After reading an earlier blog post regarding former Mayor Matthews, I was shocked to hear some of his proposed plans for the city of Newburyport. Could you even imagine our lovely city today if some of those ideas came to fruition? An oil tank farm on Low St.? What really struck me is how blatantly obvious it is to us now that these are terrible ideas and that they would have ruined the city. It seems like we really dodged a serious bullet in those days, however, I’m sure at the time there was a segment of the population that may have supported those ideas. Jump forward to today, and you can almost sense that we face the same type of questions today, decisions that will determine the fate of Newburyport for future generations.

It seems that Mayor Matthews plans were short term solutions to improve Newburyport financially. I’m sure the oil pipeline and garbage incinerator would have meant fast cash for a down-trodden Newburyport, and I’m sure many people argued that it would keep taxes low, etc. etc. Thankfully, local citizens with more foresight realized how devastating those projects would be to Newburyport, that had they been built we would have crossed a sort of “point of no return” which would have led our city down a very different path and ultimately to a very different destination than the one we’ve arrived at today. Those citizens stood up to the local government in town and made them listen to their ideas, their thoughts, their fears and concerns and made the government realize that they indeed, work for us.

Again, jump ahead to the present. We are again faced with important decisions, many of them short term solutions designed to make some fast cash at the expense of the integrity of the city of Newburyport. Do we really want a huge condo complex built on the Woodman farm? In 20 years would we prefer to look at giant development there or would we prefer to look back and say, thank god we got together and prevented that project and kept such a critical piece of land as open space? Would we look back and laugh at how foolish an idea the project was at the time and how lucky we were to avoid such an irreversible situation? The same can be said about the waterfront, do we want to look back at this point in time and say, “What were we thinking? Pave the entire waterfront and charge people to park in all the lots downtown? We must have been crazy!” or do we want to look back with regret and say,” I sure wish someone would have stood up and said something, came up with a better plan, protected such an integral part of the character of Newburyport.”

I’ve tried hard throughout this post to avoid this cliché, but I don’t think I can hold out any longer, “Those who don’t understand history are condemned to repeat it.” I hope that we are fortunate enough to have some of those citizens with great foresight that can stand up to the critical issues of the day and come up with better solutions, be it Woodman Farm, the waterfront, infill, bike lanes, parking, over development, the senior center, or whatever. There are those that will say you can’t stand in the way of progress, but years ago progress meant having a tank farm across the street from the middle school, and thankfully we avoided that disaster. It’s ok that to preserve the things that make this city special, its ok to hold on to the character and traditions that have grown in this place and it’s ok to stand up and say no to projects that only seek to make a quick buck for the city while devastating everything we love about it.

Ben Laing, Newburyport

More than a few people have taken an exception to my description of Byron Matthews as being “by all accounts was an excellent mayor” (see earlier post.) Tom Ryan in the March 24, 2006 edition of the Undertoad, elaborates on my apparent misconception.

To quote from the Undertoad:

“He (Byron Matthews) was in charge when the restoration (of downtown Newburyport) took place. However, it was Mayor George Lawler who secured finding from HUD on his way out the door. He did this because of the work done by the heroic citizens involved in the Newburyport Historical Society. Had Matthew’s had his way the downtown we know today would not have existed, it would have been a strip mall and a parking lot.”

I stand corrected.

Mr. Ryan also goes on to report that if former mayor Byron Matthews “had has his way there would have been a major docking station three miles off the coast of Plum Island and oil tankers would have pulled up and unloaded the oil that would run through huge pipes over Plum Island, through Newburyport and end up in a tank farm that was to have 18-24 huge oil tanks (40-50 feet high) on the corner of Low and Hale where Port Rehab and the neighborhood that sits behind it is now.”

I stand corrected again.

And to quote from Mr. Ryan in the Undertoad one more time, in the Newburyport Daily News, October 30, 1995, Alan Davitt wrote:

“Later in one of his administrations he (Matthews) advocated a waste treatment facility exactly as the one now operation along route 495 in North Andover. If Newburyport had been selected, the project was to be located in the Quail Run area.”

I stand corrected one more time.

I thank the Undertoad for these corrections and clarifications. I now know much more now about the 10 year administration of former mayor Byron Matthews than I did before. And it becomes even more apparent that Byron Matthews might not be the best appointment to replace Mary Lou Supple for the Newburyport Redevelopment Authority.

And it also becomes apparent that what Bill Plant refers to as the “good old boys” may not in fact have always been either prudent or wise.

I stand corrected a fourth time.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Hi Mary,

Just felt I needed to respond to your recent blog entry:

I am sorry people feel upset that I resigned my seat to seek the Clerks Position, but as I have posted on other forums and was printed in the Undertoad it was a decision I felt was in my, my family’s and the city’s best interests.

I return phone calls/emails as quickly as I can. If I neglect to return a call, I am sorry but rest assured that the issue/problem has been taken care of to the best of my ability.

I never said I wanted to pave the entire waterfront. I am for a mixed use, nicely landscaped combination Park/parking. I do not feel that the Downtown can be viable without some parking on the waterfront. I have always said that it would be a sin to pave over everything down there.

As far as the whole “infill” thing I have stated my posistion many times. The ordinance as written was too restrictive on the homeowner. I and Councilor McCarthy offered to reconsider our vote but the planning board would not compromise. This was the only ordinance change designed to curb development that I have voted against.

John Moak is a friend of mine. I have known him most of my life. He was always great to work with when he was Clerk. That being said I have no allegiance to anyone in the corner office. I would vote for his policies when I agree with them and vote against them when I don’t. That was the same as it was with Mayor Clancy when I was a councilor and the same philosophy I have had with past administrations as a private citizen.

My record over the past two years has quite a bit to show for it. I am not a “conservative good ol’ boy.” nor am I a “bombastic progressive.” I have and always will vote the way I feel is in the best interests of ward 1 first and the city as a whole. We would never have accomplished what we did if we had an extremist viewpoint (from either end of the spectrum) in that chair. The common pasture would not have been purchased, we would have no bike lanes slated for Plum Island, Perkins park would not be remedied and Joppa park still would not be handicapped accessible. I am proud to have been a part of what the council accomplished in the last two years and hope to be part of it in the future. We will let the voters decide which way they want to go.

Take Care

Jeremy

(Editor’s note: I received this very thoughtful response to my last posting from Jeremy Gillis, and I thought it would be appropriate to publish the entire email as it was sent to me. I did not ask Mr. Gillis’ permission, but I thought he would not mind.)

I was very interested to read Tom Ryan’s thoughts in the recent issue of the Undertoad, March 24, 2006, on the outcome of the Ward 1 preliminary election.

This is complicated.

What I hear as I walk and talk around the South End of Newburyport, which is where part of Ward 1 is located (the other part is on Plum Island) is that Mr. Ryan is right, that folks are not happy with Mr. Gillis’ choice to resign his seat and seek the Newburyport City Clerk’s position. Actually, this surprised me. The other thing I hear is that many people were upset that Jeremy Gillis didn’t return their phone calls the way they would like. (I myself would always wander down to Port Paint and Paper, where Mr. Gillis works, when I wanted a chat with Jeremy Gillis). The other factor is Mr. Gillis’ position, which in the preliminaries was to pave over the entire waterfront, and his voting record on the issue of infill (put “infill” in the search box, and hopefully the post on that subject will come up.) And last but not least, Jeremy Gillis’ allegiance, if you will, to Mayor John Moak.

I would also agree with Mr. Ryan, that Larry McCavitt the other candidate running in this election can be bombastic and persistent. Whereas Jeremy Gillis has a very deft hand when it comes to politics, which I admire enormously, Mr. McCavitt’s approach appears to be more like a political sledgehammer. Larry McCavitt is also a proud, unapologetic, if not somewhat inflammatory “progressive.”

Now, I have no idea what will happen in this race, and I will follow it with great interest, but it is my feeling that it is no accident that Mr. McCavitt won two to one over Jeremy Gillis.

It is my feeling that the good people of Ward 1 learned from the mayoral election. Elections matter. Political positions matter. And the fact that it appears that Mayor John Moak is not listening matters.

Whereas in previous elections, a sledgehammer approach could backfire, it seems that people are so angry and so disillusioned with the present administration, that a strong, progressive, sledge hammer approach could be appreciated. It could be seen as a way of trying to get the administration’s attention and tilting the Newburyport City Council to a more progressive side, to counter what appears to be, at this point, an entrenched, “good old boy” mentality.

I’m putting a little money on this race, and ordinarily I’m not a betting woman. If Mayor John Moak does not start listening and honoring his all his constituents, and if he goes and axes Newburyport Planning Director, Nicholas Cracknell, that those two things would most likely guarantee that Larry McCavitt could win the Ward 1 election.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

In the Newburyport Current, Friday, March 24, 2006, Mayor John Moak has this to say in regard to his controversial appointment of Byron Matthews for the board of the Newburyport Redevelopment Authority, replacing long time board member Mary Lou Supple:

“This is a good decision. It’s not a fluff choice for a fluff job. It’s a tough job. Some say this is a ‘Good old Boy’ decision. But you know what, good old boys and good old girls do a good job for the city. That’s why we’re where we are today, because of what they did 30 years ago.”

Wow. One hardly knows where to begin responding to that particular remark.

I think that if Mayor John Moak had made similar remarks during his election campaign as part of a stump speech, my guess is that he most probably would have lost the election by a landslide.

It may indeed be true, good old boys and girls do an excellent job for the city of Newburyport, Massachusetts. But what that remark indicates is a lack of respect and honor for all those people who also do an excellent job for the city of Newburyport, who are not good old boys and girls. (For a definition of “good old boy” please put “Bill Plant” and “good old boys” in the search box, and hopefully the appropriate post will come up.)

And for all those folks, who I call “progressives,” who voted for him in a big way, thinking that John Moak was a “safe” candidate, (to use Jim Roy’s phrase in the same issue of the Newburyport Current. I would interpret “safe” as meaning “fair and balanced.”) I would imagine that this remark could sound harsh and dismissive.

What I am hearing more and more, and this is not just from “progressives,” but also from people who have lived here all there lives, is that John Moak is not “honoring” all the people of Newburyport.

Many people feel that the opinions and contributions by people who do not agree with Mayor John Moak are being treated with disdain. And it appears to me that this makes many people from all different political points of view feel very nervous, and that they may feel that this does not bode well for what could happen in the next 21 months of this administration.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Let’s have a little chat about “politicking.”

In the Newburyport Daily News, March 15, 2006, Mayor John Moak said, “Maybe I haven’t been spending enough time politicking.”

Tom Ryan the editor of the Undertoad has made the observation that Mayor John Moak had been paying attention to the Newburyport department heads but not reaching out and paying attention to the Newburyport City Council.

The Newburyport Daily News on March 17, 2006 say’s, “It was the first time Moak has addressed councilors at a meeting. He believed the reason they did not approve his requests Monday was because he did not do enough “politicking” beforehand.”

What I hear from many Newburyport City Councilors is that they feel that they have been ignored and shut out by Mayor John Moak. Newburyport City Councilor Bruce Vogel goes on record as saying that in the March 17th article in the Newburyport Daily News and also expresses his frustration at the lack of a “collaborative approach to governing” by Mayor John Moak in the Newburyport Current, March 17, 2006.

So I was really surprised to read in today’s Newburyport Daily News, March 22, 2006 that former mayor Byron Matthews, Mayor John Moak’s controversial appointment to the NRA board has this to say:

” ‘One thing lacking is no one talks to the mayor,’ Matthews said. “It’s time we starting communicating, the City Council ought to be interested in that.’ ”

Wow. Lots and lots of people have been talking and trying to reach out to Mayor John Moak, and that includes members of the City Council, and as I’ve said in other posts, from everything that I’ve been told, Mayor John Moak is just not listening, not listening at all. Let’s just take his very public and repeated comments on the fact that he apparently has had no interest in taking into account the NRA survey for Newbuyrport’s waterfront and has said on record repeatedly, that he is going to do exactly what he wants.

This is the kind of politicking I do not like. I do not like it when good people try to reach out to Mayor John Moak again and again and then are “accused” and “blamed” (harsh words, but that’s what it sure sounds like to me) of not wanting to communicate with him. It would be one reason right off the bat that I would have reservations about former mayor Byron Matthews being on the NRA. It appears to me that there has been a vast lack of politicking on Mayor Moak’s part, and not any lack of trying to reach out on the part of the Newburyport City Council. Good grief, let’s set the record straight on this one.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

I can imagine that people who have lived in Newburyport, Massachusetts a “short” time wonder what in the world all the whoop-la is about Byron Matthews being picked for the board of the NRA, and what in the world a “good old boy” could be.

Bill Plant, who served as the editor of the Newburyport Daily News for many years, has a description of “good old boys” in the Newburyport Daily News, October 6, 2003, and he has this to say:

“Most of those who participated in what became the economic recovery of Newburyport between 1950 and the end of the century knew one another because there was little movement in or out of communities at that time. They could be separated by age groups, but, in the main, those who are sometimes referred to as the “good old boys” were in their 30s as they began to move through careers and public service after World War II. We not only knew one another, we often had family relationships on some level. That was true of my family and that of Byron Matthews.”

Mr. Plant also indicates in the same article that it was this generation that replaced that of Andrew J (Bossy) Gillis’ time ( and Bossy Gillis is a whole other series of posts.) There is an indication in the article that there was great pride in this generation that they took this initiative and also were the ones that began turning Newburyport around with Urban Renewal in the 1970’s.

Byron Matthews served as mayor of Newburyport, Massachusetts for a 5 year term from 1968-1978, the longest anyone has ever served in the corner office. Mr. Matthew oversaw much of the restoration of historic downtown Newburyport, and by all accounts was an excellent mayor.

When I moved here in 1981, the “good old boys” were a closed community that “newcomers” just could not penetrate. There was a definite wall. It has always been my impression that as more and more newcomers arrived in Newburyport as a result of Urban Renewal, that a resentment of not being let into this inner community festered and grew.

When Mayor Lisa Mead, a young women of 32 from Ohio, was elected mayor in 1993, for a newcomer, it was like the walls of Jericho came tumbling down. It finally felt as if Newburyport was now our town too and finally we also had a “voice.”

Also, part of the story is that Lisa Mead defeated Byron Matthews in her second term as mayor of Newburyport, Massachusetts. It must have been an extremely bitter pill for Mr. Matthews to swallow after everything that he had contributed to the community. It must have felt as if “history” had been erased.

Ever since I’ve lived here I have felt that there has been this incredible tension between these two groups within the community of Newburyport, Massachusetts, the “new comers” and the “good old boys.”

Many, many “newcomers” felt that Mayor John Moak was “one of them,” and that their voice was going to continue to be heard. So, I think it came as a shock to find out that Byron Matthew, to quote the Newburyport Daily News, March 21, 2006, is a “long time friend and mentor” to Mayor John Moak.

I think that there is a great deal of fear that this appointment is an indication that the “voice” of the “newcomers” will no longer be heard, and their many contributions will be discounted, if not wiped out. And that the disappointment that Mr. Matthews must have felt when he was defeated by Lisa Mead could cloud his ability to be objective, appreciative and embrace the point of view of those of us who have moved here as a result of all his hard work and vision.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

The Newburyport Daily News reports today, March 21, 2006 that Mayor John Moak will ask the Newburyport City Council to appoint Byron Matthews to the NRA board in place of Mary Lou Supple. The Newburyport Daily News also reports that there is a certain amount of criticism with the “mayor’s controversial decision.”

As I’ve walked and talked to folks, the response I get is one of anger and disbelief. So, since the Newburyport City Council will comment and vote on this appointment, do not hesitate to give your City Councilor(s) a call or an email to let them know how you feel. No sense in keeping it to yourself, that won’t do any good. And you will not be bothering them. I’ve called three myself and they were very glad to I know how I felt, and said that they would very much like to hear how people feel about this appointment, so don’t be shy.

Councilors At-Large

Audrey McCarthy…..978-465-0032
Barry Connell………..978-462-7462
Thomas Jones…………978-465-4002
Steven Hutcheson…..978-465-5149
Gary Roberts, Jr……..978-465-1781

Ward 2: Gregory Earls……..978-465-9324
Ward 3: James Shanley……978-463-6806
Ward 4: Erford Fowler……..978-462-8569
Ward 5: Bruce Vogel………..978-462-5463
Ward 6: Thomas O’Brien…..978-465-0314

==================================

And Ward 1, don’t forget today is voting day for the primary for your City Councilor.

==================================

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

I’ve heard from so many reliable folks, that I think this one is no longer floating around in the air, it looks like it may actually have landed. It looks like it didn’t land soon enough to make it in time for today’s Newburyport Daily News. Most probably it will be a headline tomorrow. It appears that yes indeed, Mayor John Moak is planning to bring Byron Matthews forward for the NRA appointment to replace Mary Lou Supple.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport