset or offended. Many of us do the same thing and now we are being told we have to be Politically correct or there is no room for us in service to the City.
That isn’t the Lowell I or many others grew up in. We welcome all, fight amongst ourselves, are very UN PC but can still sit in a room together and talk or have a beer.
Old Lowell vs. New? Professionalism versus Unprofessional? The Fight is on and the results will be fascinating!
I think you are missing the basic point. You can get away with a lot of inappropriate behavior when you do your job correctly and support your bosses or patrons. But stop doing that and your behavior becomes a tool for your removal. Happens all the time in the private sector.
Colonel… Nathan… Jessup… smfh
Well, if this is the same-o, same-o; then we know how it comes out.
I get what you’re saying and perhaps you’re being facetious but don’t you think you’re casting Lowell natives in a bad light? I know nothing about the Bayliss/Weicker situation but to say that “Old Lowell” is nothing more than trash talking rubes doesn’t really cast you in a good light, no? Not saying the opposite is any better (wine drinking and humorless) but give yourself more credit than that!!! I am not a native and I love it here, old and new. It was the “old” that helped rejuvenate Lowell in the 1970′s/1980′s and it’s the “new” that have injected new life and enthusiasm.
The only fight that’s on is the fight against crime in downtown Lowell, which is up 21% over a year ago. Just get it done, please.
“Downtown Lowell crime up 21%” http://www.lowellsun.com/todaysheadlines/ci_21335521/downtown-lowell-crime-up-21-percent
I understand most people have never attended a License Commission meeting or watched them on television. I attended dozens, both televised and not (the work sessions on crafting the proposed new regulations). The commissioners spent hours meeting with the police and law department reviewing and tweaking the new rules — then sat on them. After all that work and having given so much input, one would think they would have found SOMETHING to adopt. Why didn’t they? Some say it was just spite . . . . they didn’t like being pushed into action by the city council, administration, police and law departments. At many meetings, commissioners treated members of the police department and law department including Superintendent Lavallee and City Solicitor O’Connor with disrespect, often acting as if they were on opposite sides of a fight rather than working together to make the city a better place. A lot of this has been overlooked in this political slap fight. It is this infighting created by bruised egos that will hold the city back. It is not productive.
I agree with Jen. I am a regular watcher of the License Commission. There was a lot of talk about keeping the bar owners in business because they pay taxes with what seemed to me , a total disregard for the other businesses and residents of the downtown – who also pay taxes. Those are the people who were paying the price for the miscreants. No one should have to put up with the rowdy after hours bar patrons also leaving behind the stench and look of urine and vomit soaked doorways and alleyways. I believe the subject of more arrests for public urination was made fun of by one commissioner as a non-issue. The final straw was the meeting Jen mentioned.. They simply did not want to even attempt top compromise on anything proposed. The outright refusal to act was tanatamount to a slap in the face for all those who had worked to f.orge an acceptable set of regulations. It is ,unfortunately, time for a change.
If I recall, I rarely find much agreement with Elizabeth, but here we are. This particular line from The Sun was very disturbing to me:
“The last people government thinks about is the taxpayer,” Commission Chairman Walter Bayliss said, adding the business owners pay a higher tax rate and should be accommodated.
Nevermind the nonsense that local government should tier services and judicial preference to residents/business owners, based on their tax rate. There is an uglier notion underneath. It reeks of pay to play. Meaning, Bayliss is suggesting that to get more, you need to pay more. That is not a mindset I want creeping in City Hall.
Good comment. Let’s hope the participants come to realize that and act accordingly.
come on please!!!Crimes up 21% Don’t blame the License Commissioners….Blame the Manger for not putting the Polices downtown…..
The Superintendent Lavallee Should be the Blame….He not doing his job….With the Manger….21%in crimes………Mr Bayliss sorry that the manger is only trying to be the boss..
Crime up 21% may look sexy in a headline . . . but it is misleading. The bulk of the increase is in public urination arrests (which the police have been cracking down on). It is gross, unsanitary and a crime, but it is not what the average person thinks of when they hear crime is up. So, let’s take that out of the equation. If anything, the fact that so many people are being arrested for peeing in the street points to a problem of over-serving . . . how many sober people do you know who pee in the street?
I’m just a bit curious. Is this the Mayor’s position on the License Commission as well? And also, why would someone from Dracut care about the Lowell License Commission?
Isn’t a person allowed to have their own opinion? Also someone who has covered Lowell for many years and works in Lowell has a right to an opinion just as much as you do Polly? Only Jen stated hers. you just questioned why.
What’s your position and who are you related to that makes you take a shot at Jen?
we don’t have enough police to keep the peace downtown on the weekends. there are other neighborhoods that need their help. go to the meetings..Lavellee has not been the problem.. Bayliss has been completely unprofessional and unsympathetic to the residents. I’ve watched the hearings. The License Commissioners allowed things to get so out of whack that we had the “Fortunato’s” incident. It should have never happened.
How much would arrests spike if the police started cracking down on loitering? 1000% increase?
George, I’m no spokesperson and and you may know, your #’s are up because you guys are saturated with cops. The more eyes you get, the more reportable crimes result. As Jen mentioned, an end product to a boozy problem. The shame about the whole issue is, it should have been an easier fix. The blame we all know is politics, the solution unfortunately is politics… and regular people willing to combat it.
Sent from Catch Notes for Android
https://catch.com
We don’t need more cops … just less drunks. Lowell ranks among the finest municipal leadership in the nation with the City Council, City Manager and Chief Lavallee. Sandbaggers who coddle special interests need not apply to our boards and commissions.
One takeaway from this fiasco is that Lowell’s planning may have been taken off guard by the surge of commercial drinking parties which happened over a 1-2 year period. You can’t blame the club owners for exploiting the situation. Once one club showed signs of success with DJs, others chimed in. Now that padora is out of the box, new Commissioners or not, there’s a long row to hoe. Clubs are in it for the $$, not to be good neighbors or team players.
It has been my experience to have been ridiculed, yelled at, laughed at, told not to come back, and once told to “get my ass down to the meeting if there is a problem” by members of the License Commission. A Lowell citizen should not be afraid of attending a public meeting to state their opinion. I have waked out of public hearings at other boards and city council meetings disagreeing with decisions and that is what discussions are about; we don’t have to agree. But only from this board was I treated in such a disrespecful manner for my opinion.
Polly,
I speak for myself. And the notion that someone who does not live in Lowell cannot care about and love the city and what happens there is bogus and used as a dig by people who have no other darts to throw. I am much more involved in the Lowell community than in Dracut — where I pay taxes (I know that’s a big issue in your crowd). It has always been my thought that ANYONE who lives, works or plays in any of the towns surrounding Lowell has a stake in what happens in the city. When the hub of the wheel (Lowell) thrives the entire region benefits. Where we sleep at night doesn’t matter.
I would suggest to everyone to watch some of the videos of the Licensing Board to understand what Jen, Elizabeth, kmarcin, Corey, George are talking about.
The 8-page letter from the City Manager to Mr. Bayliss merely outlines the complaint. To get a full understanding how these meetings were conducted, you really need to watch them in action. Of course, reading the 8-page letter is helpful if one is going to get involved in a public discussion on this issue.
If you do not have time, just watch the April 12th meeting (pre-Fortunato) and tell me that you approve of the way our Legal and Police Departments were treated.
Also, I do not buy the argument that this is Wally being Wally. Interesting that his defenders are now advancing the argument that Bernie should have given him a warning and since Bernie did not, the man should stay. Again, Bernie is to blame.
A grown man needs to be told how to behave? If that is the case, he should have looked on his right and follow Commissioner Brian Akashian’s standard. By the way, Akashian voting record is similar to his colleagues but his conduct is that of a (here it comes)
professional.
Good post Mimi. And, I think we all know if the city manager had spoken to the commissioners about their behavior there would have been a hue and cry that he was micromanaging and sticking his nose in where it doesn’t belong. Anyone who says they didn’t see this coming, or that they didn’t know the manager was not pleased has simply not been paying attention. The writing has been on every wall in the city for months.
Just a thought, but didn’t Mr. Bayliss refer to himself as a “Blow in” during the council meeting? Kind of blows a big hole is the either/or breakdown of the thread doesn’t it? Can you be “Old Lowell, Common folk” and a “Blowellian?”
I would like to know. I grew up in a town next door, but have lived here for nearly 20 years, (since college with one minor 6 month break). I also have worked for the city for 15 years. The break was right in the middle of the 20 if that has any impact on my social standing. I think a decade of continuous Lowell living and property ownership should buy me some street cred, but I’ll only truly feel better with someone else signing off. I can’t even ask my neighbors, most of them moved here too. We all couldn’t afford to buy in our hometowns anyway, they went all yuppie on us.
Why don’t people who care enough to move here and get involved get more credit? We had a choice and we picked you to dance with Lowell. I always though wearing the “I was born here” as a badge of honor was weird. Yes those who stayed did ride out some of the worst times the city had to offer, but was it really that bad? I don’t remember anyone sacking Belvidere, Christain Hill, the Upper Highlands or P-Ville in the crack street era. Plenty of people fled to the burbs (driving up the home prices), but why did people stay? Why is there even an issue between those who rode out the storm and those who made a choice to get on board? Welcome all? It depends on how you conduct yourself and who happens to be watching. Its not a cut and dry formula.
There are no PC zombies here to change the scrappy, salt of the earth, rough and tumble common folk. As good as this “real Lowell” storyline is for the big screen, its also a negative in the documentary format. Its a cute either/or debate for people looking for a box to be placed in, but ultimately completely misses the point of how this city has held on to it’s staying power. If you didn’t have waves of newcomers, this city, like every other, would be dead three times over. Only the Native Americans have a real gripe about newcomers changing things.
I would like to thank the City of Lowell for offering refuge to a Billerican. And no the six month stay wasn’t at the House of Corrections.
Short version: To anyone who’s been rooted in Lowell, whether for a generation or several, there’s no such thing as a “Blowellian” or “Lowell Blow-in” status. Its a misconception … a myth. Some who move here use the term to describe themselves for whatever reason. All you need to be a “Lowellian” is a Lowell residence.