Can government compete fairly?

UPDATE: 3:30 PM: I have only been doing PR for 25 years but does anybody else find it odd that Umass News Info Department (that I believe has three full-time spinmeisters and a Department Manager) only puts out the press release about the $9.2 million renovation project on the very day construction starts?

Hmmm….
What the Umass flacks wrote

(Original Post 6:00 AM) So Umass can spend $9.2 million tax dollars to better hustle for costumers private dollars? Unlike the Campus Center Hotel, those new and modern hotels that have popped up along Route 9, courtesy of Hampshire Hospitality Group, pay property taxes to the host town.

And in the People’s Republic of Amherst, if you simply construct a commercial enterprise valued at $9 million it would pay Amherst $135,000 annually in property tax plus the 4% Local Option Room Occupancy Tax on gross annual revenues.

Simply being owned by a tax-exempt does not necessarily keep the business off the tax rolls. Take Amherst College for instance: they own the apparently only profitable golf business in town, Amherst Golf Course, and pay Amherst the normal $7,000 per year in tax that a private, for-profit owner would pay.

And they own the historic Lord Jeffery Inn that not only pays property taxes ($32,000) but also honors the local room tax. They too are feeling the pressure from new modern hotels along Rout 9--as evidenced by their upcoming $20 million expansion--but at least they compete on a level playing field...well sort of, having over a billion in reserves is a tiny advantage.

Back in 2003 a ‘Special Committee to Recommend Mitigation for Local Aid Cuts’, chaired by State Senator Stan Rosenberg, an indefatigable Umass supporter clearly stated:

“Eliminate UMASS Amherst Campus Center's exemption from hotel motel tax (that tax doesn't cost the state anything, doesn't cost the university anything, shouldn't be an edge in competition against local hotels / motels). This could be a significant ($70,000+) help to Amherst.”

Since the Town Manager was already taken to the cleaners by Umass with their ‘Strategic Agreement’, The Select Board should appoint a “Blue Ribbon Committee” (better yet, an Attack Dog) to pursue this potential pot of tax gold.

Springfield Republican Reports (scooping the Gazette)

So we beat on...

UPDATE: 7:25 PM Okay, this video is a tiny bit raw, I may edit it tomorrow, but wanted to get it up ASAP





(Original Post 6:30 AM) So coincidentally enough—this being the first Select Board meeting since Anne Awad resigned—I will be going before the four she left behind tonight to ask at the getting more and more popular 6:30 Question Period as I have done every late August since the world changed, that the 29 commemorative flags be allowed to fly in the downtown on 9/11.

Or maybe I’ll ask (as an insider suggested) for them to put it on the 9/8 SB agenda for a fuller public discussion.


Can you imagine even having to discuss flying American flags to honor the 3,000 Americans we lost on 9/11? Only in Amherst.

Economic development, eh?

So you will notice the "coming soon" part of the banner is pretty weathered--as in having been up in the New England sun for over three months. I actually took this photo a month ago when I covered Pizza Rama calling it quits after 39 years. And the banner has been down for the past two weeks, although I'm told by a reliable source they will open in September.

You would think going from a Fish Market that served food (Take out and Delivery) to a Latino Market (Take out and Delivery) is a turnkey endeavor. But NOOOoooo, not in Amherst!

Here we have the Planning Board pumping molasses in front of any Good Ship trying to navigate the waters to opening, and building inspection folks delaying reopenings.

Rollin, rollin, rollin...

(11:00 AM)
(5:00 PM)

His Lordship Lies, and Libels

UPDATE: (7:00 PM) Hey they finally went cyber. Here's the link:
Weiss backs down
(9:45 AM) “Surprised to learn” that an educated community like Amherst believes in Free Speech? Just goes to show how clueless Mr. Weiss is with the First Amendment (and we know he has problems with the Open Meeting Law as well.)

“Some members of the press construed”? Hmmm. The Gazette or Bully did not editorially come to my First Amendment defense (as they should have.) . And indeed only two weeks later His Lordship was going after the Bulletin for an editorial about Planning Board slackers.

“Obsessive following”? One time is obsessive? And “contacting”. Again, I called their publicly published number once to see if it was still in service and when Hubley’s voice mail picked up, I hung up. Then Mr. Hubley called me back at my business and after losing his cool and slamming down his phone called me back an hour later at my home (with an unpublished number). So that is two phone calls to my one. Now who’s doing the stalking?

And yes the state does have laws already in place for stalking and harassment or threats of physical violence-- and we do know Ms Awad contacted the police. Since they never, in turn, contacted me in any shape manner of form it goes to show how laughable her case was.

And No Mr. Weiss there is no Chapter 256, Section 43-A you meant Chapter 265 (getting dyslectic in your old age?)

The Law (don’t mess with it!)

Bully for them

UPDATE: (1:30 PM). The Bully is out (print edition anyway). They used a different photo, but still huggy-huggy

(6:30 AM) Hard to believe it's already prediction Thursday; easy to predict what makes the Bully Front Page. Obviously the Select Board was in session Monday with ‘His Lordship’ presiding--so there’s your source for a lead article or two.

But will it be the “Handful of folks say goodbye to X-Czar Awad” story or the “Drop dead Kelley resolution from SB canned?” Hmmm…Since Mr. Weiss also took a public swipe at the Bully for daring to criticize by name those poor overworked Planning Board volunteers, the latter could get higher placement.

Nah, the Bully is too nice. So they will go with the ‘Buy buy Awad’ article with ‘His Lordship backs down’ a close second (but both above the fold)

Chill, Chide, Chump

His Lordship finally figured out that he does not want to make little old me a martyr to the First Amendment (plus I don’t die easily). Hey, at least now I’m thrown in with the venerable Amherst Bulletin. How dare they name names of overworked volunteer members of PUBLIC boards and committees!

The problem with crafting an official resolution thinly directed at one individual is that in this particular case it stands no chance of working. Plus, now that he’s lost his partner in crime Anne Awad (as far as the Open Meeting Law is concerned) he will have a harder time getting fellow board members to act as a rubber stamp.

That should have a “chilling effect” on his ideological nonsense.