byte&chew

Are we there yet?

Today's front page story in The Berlin Daily Sun "Council discuss city manager position with MRI" although not complete (where the rest of the article?), the story covers an issue that we should all be concerned about. There's no question in my mind that the current manager is a very competent person and puts to shame some of the previous office holders. I believe the point made by Don Jutton of MRIabout the manager "not leading in the right direction" is possibly at the bottom of the whole issue. Mr. Jutton is quoted as saying "If he's not meeting expectations, we're willing to address that" and to which I say; What are the expectations?  I believe that if you go back 6 to 8 months ago, I posted on this blog about the issue and the need to have a vision and, here we are a full year after the municipal elections and I'm still looking for that vision. I would believe that the manager would insist that Mayor and Council define a visionbecause it's in the manager's best interest to have a direction since we're dealing as Mr. Jutton said with "expectations".  Unless there's gross mismanagement by the manager (which I don't believe there is), how can you fault someone for not being able to read the minds of 9 individuals?  Mr. Jutton said that " When MacQueen came aboard five years ago, the city's goals  were to bring aboard a professional manager who would help improve the city's image in Concord".  I can say that I remember the mess the City was in 5 years ago and I also remember the fact that we had lost all credibility as a community, Mr. Jutton is right!  I suggest that it's time for Mayor and Council to sit down and define where they want the City to go and explore what MRI can do to help us meet those objectives. I hope we don't go  half informed and hire somebody new without first determining what we want and then again,  be disappointed that a new manager is not meeting our expectations.

First things first!

"Redeveloping downtown emerging as priority of city's master plan"  was the headline in The Berlin Daily Sun last Monday.  The article goes on to say that this should be where we start at turning Berlin's economy around and I disagree. To me this is like the man who just lost his job and decides to paint the living room of his house as his first step to getting back on his financial feet. It's not that painting the living room is bad or that it won't add value to the house, but don't you think he needs to find a job first? With the closings of the mills, the region has lost it's economic base (salary) and it seems to me that we need to focus our attention at replacing the revenue side of our economy and that should be our priority!  I don't think that fixing all of our downtown buildings will bring our retail sector to the point where it will replace the revenues from the mill or will compete with the retail box stores down the B/G road. We need to create a new economy! We need to do something that generates revenue by bringing-in money from outside Berlin either by selling products, adding value to a product or providing services where outsiders will exchange their money for these services and I don't see that happening on Main or Pleasant Streets. I fully agree that we need to spruce-up our downtown and that downtown is the face of the community and, that it's important that we look our best. My argument is that it's not the first thing we need to do. I suggest that we need to get a new economy going first, it will make fixing the downtown that much easier since investors will see the opportunities and invest. Mr. Gsottschneider get real, we need to invest in job creation, the rest will fall into place.

A TV Culture?

I keep being amazed at the number of people that visit this blog as well as the complex mixture of conversations that evolve from my post. I find it interesting that, quite often a conversation quite off subject, appears “out of nowhere”. It gives rise to the question of whether or not the community at large is just waiting for an opportunity to weigh in on a variety of issues?  In the past I’ve questioned the usefulness of this blog and on a couple of occasions I’ve come close to pulling the plug on byte&chew. Although I have no idea who everybody is who comes to this site out of the 150 to 200 hits a day it receives, it must be that there’s some value to the comments that gets posted here. My frustration is that we seem to be reaching but a small minority of folks who have a specific topic on their minds, such as the pros and cons of the Laidlaw Energy project. If my conclusion that the people of Berlin and the region wish they could be having a conversation about things/issues, what would that conversation sound like and what would we be talking about? It’s also not that there isn’t a variety of venues out there that people could utilize to make their voices heard. City and town governments have public comment segments to almost all meetings, there’s letters to the editors to all of the newspapers, yet our public meetings are poorly attended if at all and other than occasional bitching about one issue or other, nobody brings their thoughts to the newspapers. Could it be that most folks believe that nobody is listening and that it doesn’t matter what they say, nothing will change? If that’s the conclusion, then what do those of us who vent on these blogs think will be accomplished by our rants? Are we a minority of folks who haven’t given up and still believe that we can do something about our problems if we put our minds to it and, is this is our last hope? I wonder what role TV has played in us becoming so ……silent about the conditions and issues in our communities? Have we become a culture of couch potatoes that sit there as if life is like watching TV, where it’s a one way conversation and other than an occasional mumble under our breaths, we just take things in, but never really participate in a real conversation. I’m of the belief that we’ve become a culture of non-communicators, ironic at a time when we have all these communication gadgets such as cell phones and computers. Have we substituted real conversations where ideas are debated and decisions formulated with mindless chit chats about daily trivia?  Shouldn’t we be having a public conversation with our elected officials about issues such as Laidlaw Energy, Clean Power, HHS move, City Manager position, building a new regional economy etc? I would encourage our political leadership to initiate “public forums” structured around the idea that they are more about listening than talking! I think back at the “forum” held about the Laidlaw project where the focus was on the panel and not on what the PEOPLE had to say! Our elected officials need to hear from the citizens and our officials need to provide the venue and an "open" format that encourages a public discussion of the issues.

The Dark Soul Award goes to........

The front page story in the Berlin Reporter last Wednesday about the lease arrangement by the State for a new HHS and Court facility building in Berlin rubs me the wrong way and for many reasons. First on my list of complaints is the idea of moving the State Office away from downtown. I thought that there was legislation passed a few years ago that discouraged moving State offices away from downtown locations. Second is the nonsense/excuse being used to move the HHS offices, that the building is unsafe etc….not enough parking etc. All fabrication by a minority of staff who have been unhappy with not having spiffy “new” offices and personality conflicts with the owner. (Now, there’s good reasons to spend millions of our tax dollars) Third, if we need a new office building for these cry babies, why not build it on Pleasant Street where we’re using our best and most valuable land as parking lots! Fourth, Berlin Falls Realty is going to tear down the former Administration building, why? I hear it’s because it has mold. (Sorry, but it’s about money) Now mold is one of the easiest things to get rid of and in this case the whole interior has to be gutted anyway. The Administration Building is in my mind a “historic building” and should be preserved. Fifth is the location. If the Laidlaw project goes through, the City better be ready to hear from the cry babies at HHS who will be complaining about the noise etc at Laidlaw. If the Laidlaw project fails then this site is most desirable for its views and would be best suited for something else than a State office building. If we allow this building to be torn down, it won’t be too long before we’ll be talking about this mistake as we do about the old Post Office and Community Club buildings. Sixth is the attitude of Senator Gallus. Senator Gallus doesn’t seem to have any respect for history or of things that may have significance other than the almighty dollar. Senator Gallus is a threat to everything Berlin and the region stands for and that has value/class because of his lack of sensitivity for the environment, culture, history or quality of life. I think we should have a yearly award for the person or group that has the least respect for those things we hold close to the heart, a “dark soul award”.  Senator Gallus could share the award with Dillon Logging and Laidlaw Energy. A chunk of coal should make a good trophy!

Save the baby

Front page of The Berlin Daily Sun today is the headline "Berlin councilors want to limit code enforcement, planning board authority".  Now, there's a can of worms that the councilors have opened! There's no question in my mind that there's been some very unprofessional decisions made by some City officials in the past, but this step by Mayor and Council seems to be a little.....extreme. I believe that if we were to look at the dozens of permit applications a year that City officials process, we would find that the overwhelming majority of the transactions are handled in a very professional manner. Then of course is the exception, where an official for whatever reason, has allowed the "power" of his/her authority to cloud their decision and their responsibility as a civil servant. I've heard stories about officials making statements like "he'll get that permit over my dead body". That kind of statement and behavior should not be tolerated for one second and, that official should be put on notice that one more such comment will lead to their firing. In my mind, what the council is trying to address is the result of poor or no accountability by the administrators or department heads. It's also my opinion that the proposed council action is the use of a blunt tool, where a more precise instrument is called for. To lump all permitting activities including the planning board decisions into this new approach doesn't seem to be a very well thought through plan. Let's keep in mind that,"two wrongs never make a right". It's been reported that the Council has heard some specific accounts of abuse of power and arbitrary decisions being made by some officials. What I'm suggesting here is that the council actions should focus on those incidents and those who were involved. This broad and sweeping action proposed by the Council gives the false impression that every department is guilty of improper conduct and, it can have a demoralizing effect on those who are doing their jobs very professionally. Finding people willing to serve on boards is always a challenge and this action might also have a damaging effect on recruitment. I appreciate the fact that the new Mayor and Council is tackling some of the issues long neglected and I also realize that some of what needs to be done will be difficult and painful. We just need to make sure we don't throw the baby out with the wash water! Put another way,"fix the machine, don't blow it up".

Cough Cough Cough Cough

This is a copy from another blog (leadfreeordie) and talks about the Laidlaw facility in Ellicottville NY and Henniker NH.    Keep in mind that the Berlin plant would be 10 times larger. Look at the numbers and X10 for an estimate of what Berlin will face.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Green Energy does not Equal Clean Energy:

Laidlaw indicated it currently intends to burn clean wood chips. People should not falsely assume that renewable or “green” energy is clean energy. In fact, burning clean wood chips creates significant health and environmental issues, especially at the burn volume proposed by Laidlaw. Laidlaw’s power plant also creates other nuisance and safety issues for Henniker and surrounding communities.

• Air Pollution and Related Health Hazards
Biomass combustion puts pollution in the air in order to make energy. Just because the energy source is natural does not make it clean energy. Moreover, even utilizing state of the art technology will not prevent the emission of harmful, carcinogenic, and otherwise toxic pollutants. Harmful emissions from a biomass plant (even a “state of the art” plant) include nitrous oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide and particulate matter. Particulate matter (PM) is solid or liquid droplets from smoke, dust, fly ash and condensing vapors. These are pollutants that the EPA has identified as having adverse effects on public health.

Some potential health effects of these pollutants include the following:

Carbon monoxide may reduce the ability of blood to deliver oxygen to vital tissues affecting the cardiovascular and nervous systems.

Long-term exposure to higher than normal concentrations of NOx can result in various respiratory infections ranging from simple coughs to bronchitis and pneumonia. This is also a component of smog and causes acid rain.

PM can cause nose and throat irritation, lung damage, bronchitis. Children and the elderly are especially at risk. It also can damage paint, soils, clothing and furniture. (This information is found on the New Hampshire DES website).

The proposed Laidlaw plant planned in Ellicottville, NY (population 2,500) is only for 7 MW, and the plans show the following amount of pollutants would be emitted annually:

nitrogen oxide - 111 tons
sulfur dioxide - 9 tons
particulate matter - 4 tons
carbon monoxide - 111 tons
volatile organic compounds - 18 tons
hazardous air pollutants - 19 tons including:
benzene – 4,231 lbs.; formaldehyde – 4,433 lbs.; hydrogen chloride - 19,141 lbs.