By Rob Marino
Thursday, April 17, 2003

A healthy crowd of Newburyport residents turned out for the second annual public forum last Thursday evening to share their views on what's positive about the city as well as to address important concerns to City Council representatives.

"It's heartening that so many people have turned out," said Ward 3 Councilor Karen Kelley to the attendees at the City Hall auditorium. "It's so rare to come together to discuss, generally, how we can make things better."

Mayor Alan Lavender encouraged those in attendance to speak out. "Don't go away without saying anything," he said.

As the session got under way, participants broke into three separate groups by ward. Ward 1 Councilor Dave McFarlane took notes for residents in wards 1 and 2, Kelley took notes for residents in wards 3 and 4 and Ward 5 Councilor Brenda Reffett took notes for residents in wards 5 and 6.

Also among the participants were Ward 2 Councilor Gregory Earls, Ward 6 Councilor Thomas O'Brien and Councilor-at-large John Pramberg.

In addition, School Committee members Bruce Menin, Bill Heenehan, and Mary Anne Clancy were in attendance, as were Police Marshal Thomas Howard and City Planning Director Nick Cracknell. Town Clerk John Moak moderated the forum.

Residents in the three groups started out expressing what they view as pleasing qualities about Newburyport. The city's waterfront renovations, including the new boardwalk and Ways to the Water paths, progress on the rail trail, the passage of the Community Preservation Act (CPA), renovations to the Bartlett Mall, and increased public activism and involvement were just some of the positives noted by residents. The high school expansion and city teachers, the new library and its staff, the dexterity of city planners, and the city's recently improved bond rating all got high marks. Public safety and police presence in the schools ranked high as well.

While participants had plenty of good things to say about the city, they also had plenty of concerns. Residents in the three different groups addressed many of the same concerns, including the poor state of the city's roadways.

"I don't want to lash out at the obvious, but my child keeps bringing home pieces of road and naming them," Menin said, adding that he was concerned about the "generally degraded state of infrastructure in this community."

Although voters approved the passage of the CPA last November, residents also expressed frustration over the city's inability to implement the state program in a timely manner and urged city officials to establish the program-required Community Preservation Committee to get the ball rolling. At least one resident said he thought the idea behind the CPA is a good one, but he questioned the financing aspect of the program.

Money matters also came to the forefront with many residents voicing concern about growing taxes, sharp increases in mooring fees, proposed cuts in school funding, lack of funding for park maintenance and reduction in city services, including the mayor's recent decision not to hire a youth coordinator. Emphasizing the need for a teen center, many felt the city isn't investing enough in youth services and that substance abuse among teens is a serious problem.

School space issues and overcrowding at the Bresnahan Elementary School were concerns. Forum participants also pointed out that the Kelley Elementary School is still open, going against the recommendation of the Long-Term Elementary Building Needs Committee to close the school.

Traffic and the lack of enforcement of the city's sidewalk ordinance as well as the lack of sidewalks on Plum Island and in the Maudslay State Park area were concerns.

While residents said that more affordable housing is needed, they also stressed the need to review housing records for more accurate Chapter 40B reporting. Chapter 40B is a state law requiring that each community have 10 percent affordable housing in its total housing stock.

In addition, residents expressed concern about the city's water quality in part to claims of illegal dumping at Plummer Spring. Residents also complained about flooding on Hale Street and drainage problems in the Curzon Mill Road area. Lack of movement on a senior center, the capping of the Crow Lane landfill and city-wide littering were also noted by concerned residents.

Concerns relating to the Police Department were also addressed, including the City Council's recent handling of police promotions and the "perception of discord" within the department, as it was written on the notepad for Wards 5 and 6.

Forum participants said they also want to see more accountability in city government, as well as more effective city leadership and better representation from their elected officials.

"When the community does speak, actually pay attention to them instead of stabbing them in the back," said resident Sheila Mullins.

Residents noted "lost opportunities," including the City Council's inability to come to an agreement on a downtown parking garage last fall. Some said the City Council ignored the hard work of the Traffic and Parking Committee, which revised its recommended plans for a parking garage several times to appease concerns raised by elected officials.

Some complained city officials have continued to ignore advise from consultants on a number of issues, including the recommendations made in the Police Department management study. An attorney's opinion last year supporting the mayor's decision to promote police Officer Alan Maguire was also ignored by the City Council, many residents pointed out.

Former Mayor Mary Carrier said the City Council has been so tied up in the contention surrounding police promotions, that it's been impeding the council's ability to take care of other business.

"I think the City Council has sat on a lot of these things," Carrier said. "Leave the mayor's appointments to the mayor and the City Council's work to the City Council."

Once resident asked, "Is there a reason why the mayor isn't here now, listening to our concerns during the budget season?"

While Lavender was on hand at the beginning of the forum, he had left by the end of it. Others wondered why the remaining four city councilors also were absent.

"I just thought there were more important things to be done in my office than to attend the portion where they broke up into groups," Lavender said in a follow-up conversation this Tuesday.

Moak explained that the forum was intended to be a fact gathering session for the City Council aimed at giving them more insight when it's time for councilors to debate the mayor's proposed budget. Kelley stressed that the council only has the ability to cut the mayor's budget and that residents should contact Lavender with their concerns before he finalizes the budget.

"You can't be looking for answers this evening," Moak said. "I think government extends beyond the yes and no answers to the hows and whys."

Notes from the forum are available on the city's Web site, www.cityofnewburyport.com.