Katy O'Connor Ives

Ah, Katy O'Connor Ives.

Two weeks ago, she wowed me at the candidate forum at Clipper Way, demonstrating a poise and ease of expressing herself that I hadn't previously seen. (To be fair, I haven't watched a council meeting in quite a long time.) I walked away intending to give her one of my votes.

Then, she impressed with her performance at the enjoyable ROOF Port Follies fund-raiser. Ives serenaded her tiny dog with a solid performance of Boy from Ipanema.

But then things went a bit south.  The profile of her in the Daily News, "Ives strives for waterfront access," included this troubling nugget.

"One of the most important priorities is access to the waterfront," Ives said. "There is such a rich history here, and city projects should be anchored in history."

I wondered how she defined Waterfront access? I think we're all in favor of maintaining an expanding the public's right along the river, particularly as Steve Karp decides what he'd like to do with his properties to the east and west of the NRA lots. As things stand, the public really has very limited access to the waterfront on Karp's property closest to the Route 1 bridge, unless you're dining at the Michael's or the Black Cow.

I'd hoped that was how she defined waterfront access, ensuring any future development on those lots restores the public's access to the river. But that might not be the case.

A few days later, the Daily News covered the second candidates forum with this article, "Candidates differ on waterfront's future."

Ives: She said that open land should be preserved, because the waterfront is a resource cherished by city residents. If a hotel is considered, it might be located "closer to the bridge" than to the east end of the city's public holdings.

Ives is a strong proponent of the Local Historic District and supports the project to rebuild the Bresnahan School, so she scores two out of three on my political litmus test. But I'm beginning to think she'd be against the placement of any buildings of the NRA lots. If so, we may have a problem.

Update: Ives called recently to explain her position and we're on the same page. No problem here. She's open to some limited building on the NRA lots.

p.s. I am intrigued by her proposal that the city take out a bond to pay for city's extensive sidewalk repairs. As Ives said at the forum, the state of the economy might help the city save money on costs as contractors compete for work. But before supporting such a measure I'd need to understand how we'll decide where the money is spent. Will there be a public body making decisions? Or a transparent formula we all can understand and accept?