Thursday, February 04, 2010

Blog comments that should be posts - Historic Preservation

Fall River has historically done a bad job with historic preservation, which is why THIS is a comment that should be a post. And honestly I can't say it any better than Scout. Historic preservation needs to be part of the mission for our city leadership. Scout is right when he says "that heritage and architecture are among FR's few remaining assets." And I believe they are an important part to revitalizing Fall River.

Scout
said... (5:43 PM, February 03, 2010)

Lefty, can we talk about the need for a coherent historic preservation policy in FR?

I know that's not top of mind for everyone, given all the other challenges the city's facing ... but I'm so sad to see the wrecking ball headed for St. Louis Church.

FR has a consistent history of destroying beautiful, historic buildings and replacing them with concrete boxes. And yet I'm still somehow astounded to hear of this latest insult to the city's skyline.

Durfee Theatre: gone.
Old City Hall: gone.
Central Congregational: rotting away on Rock Street.
And now this latest casualty of an indifferent preservation policy.

Has there been any discussion locally of what's going to happen to the old Durfee building if/when its courthouse operations are moved to the new courthouse?

Again ... I know this must feel less than urgent to a lot of people. But I really feel that heritage and architecture are among FR's few remaining assets. And their destruction will have immediate effects on the people of the city (as an extension of broken window syndrome) as well as longer-term implications for economic development.

If FR can address education, crime, and its other various challenges, it will survive only if it can a) attract new industry; and/or b) become a bedroom community for folks who can't afford property closer to Boston. The city's heritage value and architectural integrity are key to both possible opportunities.

I'm not local, so I don't understand the particulars ... but I don't get how a nonprofit organization can acquire a National Register property and simply neglect it to the point that it (apparently) needs to be demolished. And no one noticed. How is that possible?

Is there anything that can be done to stem the tide of this destruction? If so, what?

Blog comments that should be posts - Joan Menard to retire?

Joan Menard to retire?

Here's the comment with some analysis!

Anonymous said... (12:01 PM, February 02, 2010)

Congratulations and breaking news... Joanie Boloney (Joan Menard) to announce her retirement soon.

Open field will look like this:
Mike Coogan - President of Firefighters Union in Fall River who already announced he was looking

Probable: Rep. Mike Rodrigues of Westport - Selectman Lorne Lawless of Somerset

Possible: Surprise entry from the Fall River City Council, maybe Joe Camara or Linda Pereira or Brad Kilby who have all run for state representative in the past and are possibly still interested in state office. Pelletier, Mitchell, Casey, Bigelow are all either too old or in poor health or couldn't raise the money or just aren't credible candidates. An outside chance of Mike Lund or Eric Poulin maybe, one could raise the money for sure and the other supposedly has high likeability and favorability ratings in Fall River but probably couldn't raise the money. Also Poulin hasn't been on the council long enough so likely too early to jump ship. Lund already has a term in and could do well in Fall River and Swansea.

Well this morning on WSAR they were saying that Menard has not decided if she if going to run or not so it looks like our commenter is on to something and the breakdown is pretty interesting analysis, which is why THIS is a comment that should be a post.

Tuesday, February 02, 2010

Blog-a-versary


Today marks the 4th anniversary of A View From Battleship Cove!

I think I can also technically say that the blog is in its second decade.

It's kind of funny to see each year roll by. I never expected to be blogging 4 years since that first post. I never expected to have tens of thousands visits in a year. I never expected to have regular readers comment on my post, send emails, and chat with me on IM.

It's all been a lot of fun.

Thanks for stopping by and reading, helping me share my views and sharing yours in return.

Lefty

Saturday, January 30, 2010

SouthCoast Photo of the Month




Recently I staggered out of bed to get ready for work. I stumbled into the kitchen and started a pot of coffee and then went to shower and get dressed. When I made my way back into the kitchen the coffee was ready. I went to grab my coffee mug from its familiar location but it wasn't there.

Where's my mug?! Where is my OFFICIAL A View From Battleship Cove coffee mug? It was sitting right here next to the coffee pot where it ALWAYS sits.

Did I leave it somewhere else?

For days I searched but couldn't find it, Mugsy was missing!!

A few weeks later I received a letter in the mail. Inside were these pictures and a note saying that my mug was fine and enjoying the rich full bodied taste of coffee in the Netherlands!

That was it, no ransom note, no explanation of why or how just that note and a promise that there would be more to follow.

So this month's photo(s) of the month is of my beloved coffee cup apparently enjoying a holiday in the Netherlands!
________________________________________________________


Are you an avid picture taker? Do you have a shot you're particularly proud of? Perhaps just a shot that you'd like to share? Submit it here for the SouthCoast Photo of the Month! Send submissions to aviewfrombattleshipcove@google.com

Friday, January 29, 2010

Gambling with our future

It seems that the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe may be giving up on plans to build a casino in Middleboro and instead is considering building one here in Fall River.

Oh God haven't we been through this before?

According to SouthCoastToday.com the Wampanoag's feel that the "financially strapped city will be a more welcoming home for a future casino." Unfortunately Fall River is facing hard times and it looks like our new mayor is already on board.

"Right now, the city of Fall River has the second highest unemployment rate in the commonwealth of Massachusetts," Flanagan said. "So a gaming facility would put people to work of all skills levels and all education levels."

Oh dear, and just when I was starting to like Mayor Flanagan.

Of course Fall River HAS been through this before back in 1997 the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head wanted to build a casino in the city. When that failed to pass the House they then tried for a high stakes bingo hall that first failed to pass a city council vote and then failed to get enough votes in a special election.

I gladly voted against this 12 years ago and thought we put this to rest. Why is Fall River back on the radar? That's simple the Mashpee Wampanoag's think as a "financially strapped city" we'll do little to resist them. You know, this is exactly why we've been dealing with Hess all these years because they figured we could be exploited too.

I remember this the last time all the talk of the money it would bring and the jobs! Thing is most of the money and the jobs would be short term during construction, after that it was mostly part time stuff and very few good paying jobs. Where in the world would we stick a casino now? Originally the proposal was up on Airport Road, which would have meant very little trickle down for the rest of the city. People coming to gamble wouldn't be driving through Fall River and hitting our restaurants. They would just go directly there. What will be different this time?

If this really gains momentum we'll hear about all sorts of studies that show the benefits. Of course revenue will be the big magic one and jobs. They'll be talk about how this will help revitalize the city and be the cornerstone for tourism in the city. However there are also tons of studies that show increased crime rates, the introduction to organized crime, the devastating social toll caused by gambling addictions. In short something like this might bring a bit more revenue and a few more jobs but at what cost? And once you build it you can't go back!

Right now developers in New Bedford are already in the process of developing a downtown casino. Can this area really support TWO casinos that are THAT close? I recently linked to a post about the Harbour Mall which basically stated that after the Dartmouth Mall and the Swansea Mall opened up the Harbour Mall pretty became the area's second-rate mall. Well with Twin Rivers in Lincoln and Foxwoods not terribly far away and a proposed New Bedford casino are we going to end up with the Harbour Mall of casinos? Who will go to the second-rate casino? Oh that's right the people who live right next to it, which means the revenue your generating is really just coming out of your own economy anyway. It also means that all the social troubles are just yours too.

People who gamble are usually looking for a quick way to make money and wind up losing more than they win. I think the same can be said for communities who gamble on gambling.

Thursday, January 28, 2010

It's MY-TV! Where is the money going?

In his final month in office Mayor Correia signed a 10 year contract with Comcast. Amongst the highlights is the doubling of the franchise fee which is projected to generate over $800,000 a year. This will more than double the amount of money available for PEG (Public, Education, and Government) media access.

Sounds good right? Well, not so fast. Clearly the doubling of the franchise fee is going to mean an increase in your cable bill. In fact if you have a comcast box in your house part of your bill has always funded PEG media access.

How is this money being spent?

My understanding is that the FREDTV ( the school department) has been getting the vast majority, (somewhere between $300,000-$400,000) of the money paid to the city by Comcast for PEG funding. (Let's not forget this is really money being billed to you!) How is that money used? Well part of it goes into the programming you see when you flip on channel 17. Gee it hardly seems money well spent. Don't get me wrong I think it's great to see the a school play, or a band but most of the time when I turn on the channel I see annoying slide shows of all the schools or generic announcements. Obviously some of this money is used behind the scenes as part of an education program but where are the results?

Oh, someone will be quick to point out that the FREDTV (the school department) also runs the Government Channel! Well, that is pretty low overhead. It too is run out of Durfee High and so utilizes pretty much all the same equipment etc. but also the Government Channel has been up and running for less than a year.

The public channel is run by Fall River Community Television up at BCC. This is the channel that is supposed to be available to everyone in the community. Want to do a show on collecting bottle caps? Well you can! Do you want to film various sites around the city? Your grandmother's birthday celebration? A jug band? This is the place. It's really kind of a cool concept. In a way it is much like blogging ANYONE can start a blog as long as they have something they want to share and with a little training and few rules anyone can have a public access show. All it takes is some hard work and dedication. Now my understanding is that the most impressive of our 3 channels (in my humble opinion) runs their operation on a shoestring budget of around $75,000. I think that's a pretty good return on our investment.

So here's the amazing thing, with PEG funding about to double FREDTV (the school department) is trying to make the case that they should keep pretty much all that money for themselves! Gee, that seems a little greedy! Does the FREDTV (the school department) really need $800,000 to run 2 channels? I have a few problems with this:

1. I'm not sure we're getting very much for our $300,00-$400,000 investment handing over more money NEVER seems to be a good idea in such situations.

2. I have serious concerns about the GOVERNMENT CHANNEL being run by the school department, which is gee, PART OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT

3. I think it is a major disservice to not fund the channel that is meant to be available to the community at a level comparable to the other two.

But here's the thing, this is MY TV (and if you're a Comcast customer yours too!) and I think I should get a say in how this money is spent and what I expect to see in return.

Other communities have non-profit organizations that oversee how PEG media access is handled. It's something we should be considering here in Fall River. A board that could help determine the funding for each channel and the goals and then make sure that those things are being achieved.

Even without a non-profit board providing oversight we need to figure out who is getting what and who is running what. It is pretty silly to have the public access channel run on the crumbs tossed aside while FREDTV has enjoyed the bulk of our PEG funding. Now with MORE money coming in we really need to equalize that. After all these channels are supposed to be for the benefit of the community at large. I think I would just start by splitting the funding 3 ways, a third for each channel and then tweak and adjust based on which channel might need more and which can make do with less. I would also seek proposals from FRCTV on how they would operate the Government Channel.

Why shouldn't Government run the Government Channel? Just on the surface the idea seems like a conflict of interest. Can you imagine if the Mayor announced the city was buying the Herald News?! Gee would you trust the coverage? The same principle applies. On top of that I've already heard that meetings had to be adjourned because the students had to go home! How do you handle special meetings held on weekends or during school hours? It seems like a huge mess. Don't get me wrong I think student involvement is a great thing, but let FREDTV form a partnership with whoever runs G-TV so that kids can be involved and the essential mission (which should really be to cover all meetings and government events) can still be carried out.

Now speaking of 'the essential mission' the public access channel needs more funding to carry out its core mission. More funding would allow FRCTV to do MORE outreach and this is the PUBLIC channel the one available for the citizens to use. It would allow for possibly more equipment to be purchased to expand their abilities, heck it might even allow FRCTV to move away from BCC and possibly run out of a dedicated space with multiple studios and allow for even greater outreach and accessibility. OK, that is some pretty lofty goals but certainly with such a modest budget more funding could really make a big impact at FRCTV.

In a nutshell the Government Channel should be separate from government and cover all meetings and government events. The Public Channel should have more resources which will allow it to be more accessible and do more outreach. What about the Education Channel?

Well first off before we consider giving them more money I think we need to figure out how they've been spending the money they currently get. Obviously not every dollar is showing up on our TV screens, part of that money is in the classroom. However, I would think what we DO see on the screen should be an indicator of what is going on in the classroom, I'm not sure that's the case.

Part of the money the city will be getting under this contract is funding for equipment and facilities. I think we need really think about improving our PEG access infrastructure as well as expanding on what that infrastructure should be. What do I mean? Well for starters I think we need to invest on better facilities and determine where those facilities should be. For instance nothing annoys me more than watching a school committee meeting where I can't hear half the conversation. In the past I have been an advocate for roaming school committee meetings that visit each school, but now I'm thinking they should be held in one location and that location set up to ensure good video and audio recording. In fact I'm beginning to think it makes sense to have these meetings in the City Council chambers and maybe other meetings as well. I think the Fall River room on the 6th floor of Government Center gets used for many functions and press conferences and should be set up in much the same way and perhaps the Nagle Auditorium at Durfee.

Lastly I think we need to make the bulk of this programming available to the community as a whole. Unfortunately there is no mechanism in place to make satellite dish networks or other competitors carry the PEG media access channels, and in fact cable and telephone companies have lobbied the Federal government to reduce or end PEG television. Still I think it is important that everyone in the community have access to programming these channels provide. Many other communities have embraced new and emerging technologies utilizing the internet. This is a direction we need to move toward to make sure that we always have a community outlet for free speech, open government, and the 4th grade spelling bee.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Fall River's Harbour Mall

Did you know that the Harbour Mall is celebrating it's 40th birthday this year?

Did you know that neither Wal Mart OR Kmart were the original anchor stores?

Do you remember when the movie theater was added? The mall has one unique feature that no other shopping center in the United States can claim. Do you know what it is?

Here's an interesting blog post I came across about Fall River's New Harbour Mall, that I thought would be worth sharing.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Mr. Brown Goes to Washington

It's the Democrats race...

With the passing of Ted Kennedy, I like many assumed that the person elected to fill the remainder of his senate term would be a Democrat. After all, Massachusetts is the bluest of the blue states and Ted Kennedy a liberal icon who had been a symbol of the Democratic party for so long it seemed he could have founded it. When Attorney General Martha Coakley announced her intentions to run it seemed a done deal. Coakley had statewide name recognition was reasonably popular and had an organization that hit the ground running. Coakley dominated the primary campaign and it became clear that her Democrat rivals never stood a chance. Even the Kennedy family endorsing one of her opponents did little to affect her momentum.

A Reasonable Republican...

Scott Brown on the other hand began his quest for the Republican nomination with little name recognition in a race that nobody was paying any attention to. Brown overwhelmingly won the Republican primary, but turnout was extremely low and only 12% of Massachusetts voters are Republicans. How could he hope to beat Coakley in January?

Closing the Gap...

When Scott Brown won the Republican Primary in December HIS campaign was just beginning, in contrast most would have assumed that Coakley's was done and all she had to do was sit back and let the clock run out. Certainly it seems that was the attitude of the Coakley camp it seems that we hardly heard a peep out of Martha. As Brown canvassed the state more and more people began to pay attention. Who knows why? Did the message resonate? Were people upset that the Democrats seemed to assume an easy win? Was it health care in Washington or national defense? This is really the key that the pundits are going to debate over and over again but it is safe to say for a combination of reasons Scott Brown found himself closing the gap.

Flat Footed....

With Scott closing the gap it suddenly looked like a race! I found myself shocked at the thought and energized by the notion. A low turnout, like many were expecting may have allowed an energized Republican Party with the help of independents to pull off a surprise win. It seemed with all the news coverage of the closeness of the race energized Brown's supporters firmly putting momentum on his side.

Even then the Coakley campaign seemed to caught flat footed, last minute efforts were put in place to bring in big names like President Clinton and even President Obama. It was leaked to me that efforts to get Democrats mobilized here in Fall River didn't start until this past weekend and when the party faithful started going door to door they were shocked and awed to find out that the Republican effort had already been out in force.

For the first time in almost 40 years...

Now that it was a race it seemed anything could happen on election day. A high turnout was now being predicted. Would the sudden Brown surge motivate the Democrat faithful to come out in force? Would independent voters come out for Brown as strongly as the polls indicated? The one thing that was certain is nobody was taking a Democrat win as a given and several pundits were already calling it a Brown victory. When all was said and done the pundits and polls turned out to be right and Scott Brown became the first Republican elected to the U.S. Senate since 1972.

Lefty's View: I'm giddy! Massachusetts just elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate! That said, I've heard an awful lot of talk about how this was a mandate for the Republican party, a sign of a resurgence of Republicanism in Massachusetts. I've heard that this was a clear indicator that Republicans would regain some seats in the House and Senate in this Fall's elections. I think that's a lot of nonsense. Scott Brown's victory is an amazing accomplishment but one that came about due to many, many factors. Scott Brown has been called a moderate, a populist, a centrist, and an independent. There is a probably some truth to all those labels and Republicans, independents, and even some Democrats could find something to relate to with Brown. Brown was able to define himself as an independent thinker, beholden to no one, a regular guy with humble beginnings. There is a lot in that for people to identify with. The issues he ran on resonated with the concerns of Massachusetts voters. A national health care policy that is almost universally believed to be imperfect has little appeal for a state that has 98% of its residents insured. A candidate crying out for tax cuts and more fiscal commonsense is appealing to residents effected by Massachusetts fiscal woes. Along with that there is Martha Coakley's failure to ignite any sort of passion in the hearts of voters after the primary. Most of us didn't vote in the primary and didn't pay attention. When the race heated up the people Martha did excite were to few and the voters who were now paying attention hadn't heard from her. If she had canvassed the state, had the Kennedy's go around the state on her behalf, or even just paid more attention to what her opponent was doing things probably would have been different.

Scott Brown's election was like capturing lightening in a bottle, a perfect combination of events and circumstances that led to victory. Brown will have a tougher job winning reelection in 2012, when I suspect Massachusetts turns 'blue' again. There is some lessons here for the Massachusetts Republican Party:

1. First and foremost run credible candidates with statewide appeal, to do otherwise keeps the party from any chance of being taken seriously.

2. The best chance for Republicans to win more seats is to run candidates with broad appeal to independents and conservative Democrats. Moderate Republicans are not embraced by the party but with 12% or less of Massachusetts voters registering as Republicans, the party needs to realize that it HAS to move to the left to have an credibility in the state. That means embracing moderates.

3. As the minority party Republicans can't compete with traditional machine politics, yet can still excite the base and bring in new voters by running grassroot campaigns.

Scott Brown has laid down a pretty good blueprint for Republicans in Massachusetts to use. Let's see if anyone is paying attention.