History should always note and long remember...

As we prepare for this most memorable of solemn holidays to honor those who gave their "last measure of devotion" keeping us free--perhaps it is time we consider imbuing another day with this ritualistic reinforcement designed to make Americans momentarily pause and, hopefully, to remember.

Especially since the state is considering eliminating two hack holidays for some state employees--Evacuation Day and Bunker Hill Day.

How about remembering that stunning morning.

Yes perhaps for any of us alive of an age old enough to understand rudimentary communication, 9/11 is forever seared into memory; a combination of shock, horror or perhaps guilt over feeling relieved it was not you or a loved one aboard those airplanes or trapped in those burning buildings.

But time creeps forward, so someday 9/11 will be a distant memory. We pause now to remember all those who perished for their country over our entire history. A hundred years hence none of us will be around to remember.

Hopefully we will have passed it down to our children and told them to pass it down to their children the awful damage inflicted that otherwise gorgeous Tuesday morning in America.

Declaring 9/11 a national holiday will go a long way to ensure that. And what better state to start than Massachusetts, where half the four planes--the two that created the most carnage--debarked from?

Boycott Massachusetts?

So now that the Mass State Senate approved a law requiring proof of citizenship for receiving state benefits it will be interesting to see if we become a target of scorn and outrage like Arizona. Hey, maybe Cambridge will secede and join up with New Hampshire, the "live free or die" state. But with a motto like that, probably not.

The Republican reports

The WSJ reports (leave Dora out of this debate)

Don't mess with Mother Nature

Amherst College

So a powerful storm assaulted the Happy Valley late last night, felling trees, rattling windows, and scaring the Hell out of little kids and domestic pets. But today is a L-O-T cooler. A good thing--providing you have electricity.

"Watchdog" awakens!

From: amherstac@aol.com

To: Mdechiara@gmail.com; farshidhajir@gmail.com
Sent: Wed, May 26, 2010 10:18 pm
Subject: Public Documents Request

In the PDF of the letter signed by five School Committee Chairs sent to the DA requesting a ruling on public officials who have blogs posted on the Shutesbury internet listserve, under the "permissions attached" pages, Farshid Hajir reads: This letter to Cynthia Pepyne looks great; I would like to sign on. My comments:

But then after the colon there are no comments.

Could I please be provided with a copy of those comments which seemed to have disappeared.

Thanks,

Larry Kelley

#####################################
From: amherstac@aol.com
To: newman@lnn-law.com; lesser@inn-law.com
Sent: Wed, May 26, 2010 3:02 pm
Subject: The First Amendment and Open Meeting Law in the modern age

I certainly hope the local ACLU will weigh in on this 'Only in Amherst' tempest in a teapot I first railed about on my blog 6 days ago but now prominently displayed on the Front Page of the Daily Hampshire Gazette.

As a long-time insider of all things politics in the People's Republic I can assure you this effort to involve the DA ruling about blogs is an orchestrated (local) government attempt to quash Catherine Sanderson's First Amendment rights simply because she (very publicly) "calls 'em as she sees 'em".

And is not that what the First Amendment is all about?

Larry Kelley (concerned that I will be next)

########################################

So six days after it first hit the blogosphere (my piece of it anyway), the Daily Hampshire Gazette covers the story of five School Committee Chairs sending a letter of request to the District Attorney for legal clarification on blogs and the Open Meeting Law. Front Page. Above the fold no less.

The Gazette, finally, reports

And you would think, since that letter was instantly forwarded to the Gazette last week (in hopes of getting the headline they indeed got) with all this time to hash out the story, they could have done a better job.

Don't mind me, I'm just pissed off that I was referred to as "Larry Kelley, a Amherst watchdog blogger who posts frequently about "The Vagina Monlogues" and "West Side Story," is also a member of the town's Redevelopment Authority."

Besides misspelling "Monologues", the proper name for my committee is Amherst Redevelopment Authority, a quasi-state, independent body with four members elected by town voters and one appointed by the Governor. The only entity in town besides Town Meeting/Selectboard with the power of eminent domain.

And I have not posted about 'VM' or 'WSS' in over a year.

Details, details.

Obviously the problem, as the Old Guard sees it, is Catherine Sanderson and her School Committee blog. Because she is not afraid to speak her mind openly, in public, at all hours of the day and night. That should be encouraged, not threatened.

As the ACLU says about the First Amendment: The way to deal with bad speech is with more good speech--not censorship.

Mr Hood Commented on this blog a few days ago that his blog (still in its rookie year) garnered 129 unique visitors last week. This blog was almost 500. And Ms. Sanderson's open public sitemeter tells me she was about 33% over this blog last week, so I would guess her unique visitors were somewhere in the neighborhood of 700. Thus I would hardly lump Mr. Hood in the same category as Sanderson's "that see large volumes of web traffic."

Of course law is always going to lag behind technology. The Mass State Legislature recently tweaked a law to include text messages because some pedophile sending explicit messages to a minor got off because the original law talked dealt with graphic material being disseminated but did not clearly spell out "text messaging". Now it does. And of course we now have a law saying you can't text message while driving (who would have thought you need to make that a law.)

But what never changes is the intent/spirit of the law. And clearly the Open Meeting Law, enacted before the Internet revolution, simply wants to keep public matters kept public. And you don't get any more public than a blog.
#####################################

It will be interesting to see if the Gazette or Bulletin issues an editorial on this issue.

In the blink of an eye...

UPDATE: 2:00 PM (Tuesday). So the "chicken little" in me is even more aroused as North Korea just announced they were ejecting South Koreans from the industrial complex just inside their border operated by South Korean companies that employ 40,000 North Koreans.

Even the South did not go that far yesterday in announcing economic sanctions. Since the only other industry in North Korea is that relating to the military this is a classic case of biting off your nose to spite your face. Or: Pride goeth before the fall.

As the proud father of two girls originally born in China and aware of how very many girls have come to our country over the past 20 years via international adoption I always figure the Chinese government would at least think twice before going to war with us as collateral damage could include so many of their own (not to mention all the Chinese who have come here for education or employment purposes.)

Severing this last co-mingling of two people who should be one is a bad sign.

###########################################
Original Post: Yesterday
Having spent a week in Seoul last year getting to mix with the locals and taking a guided tour of the DMZ (which is a lot harder for the locals to do) I am frankly concerned about recent revelations that North Korea did indeed sink a South Korean warship.

Initially I figured the Cheonan inadvertently hit an underwater mine left over from the horrific war 57 years ago that, technically, has never ended. Mainly because North Korea actually seems proud of its belligerence, I also figured they would instantly take credit for scoring such a surprising blow on a highly trained military ship.

But considering the North never really acknowledged the secret "Tunnels of aggression" constructed under the DMZ and designed to deliver thousands of troops per hour into a sleeping Seoul I guess I should not be surprised.

So what is a concerned diplomat to do?

Box them into a corner and they will fight with the same tenacity exhibited so long ago only with more modern weapons of mass destruction. Let it slide and they will be encouraged to do it again.

Unlike our 9/11, all the causalities were military inflicted by another uniformed military in a disputed zone. More like Pearl Harbor, a dastardly act indeed, but if you believe "war is Hell" then certainly not something to start another war over, or maybe I should say a resumption of the war that never ended.

I'm reminded of what a US military officer told me when I was touring the furthermost military base on the DMZ (mainly staffed by South Korean military) that the 28,500 US troops stationed on the peninsula would merely act as a "speed bump" if the North decides to roll in force.

And then, President Obama--under terribly tense constantly shifting conditions--would face the same option presented to President Truman when the Chinese first entered the conflict in almost limitless waves: do we use nukes?

Either way, the slaughter will set a new standard for barbarism in the modern age.

How I spent my summer vacation in Korea

Blame the blogosphere

So five local school committee chairs have officially requested in writing the District Attorney create guidelines about how and when a blog may or may not violate the Open Meeting Law--key word being "Open".

The irony simply abounds. The joint letter apparently was the idea of Shutesbury School Committee Chair Michael DeChiara, you know the guy who recently got the state legislature to pass a new law allowing towns to withdraw from school unions.

Shutesbury apparently had a beef with a shared Superintendent hiring a pricipal for only one year when most folks wanted them to get three. The issue caused Shutesbury to rethink Union 28 which shares the expenses of a Super between Leverett, Shutesbury, Erving, Wendell and New Salem.

So how is this any different than Amherst considering a withdrawal from Union 26 with Pelham where Amherst funds 94% of expenses and only has a 50% say in administration?

But back to the blogosphere. The issue of Amherst withdrawing from Union 26 has gone from obscure non-issue to raging controversy mainly because of the discussion on Catherine Sanderson's school committee blog.

The other School Committee chairs wonder if perhaps some Anons posting comments could be School Committee members thus potentially bringing together a quorum discussing something outside a posted public meeting.

Forgetting for a moment that a blog is public, these Chairs are not showing much faith in their fellow School Committee members if they honestly believe an elected public official would cowardly cower behind a cloak of anonymity.

The next question asks about the propriety of comment moderation where the blog owner could slant the discussion by nixing opposing comments. So it's the old "damned if she does, damned if she doesn't" routine?

What's a blogger to do? You can't allow Anon comments because it could be cowardly elected officials in disguise and you can't moderate comments because you could censor them. Hmm....

Gotta love the part about "Every committee has mechanisms and policies for making sure that its discourse is appropriate and civil," suggesting ways should be found to extend that control to a blog. Sounds like the South Hadley School Committee chair who was recently chastised by the ACLU for censoring public comments he did not find "appropriate and civil."

Another irony is that Irv Rhodes, Amherst School Committee Chair, currently in the center of the storm on the Union 26 issue and as a direct result of what he considered disrespectful behavior on the part of Regional Chair Farshid Hajir and Union 26 Chair Tracey Farnham, came up with a "Pledge" that he made to fellow Amherst committee members.

The opening one states:

"To be open, honest and transparent about any and all matters that come before the Amherst School Committee and keep you informed about any events that directly or indirectly involve the work of the Amherst School Committee."

Mr Rhodes, however, signed the letter sent to the District Attorney without giving Catherine Sanderson--the obvious target--a common courtesy heads up call.

And that official letter pretty much constitutes a (secret) joint meeting of five School Committees. Physician heal thyself!


Shutesbury's Internet chat room PDF of letter to DA is at bottom of "discussion". And notice the only two folks who chime in are also Shutesbury School Committee members thus, with DeChiara (if he was still online) makes for a quorum.

The Bully covers Shutesbury School Committee Chair Michael DeChiara's crusade

The Empire Strikes Back!

UPDATE: 7:00 PM
This is almost tooooo funny for words. Now I'm told from a reliable source that a cabal of local School Committee Chairs has filed a letter of complaint/inquiry with the District Attorney questioning the legality of a certain (perky, forthright blond) Amherst School Committee member having a public blog.

Key word of course of course being PUBLIC. The Open Meeting Law is designed to ensure public matters do not get discussed in PRIVATE. What are they afraid of?

##############################################
Or maybe I should cite "Revenge of the Nerds?" Although... he did rate a red chili pepper for "hotness" at Ratemyprofessors.com but you still have to wonder about the lumberjack shirt for a public meeting.

Regional School Committee (you know that four town alliance where little old Amherst comprises 80% of total student body) Chair Farshid Hajir showed up at an Amherst School Committee meeting the other night to take advantage of the 'Public Comment' period and harangue the Amherst board over the handling of the Union 26 battle, a union of two where Amherst funds 94% of the overhead to Pelham's 6% but only has a 50% say in administrative matters.

Interestingly Mr. Hajir at an earlier Regional School Committee Meeting trumpeted that recent emails reverberating between himself, Irv Rhodes Chair of Amherst School Committee, Union 26 Chair Tracy Farnham and Superintendent Maria Geryk had "clearly violated Open Meeting Law."

This is of course the same as poking and then throwing raw meat to an aging, overweight, sleeping Rottweiler, thus--even the Daily Hampshire Gazette--asked for copies of the emails and received them in record time.

Of course the emails do not violate the Open Meeting Law because a quorum is allowed to discuss in writing over the phone or at the local bar "housekeeping issues" which clearly this tempest qualifies. Yes, if the discussion veered into the pros and cons of leaving Union 26 that would be a violation.

Obviously Mr. Hajir thinks the emails make Mr. Rhodes look bad while Superintendent Maria Geryk comes out the Gandhi-like peacemaker (although he did not get $135-K annual salary.)