Pretty Outrageous

I know next to nothing about the Crow's Lane matter except that I feel for the people living down there.

That's why this news is pretty enraging. How can this be?

I suspect it might come up in the mayoral debate tomorrow, 7 p.m. at the Nock Middle School.

My second point (read below item first)

Can someone tell me what role the Mayor will have in the development of the waterfront. I know he appoints a number of members to the NRA (not sure what number to be honest but I'll try to look it up.) But once the appointments are finished, what say does the Mayor/City/City Council have over development of the two lots?

I get the sense from the Port in Progress series that the NRA can act independently. So I'm left with the understanding that the NRA members can determine the future of the waterfront.

Moreover, Fred Hufnagel raises a very good point about the Waterfront Trust in his letter to the Daily News. This was in response to Jim Stiles' suggestion to hold weddings on the Waterfront as a means to raise fees:

The problem for the city is that it doesn't own waterfront park or most of the boardwalk. Ownership of these parcels (apart from the two NRA parking lots) was transferred to the Newburyport Waterfront Trust, a public charity, in 1991. The Trust, not the city, owns the land and receives any income from what goes on there. The Trust is not a city body; its only relationship to the city is in the appointment of its members by the mayor and City Council. Fees from events held on Trust lands are used by the Trust to help cover the costs of mowing the grass, trimming the trees and for other maintenance and improvements. So far this year the cost of park maintenance has been over $22,000, plus another $6,000 spent on repairs and improvements. Not all this money comes from fees; there are also a number of very generous donations made to the Trust. But fees from waterfront events are part of the whole package and are definitely needed by the Trust to help maintain this area.

So if the NRA controls the lots, and the Waterfront Trust manages the rest. What is left for the city and the mayor to do?

I'd love an answer that I can publish here.

Details would be nice

I didn't get to attend last night's candidates forum. (Frankly I wasn't quite sure if it was open to the public or just to folks at the condo complex where it was held, but that is beside the larger point.)

I was a little disappointed in the discussion around the waterfront. Seems like Jim Stiles tried to get things started with his opening salvo. I'm basing all my comments on the news article, btw. Find it here. But John Moak didn't pick up the challenge choosing, in his words, to focus on the successful elements of his first term.

I really hope someone takes the time to parse the details of the different Waterfront stances of the two candidates. Stephen Tait tried to do this here. (I hope this links to the article but I'm not sure if registration is required.) But I feel more can be done. What does 250 spaces look like on the waterfront? What about 150? Give us some graphics. Show us some details.

I guess this is an open letter to The News, but if the Current is up to the challenge go for it. I, of course, invite both camps to comment to this post.

I just need more info on this important subject. I think both sides took a different degree of hits from Letters to the Editor in the news. Janet Marcus leveled a pretty good blast against John Moak here. While Fred Hufnagel questioned some ideas that Jim Stiles raised here.

Disclaimer Number One: Politics plays a role in everything especially letters to the editor. I obviously can't verify every fact or statement in these letters. But I haven't seen any comments refuting the charges or addressing the concerns raised in either letter. I think that would be nice.

Disclaimer Number Two: As I've stated previously, I'm a less parking on the Waterfront guy. I don't necessary want wide open green space but I don't want too much parking down there.

I'll try to wrap this up, but all this blather leads me to a larger question which I'll address in a separate post.

Meanwhile, I'll attend future forums with an ear open for some answers and details.