I’m taking an extended break from blogging for personal reasons but didn’t want the passing of former Lowell / Cambridge City Manager Jim Sullivan to go unnoticed.

When we talk about “Professional Managers” Jim Sullivan set the bar and it was because of Jim Sullivan and the salary he demanded to take the Lowell job and then to return to Cambridge that many of today’s Manager’s receive the compensation they do. Mr. Sullivan was not shy about what he felt the value of his and any Managers service was worth and it was because of Jim Sullivan that today’s Manager’s are so well compensated.

Mr. Sullivan also recognized that to truly succeed you need to surround yourself with people who were as smart or smarter than yourself and listen to what they suggest. He also was a smart politician which is why he lasted so many years in Cambridge and his assistant current Cambridge Manager Healy has lasted and prospered.

It was also because of former Manager Sullivan that this blog received so much attention and acceptance. He wrote a lengthy letter to the Editor regarding the current City Manager and Manager Lynch answered my email and allowed me to post his response to Mr. Sullivan.

That caught the attention of Warren Shaw who was kind enough to invite me on his Saturday Morning show and publicize the blog (and then worked me into a regular on the show) and John McDonough to invite me often on his City Life show and my fellow bloggers like RichardHowe.com and LeftinLowell who added my Blog to their roll and encouraged people to read it by referencing and linking to it.

I had the great pleasure of spending 3 hours with Mr. Sullivan and his lovely wife to discuss his time in Lowell and Cambridge, Lowell politics, his great friend former Mayor Armand LeMay and Lowell in general along with his response to Mr. Lynch’s comments.

One of the things I found most interesting was this nugget from Manager Sullivan, He was sitting at home waiting for a referendum in Cambridge about whether he should get his job back when Lowell City Councilor Paul Tsongas talked him into accepting the Lowell City Manager position for $25,000 and that prior to his departure in Lowell , Sullivan recommended that his assistant city manager, Bob Healy be chosen as his successor The city council instead chose former state representative Paul J. Sheehy and Healy accepted the assistant city manager’s job in Cambridge.

It makes me wonder what might have been if that council saw in Bob Healy what Jim Sullivan and ultimately the Councils in Cambridge saw. Paul Sheehy’s tenure was very short.

I am reposting the article I wrote from that visit which was Mr. Sullivan’s response to Manager Lynch and offer my Thanks to Jim Sullivan and condolences to his family and friends especially Armand LeMay who I interviewed in 7th grade when he was Mayor and who fostered my interest in local politics.

Gerry: Just returned from a remarkable visit with Former Manager Jim Sullivan. I will post more on that later but for now here is Mr. Sullivan’s response to City Manager Lynch.

“It should come as no surprise that I have been critical of many of the financial transactions undertaken by the City Manager and the City Council in the last five years. What does come as a surprise is that for the first time City Manager Lynch has been willing to respond to some of my criticisms in writing.

My criticisms have always been in writing so now the Taxpayers of Lowell can judge which one of us is telling the truth. It should be evident that since Manager Lynch and I disagree– one of us is wrong.

Let’s look at the financial facts.

To determine the increase in property taxes during the Lynch years we must use as a base the level of property taxes during the last municipal budget filed by the Cox Administration for fiscal 2006.

In fiscal 2006, the total property tax levy was $77,280,078.

In fiscal 2007, City Manager Cox was appointed on August 15 ,2006 and examined the Municipal budget that had been approved and he determined that the budget was not in balance and recommended an increase in property taxes and fees because the shortfall he believed was approximately 8 million dollars. Since by this time it was December 2006 and there was only 6 months to go in the fiscal year, the magnitude of the total increase recommendation was about $16,000,000.
This would enable the city to obtain $8,000,000 by June 30, 2007.

The corrected fiscal 2007 Municipal Budget thus became the responsibility of the Lynch Administration. The property tax levy increased by $8,260,584 to $85,540,662.

In fiscal year 2008, the property tax levy increased to $90,856,310.

In fiscal year 2009, the property tax levy increased to $95,520,809.

In fiscal year 2010, the property tax levy increased to $100,280,537.

The fiscal year 2011 property tax levy is projected as $104,407,615.

Thus in the five years of Municipal Budgets created and approved by the City Manager and the City Council, the property tax levy has increased by $27,127,537.

In his written response to my criticisms Manager Lynch states Jim Sullivan “once again misrepresents and misinterprets history in an attempt to make the argument that Lowell is recklessly spending taxpayer money at an alarming rate. Nothing could be further from the truth.” An increase in the property tax levy of $27,127,537 in 5 years is certainly alarming to most taxpayers. He can’t deny that the tax levy for the years in question are absolutely accurate..

City Manager Lynch in his response attempts to describe my performance in Cambridge in 1974 which was 36 years ago. He has little understanding of the complexities of the City of Cambridge which runs both a Municipal Hospital and Levels 1,2,3 Nursing Home. He doesn’t bother to state than in my last three years in Lowell, I reduced the tax rate three years in a row and in my return to Cambridge, I reduced the tax rate three years in a row.

He doesn’t mention the fact that when I returned to Cambridge in 1974 that the fiscal condition had deteriorated and Cambridge had a Negative Free Cash Position of over five million dollars. I immediately set about turning the financial condition around.

In an Article in the Christian Science Monitor describing how “Sullivan helps turn Cambridge finances around”. The author Emille T. Liverey
stated “His efforts in that direction began in April 1974 when he returned to the Cambridge position that he had held from 1968 to 1970.
The City’s finances were in such disarray that it was not until six months after the fiscal year ended that the balance sheet even became available. And then it was revealed that the city had run up a deficit of nearly 5 million dollars.”

“Turning the situation around, Mr. Sullivan wound up the first year of his new administration with a 3 million dollar surplus. In an inflationary year he cut the tax rate for fiscal 1976 by $5.50.”

“The two chief ways to hold down a tax rate are to reduce municipal services by employee cutbacks or to generate revenue from sources
other than property taxes.

“Taking the latter course Mr. Sullivan has become a relentless pursuer of tax delinquents and an aggressive “grantsman” – chasing down every means of increasing the city’s income from state or federal sources.”

“When he returned to Cambridge in 1974, there was almost $8 million due the city in unpaid real estate and personal property taxes. By the end of 1975, the city’s financial director had collected over $3 million which explains the surplus that year.”

If City Manager Lynch objectively reviewed my experience, he might have learned something about managing a city in financial distress.

I continued my restructuring of the City’s financial system and it has continued in place. I might add that the City of Cambridge currently has a free cash position currently of $84,000.000 and a stabilization fund position of $54,000,000.

City Manager Lynch certainly did not learn much from his review of my background as Lowell has a minus free cash position of almost $500,000.

City Manager Lynch in his response to my criticisms states “Mr. Sullivan continually raises the issue of the Early Garage as an example of excessive borrowing. This decision was made before I became City Manager but more importantly it was good decision that has paved the way for hundreds of millions of dollars of private investment and is operationally sustainable if we look as the parking program of the city as a system and not as a stand alone operation”

The bond prospectus for the garage is dated September 15, 2006, and if I am not mistaken City Manager Lynch was appointed City Manager on August 15, 2006.

He therefore can not deny his involvement from the beginning with the construction and management of the Early Garage.

The total of Principal and Interest amounts to over $46.000, 000 over the life of the bond. This means that over 20 years the average annual payment for principal and interest is $2,300,000 a year or $180,000 a month.

To pay the principal and interest alone would require a revenue stream of $180,000 a month. For fiscal year 2010 Parking revenues were less than $40,000 a month. For the current fiscal year 2011 the budget estimates annual parking revenue at the Early Garage of $439,000.

The Early Garage fell short of Revenues necessary to pay principal and interest on the garage by $1,800,000 in fiscal 2010 and is projected to be short another $1,800,000 this fiscal year. This does not take into consideration the necessary revenues for maintenance, employees, or security. There is no way this garage is not a financial burden to the
Taxpayers of Lowell and will continue to be. Just to pay the bonded indebtedness would require all 900 spaces being rented for $200 a month. The City currently charges $65 a month for parking.

City Manager Lynch can not deny his involvement in this financial mess for he has been involved since the construction has gotten underway.

The Hamilton Canal Project consists of approximately 15 acres. It should have been developed as an industrial and commercial center to create job opportunities and a stronger tax base for the community. Instead the City Government is allowing the development of condominiums and artist lofts for housing. The City should have worked with the University to attract companies interested in the nanotechnology research to be undertaken by the University.

The City Manager signed a lease in 2009 to lease the Ball Field to the Spinners for $150,000 a year for 10 years. The Facility cost $15,000,000 to build with the Commonwealth financing $10,000,000 of the cost, the City bonding $2,000,000 of the costs, and contributing about $1,000,000 of the Riverwalk funds and the University putting up $2,000,000 for its construction. The $150,000 a year rental is one % of the cost of construction. It would take 100 years to recover the principal of the costs and that would not include the interest on $15,000,000 for 100 years.

No prudent investor would ever consider a one percent return on investment. However the City Manager did. To make matters worse, the agreement was entered in 2009 between the Spinners and the City, but in 2008, the Spinners had a firm examine the facility. It was found that about a million dollars worth of repairs were needed to fix up some physical problems. Why should the City of Lowell be responsible for the repairs, when the Spinners were tenants and responsible for maintaining the facility for the previous ten year?

The City of Lowell has established a number of Enterprise Accounts to take them out of the General Fund and have them self sustaining with their support to come from fees.

Bonded Indebtedness and operating costs should be paid for by the fee systems established. Unfortunately however most of the funds are in a deficit position. By a deficit position, it means that their revenues are not sufficient to pay their costs. If the fees are not sufficient, then the
costs must be made up from property taxes because city costs and revenues must be balanced.

The Water Enterprise Account from page 144 of the 2011 Municipal Budget of
for 2011 minus $1,008,939
for 2012 minus $3,451,982
for 2013 minus $6,747,345
for 2014 minus $10,199,615
for 2015 minus $13,716,028

The Wastewater Enterprise Account from page 141 of the 2011 Municipal Budget of
for 2011 plus $1,535,732
for 2012 minus $5,601,168
for 2013 minus $14,376,172
for 2014 minus $24,785,282
for 2015 minus $36,972,548

The Parking Enterprise Account from page 143 of the 2011 Municipal Budget of
for 2011 plus $46,926
for 2012 minus $284,283
for 2013 minus $623,283
for 2014 minus $970,595
for 2015 minus $1,328,924

The free cash account from page 140 of the 2011 Municipal Budget
Shows a free cash deficit of For 2011 minus $490,543

How can the Taxpayers of Lowell possibly accept increased fees or taxes in the near term to eliminate these unfunded liabilities?

The City Manager does not seem to realize that the average per capita income in Lowell is only $15,500 a year and the unemployment rate is 11.5 per cent.

Look at the multitude of foreclosures listed in the back pages of the Lowell Sun. Check your own tax bill.

I am a private citizen who has been City Manager of Cambridge 11 and 1/2 years and City Manager of Lowell 3 and 1/2 years. I have a Bachelor’s degree and a Master’s Degree from B.C. and a Doctorate from Suffolk University. I was a Senior Research Assistant at the Urban Systems Laboratory at the Sloane School of Management at MIT and have lectured at Harvard University and Boston College on Municipal Government.

I was the President of the Massachusetts League of Cities and Towns in 1978. I was the President of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce from 1981 till 1991. I have lived in the City of Lowell since 1970 to the present date and I am not interested in public service. I have had that experience for most of my life. I believe that the Citizens of Lowell deserve to know why their taxes are going up and why.

The Arena, the Ball Park, and the Jam Plan are projects that should never been undertaken without the utilization of a cost benefit analysis. They have not and will not improve the financial condition of the City. Such investments should be made by the private sector and encouraged by the governmental and financial community.

The City Government of Lowell should realize its financial limitations and take advantage of the University’s and Middlesex’s talent and contacts with the economic and financial community.

The University has a Chancellor who has an extensive political background and has demonstrated executive skills and a willingness to work with the City. Take advantage of all that he has to offer.”

Respectfully submitted

James L. Sullivan

For my pal Jack, who has shown no respect for a proven winner and those that believe him and are so blind loyal to the Party and are disrespectful and attack someone who is willing to stand up for what they believe in. I point out that Rita Mercier finished 6th in the City of Lowell once out of 9 times and has topped the ticket the 8 other times.

Your bromance combination of Councilors Bill Martin and Mayor Patrick Murphy have never come close to achieving that kind of popularity and you can call them her seniors all you want but they have shown to be the regular voters in this city for many years and most of them and us lifelong Lowellian will vote Rita in has long has she runs.

Here’s some Numbers and stats as you data driven people love to use, which point out clearly in Lowell Rita is #1 and your boys are also rans..

Rita went from 8th to #1 adding 2,000 votes after her 1st year and never looked back, the best your boys did is 8th to 7th picking up only 337 votes and 8th to 4th with 1100 LESS votes.

Rita Mercier
1995 -6th 6749 / 1997-1st 8886 / 1999 -1st 9053 / 2001 -1st 9994 / 2003-1st 7949 / 2005- 1st 8041 / 2007 -1st 7107 / 2009 – 1st 6882 / 2011 – 1st 5305 /

Bill Martin
1999 8th 6486 / 2001-7th 6749 / 2003-7th 5904 / 2005-8th 5808 / 2007 – 3rd 5641 / 2009 – 6th 5642 / 2011-6th 3692

Patrick Murphy
2009 – 8th 4860 / 2011 – 4th 3742

And has Idiotic has I have been with some of my comments and temper tantrums nothing comes close to being has stupid, idiotic and just plain wrong has your statement:

This endorsement is ALL about Rita and her lust to get even with Mayor Murphy for firing Diane Bujnowski.

I doubt even Patrick Murphy who may have an ego only slightly smaller than my expanding girth, would ever make such a stupid statement let alone put it to print on Facebook!

Also your girl LIZ Warren is has relatable to the middle class has you are bipartisan. A College Prof. making over $300,000 a year teaching at Harvard 3-6 hours a week really understands the majority of Lowellians who are living on their paychecks week to week? I believe that about as much has I believe she’s part Indian. I’m another Democrat for Brown! With Rita Mercier and the 3 Reps from Lowell who are quietly supporting Sen. Brown (and maybe not that quietly) Prof. Warren will not win Lowell.

Why did we talk about it on WCAP?? Because just has you have the right to attack Rita on your BLOG, The host and contributors on WCAP have the right to point out how idiotic it is to downplay and attack the top vote getter for 8 straight years in Lowell and dismiss the seniors the way you do. Here’s a flash genius…Elderly VOTE!

Nice to see Dracut having a groundbreaking for their new High School. Some are upset that Selectman Jon Zimini asked at the board of Selectman meeting the night before about truckloads of dirt being taken from the site and delivered to a private resident. They say a guy who was close to Mike McLaughlin should stay away from the subject of “dirt”.

I say that may be true but if all residents have a chance to participate in getting the dirt that information should be posted and made public. There may be Allards or Groves or other Nashua Road residents who would like to get some dirt from the site and not be close to school or elected officials to find out how.

Just be careful not to get close to wetlands, less the Dracut Inspector or Lowell Sun Reporter John Collins pay a visit to check.

My friend State Rep Colleen Garry had a good week with the opening of the Tyngsboro Bridge and the groundbreaking. I recall Colleen holding signs in support of the High School project. I don’t recall her opponent Cathy Richardson doing that.

The Bayliss and Fire Box issues should be over and it is time to move on. The public will never know what it cost the taxpayers for the Manager to get what he wanted, namely Mr. Bayliss off the board. Apparently whatever the cost was, the Manager thinks it is worth it.

The Alarm issue should be over. No one is getting a refund but no is going to be charged monitoring fees unless the Manager Ignores the Vote Tuesday Night and says he can in act the 2009 vote that was passed. I don’t expect that to happen.

The Issue of NOT reporting the IG’s letter to the Manager and the Manager to the Council has also been settled with the Manager informing all dept. heads he wants to be made aware of any letter from the IG,FBI, HUD or any other of the alphabetical divisions and the Council made it clear they want to be informed.

Just to make sure of that I’m hoping Councilor Kennedy or Mercier or even new Councilor Leahy submits a motion mandating that the council get a copy of any such letter. Better to have to much info than not enough.

Councilor Mercier on WCAP scolded me for saying to drop the Julian Steele investigation pointing out her motion DOES NOT mention Julian Steele and she wants to know what has been going on in the last 2-3 years when it appears the Manager has let several depts.. run amuck. One question I would want answered is how can you justify firing a laborer for stealing under $250 worth of gas when the Dept. head is using city equipment (and maybe gas) and personal to install and run it, get a fine of $5,000 from the Ethics Commission and keep his job? Can it really be just that the laborer is a political connected person whose grandfather didn’t always support the Manager? That’s Professional Management?

Just once I would like to see a straight answer to a question. Does the City NOW have a policy that EVERY dept. has been made aware of regarding any scrap or outdated material and a way to show how it is being disposed of. Have we in the previous 5 years had that policy? Can I get a Councilor to make that motion and get that answer please?

Let’s face it, up until a fired employee made it an issue NO ONE was asking about it but since everyone now is and people are saying employees made tons of money from Julian Steele (NO ONE CAN PROVE) it must be true. Maybe the proof is with the illegally dumped Asbestos. Maybe the SUN can hire a few ex city employees (Camacho and Mercier) and a twice defeated City Council candidate who is very familiar with that side of the tracks and investigate it!

According to City Councilor Mercier, the “Special” meeting on the Auditors wish to negotiate a new contract will be on Monday Sept. 24th the day before the Council has to notify her. She is on a long planned vacation this week which is why there is no meeting. If you listen to Councilor Mercier it appears she along with Councilor Martin appear to be in favor of giving her a new contract. It will be interesting to see how the rest of the Councilors feel.

The School Committee and Dept. have been very quiet and no real issues. The safety at the Pool and the report of the death of the student are still hanging over them and the people of Lowell deserve an answer. How long will they stall on providing one?

Rumors are swirling about why Mike Lenzi has not yet retired and who between Cliff Krieger and Ray Boutin has the votes to be named his replacement. It is my understanding Mr.Lenzi hasn’t officially moved so until he does he isn’t required to resign. Mr. Boutin seems to be getting some strong consideration and has been involved at the school in the past. Cliff is no doubt a very intelligent man and has former Move Lowell Forward member and current School Committee member Kim Scott in his corner along with Joe Mendonca and reportedly the Mayor. This could be closer than what people think.

CNAG MEETING MON SEPT 17 DOM POLSKI CLUB on LAKEVIEW AVE. 6:30PM

Meeting w/LPD and members of city council to discuss recent shootings our our neighborhoods.

I think Ron Mercier was a victim of political payback and that is why he was fired by the City Manager for stealing gas while his boss stoled..er ‘borrowed” city owned property, used city workers and gas to power them, was fined $5,000 by the State Ethics Commission and kept his job.

I have zero issue with the police or someone investigating what is going on NOW to insure things like that no longer occur.

However, I think it is a steaming pile of crap to waste any man hours and the money spent for the time it will take to look into something that MAY and let’s be 100% clear here it is only MAY have happened 9 years ago based largely on the words of a disgruntled former worker and a lawyer hired to try and save his butt at a trial.

New councilor John Leahy pointed that out Tuesday Night saying “We shouldn’t chase after stuff coming out of a trial.”

Hos many man hours of IG, FBI. HUD and every other alphabetical division was spent searching for non existing illegally dumped Asbestos on the word of another disgruntled employee who had a grudge and agenda? He was incompetent at his job yet the Newspaper especially treated his word has gold because it fit the Political Agenda of the Editor/Publisher which was and still is in my humble opinion to try and get Dr. Gary Wallace because try as they might they can’t get Kendall Wallace out of the SUN!

What we do know has FACT about the Julian Steel Project is this:

1. Upon completing the transfer of each JDS family the LHA shall convey title of all lands and buildings, including all structures above ground and all subsurface components to the the RFDC.

2. The RFDC shall immediately be responsible for the demolition and to dispose of the debris in accordance with the law.

3. The City of Lowell through municipal bonds shall pay up to $1,000,000 for the cost of the demolition.

4. The RFDC awarded the demo contract to a company called S and R.

5. The demolition was handled entirely by S and R has far as any records show. No one at the LHA knows anything about supposedly 40 units done by City of Lowell workers.

6.The water meters owned by the city were not attached to LHA buildings, they were out on the city sidewalks underground with trap doors covering them.

An LHA Official who I asked about the demolition and the City workers stealing had this to say on the supposed WINDFALL by City workers..

” I don’t know how they would have done that, during the relocation the LHA had offices on site that housed relocation coordinators and hired night time security details to protect the safety of the remaining residents.”

Why do councilors and the newspaper seem to think that people who have been fired for one reason or another are more credible than people still employed or the Manager?

They have an ax to grind and should be looked at with the knowledge that they are pissed off and disgruntled and were fired for either being an incompetent idiot or for stealing because ‘everyone did it.”

In 2003 copper was worth between $1,400/ $2,000 a ton. There is 2,000 pounds in a ton so copper was about worth about $1.00 a pound. It wasn’t until late 2003 and early 2004 the price began to move upwards. Prices continued to climb higher during 2004 and 2005, reaching $4,500 a ton at the end of that year ($2.25 a pound).

So how much could someone really make and how did they transport it without anyone noticing a huge truck hauling away TONS??

Just like the Bayliss situation unnecessarily cost the city money for the Manager to get rid of him, this wild useless goose chase looking for someone to say something credible and find out how supposedly tons and tons of material was carted away is a useless endeavor.

A fact that is being ignored is according to contracts signed at the time, ALL demolition should have been done by S and R and if it wasn’t they NOT the city were the wronged party and yet there is no record of them complaining or saying they were screwed by city workers. Shouldn’t they be the ones complaining?

How after 9 years does anyone remember anything that will stand up in court and why are we blindly willing to accept the words of fired, disgruntled employees to cost taxpayers dollars chasing after things they say?

This goose chase is a total waste of time and money and should stop before it starts. Councilor Mercier should withdraw that request and start looking at things she can effect.

Make sure the city does have a policy about scrap, make sure dept. heads know and follow it and make sure the Manager is meeting with all dept. heads and communicating with the Council and stop chasing ghost that will result in nothing but cost of time and taxpayers dollars.

Did the city in 2003 have a written policy concerning scrap? For that matter do they now?

The LHA did and does and when I asked about it, was told;

‘We do have a procedure in place for dealing with scrap metals and white goods (refrigerators, stoves) and that there is very minimal scrap copper on an annual basis, it generally runs about $1,000 per year.”

Isn’t their a statute of limitations for theft? Can we go back 9 years and prove beyond a reasonable doubt the exact amount of money someone MAY have received from stealing?? And how much do we spend in man hours to find this out?

All the alphabet divisions that looked into the Inspection/LHA Issue ended up with NOTHING but a slap on the wrist for nOT doing enough testing BEFore hand, NO Proof of Asbestos, Illegal Dumping or wrong doing at a cost of thousands of dollars and time spent by people who could be looking into real issues.

Doesn’t this apply to any ability to prosecute anyway?

An indictment for any other crime shall be found and filed within 6 years after such crime has been committed. Any period during which the defendant is not usually and publicly a resident within the commonwealth shall be excluded in determining the time limited?

In the latest chapter of who do you trust…Former Commissioner Bayliss is now saying on Tuesday he was for a public discussion but on Wednesday after talking to his Lawyer he changed his mind.

That backpedaling was done in the name of trying to save his friendship with Councilor Mercier who he hung out to dry in today’s sun.

Congrats to Lyle Moran for following up on my post and now in the breaking news section he has a story

Bayliss originally wanted public session on settlement

City Councilor Rita Mercier was correct Tuesday night when she said ousted License Commission Chairman Walter F. Bayliss Jr. told her he wanted his settlement with the city to be discussed in public.

“I should have said to Rita ‘I’m going to call my lawyer and find out whether it can be public’ and I did not,”

Bayliss said. “Rita Mercier did not lie.”

That sound you hear is Mr. Bayliss backpedaling to try and save some face..to little to late!

I could care less if Mr. Bayliss stayed or went from the License Board. I do think the City Manager handled the entire situation badly. Both waged a public campaign to get their side of the story out.

Mr.Bayliss said it was all about his reputation!

However the recent actions of Mr. Bayliss certainly call into question his character and do nothing but provide people to think that his quest to keep his seat had more to do with Health Insurance than his ‘reputation” and makes you wonder how he treats his friends.

Councilor Rita Mercier is someone I like and think she is exactly what you want in a councilor. She has also shown that she stands up for her friends and I respect and admire that.

So I believe she believed she was 100% telling the truth Tuesday Night when she said “I talked with Mr. Bayliss and he has no problem with discussing this publicly.”

Had the council members proceeded based just on the words of this long serving and highly respect city councilor it appears they would have violated a confidentiality agreement and opened the City up to another lawsuit!

Thanks Walter, That’s what friends are for right? To publicly embarrass a City Councilor who is now being made to look like she was lying.

I believe Rita when she says she spoke with you and you had no issue with talking about this in public. I believe YOU lied to her and now you have put Councilor Mercier into a position that she has to say either she was lying or misunderstood you or she has to say you are a LIAR!

If this was just about your reputation that is one thing but because of you it is now about the reputation of a long serving trusted city councilor.

I believe her and challenge you to either go on WCAP with Teddy or call us Saturday Morning on Saturday Morning Live with Warren Shaw and tell us personally who was lying to who?

Did you lie to Rita or did she lie to her fellow councilors and the citizens who were watching?

MY money is on you and just like you are hiding the settlement agreement, you will not be man enough to respond and will leave Rita hanging out to dry!

‘I’m willing to bet Mr. Bayliss through his Attorney will NOT allow the exact details of the settlement to be made public. ‘

It appears I was correct yesterday because in today’s Sun Lyle Moran has a story that says Ex-license-panel chair wants to keep settlement details private (NOT yet available on the free site, I’m reading the on-line)

This is a case of both sides hiding from the truth so they can each state their own version of the story. They both conducted public campaigns to get their side out and now the City which lost the case but won the war wants everyone to know that Mr. Bayliss seems to be exaggerating the truth, while Mr. Bayliss has decided that keeping the truth hidden serves him the best.

Truth – He had to resign has part of the settlement!

The bottom line is the Manager got what he wanted, Mr. Bayliss to resign but the public will not know the exact cost to do that.

Mr. Bayliss gets to tell people he won, keep saying he didn’t have to resign and he also gets to say privately what he can’t say publicly. The City paid for his legal fees.

In today’s SUN ‘ he sates ” the city did not cover his legal costs.’ because if he said it publicly it violates the confidentiality agreement HIS Lawyer wanted and agreed to.

Mr. Bayliss told The Sun Wednesday he stands by his attorney’s position that the settlement should not be discussed in public.

Reportedly in private he has told people he did get his legal expense covered and he went on the radio and claimed he didn’t have to resign.

The city side has rumors floating that the cost to remove Mr. Bayliss
was the cost of attorney fees, health insurance coverage but that he had to resign within 30 days.

Either way both sides will be content to have the rumors and whisper campaigns continue and hide the truth from the public.