Wow, what a reception I've been getting for changing my format of articles from history and incidents to writing columns about our city government. Phone calls, strangers stopping me on the street, and when I'm shopping for my groceries, all have been positive so far. In most cases, the comments were, "I never knew that, or I've never given it a thought until I read your article, and I'm going to pay more attention to what's going on in City Hall, especially when they are spending my taxpayer's money."
In last month's column, I mentioned the city's debt and what's on the plate to spending money in 2012. I also mentioned that our city councilors should do more debating on their feet in the council chamber and not in committee meetings where debating is not televised. I also mentioned the authority given to any mayor to discharge a city employee without "just cause." I did my homework, interviewing some city employees, and they agreed it's frightening. Where was the debate when the new charter was presented? Appreciating that space does not permit these subjects to go on in length, allow me to deal each month with specific subjects. This month, may I address the "open space" that most of our councilors agree with.
To begin with, how much open space do we have for our general public to use or appreciate? Let's see, we have Maudslay State Park, Moseley Woods, Atkinson Common, Bartlet Mall, Waterfront Park, Cashman Park, the Clipper City Rail Trail and Hale Park. Let me also add in several tot playgrounds scattered around the city. Now, we have a minority group screaming for more open space in the development of the 31/2 acres to be developed in our waterfront that already has a million-dollar park used regularly. To make matters worse, and before any decision is made, several agencies are involved, namely the NRA, the Waterfront Trust, the Chamber of Commerce, the Custom House, the Firehouse Center, the DPW, the harbormaster, the mayor and City Council. Now, if you count how many individuals, and I might have missed a few, I figure I am going to have to live at least 25 more years to see the development completed, and I'll be 115 years old. No one that I know of, except me, bothered to examine the original paperwork in the Urban Renewal concept that states development, not dirt parking lots. Can you imagine all these agencies agreeing to decide anything, except what's for lunch! Can you imagine that the subject of development has been discussed for 40 years, or to compare, when I once had to use a comb and hairbrush. I could be wrong, but someone has to describe to me what is the meaning of having open space, when I believe I described the number of acres available for the residents and public in general, to look, walk, play, party or for any use according to law.
Once again, I repeat, my role in writing this type of column, is for that "silent majority" to speak up and to the right people, and that being the mayor and your city councilor, who may be making decisions that you do not agree with. Otherwise, that councilor is making a decision he or she wishes to happen. That is not what your councilor was elected for. Meanwhile, if more open space is adopted, not bringing in a nickel of revenue to the city, just pay your yearly increased tax bill with a smile.
• • •
Ralph J. Ayers of Newburyport calls himself a "local yokel."


