In Our Opinion: Higgins for mayor
Come Tuesday, Northampton voters will choose between two candidates who have each worked long and hard, at times as allies, to make the city a better place.
The one most ready to lead Northampton into a new decade, we believe, is the city's current chief executive, Mayor Clare Higgins.
In a vigorous and fair-minded campaign, challenger Michael R. Bardsley has focused attention on Higgins' performance to an extent not seen in years of electoral mismatches. He is winning support from people who believe Higgins can be deaf to constituent concerns and from those who want city government to open itself to a greater degree of public inspection and community involvement. Bardsley has pledged to keep all city elementary schools open and close the landfill. Single-issue voters will have it easy Tuesday.
We wish to acknowledge that Bardsley, an at-large city councilor with a deep knowledge of the people and precincts of the city, could in time become an effective mayor, and even a very good one. But we believe his candidacy comes up short against Higgins' steady handling of the job's many complexities, chief among them the drive to support city services in a time of falling state revenues. With cuts in state aid to cities and towns looming, Higgins and her financial team are the best stewards of Northampton's finances.
On the chief issues Bardsley has raised, we believe he fails to make the case that the city should retire a leader as willing as Higgins to tackle and solve problems.
Consider several of the issues that have been campaign flashpoints.
THE LANDFILL. No one likes them, but we believe Higgins is giving residents the straight dope on what will happen financially if the Glendale Road site closes. Bardsley's call to use a closing as a moment to rethink the city's waste-disposal practices, including recycling, is appealing. But it would be swamped by the realities of waste production and does not speak to the financial impact for businesses and individuals when trash must be hauled out of town or out of the region. Higgins is right to call for Northampton to solve its own disposal problems, not ship them out of the city. The question to be answered is whether current technology and environmental standards can create a safe and cost-effective waste disposal center on that site.
GOVERNMENT PROCESS. Bardsley has raised questions about how decisions are made in Northampton. He opposed the pact governing Smith College expansion that Higgins negotiated in private with the school's president. Bardsley has also questioned how the city went about making land available downtown for a private hotel. The hotel debate played out over years of public meetings which gave residents fair opportunities to be heard. Though Higgins is faulted for missteps on public access, including the recent shredding of the City Council's executive session minutes, she was saluted by the group Common Cause in 2007, 2008 and 2009 for being an advocate of open government. She worked to put more documents and data on the city's Web site. And in budget season, Higgins has traveled into every city ward to offer briefings to small groups.
In one case, Higgins was slow to acknowledge a problem existed after it was revealed minutes of City Council executive sessions lacked information. In time, she acted to reform the process for keeping and approving the minutes.
CLOSING SCHOOLS. Bardsley takes an ill-advised position in vowing to keep all four elementary schools open. A mayor, though acting as chair of the School Committee, cannot make this decision alone, and not without knowing the financial picture the city will face next year. Higgins prefers to look at class sizes rather than the number of schools, and we think this is a position better able to safeguard the classroom experience for all.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Bardsley is promising to reach out personally, as mayor, to encourage businesses to locate in Northampton. It's a good idea, but not one that comes with any guarantees, given our financial climate. We question whether, given his dismay over the downtown hotel project, Bardsley fully understands the compromises that must be made to woo new business to the city. Higgins created a stabilization fund that will help buffer Northampton to some degree from local aid cuts. The city is also now collecting local option hotel and meals taxes - a revenue source she long lobbied the Statehouse to provide to communities.
In our view, Higgins has earned a sixth term through her handling of the city's budget, her deep understanding of the moving parts of local and state government and her hard work. That's not to say she's perfect. Higgins admitted at a forum this week she can be impatient. She doesn't give lip service, she's occasionally abrasive and she doesn't sugarcoat reality. As a politician, her manner can be both confounding and refreshing.
But Higgins is a doer and a closer - and deserves another two years.
Comments
let's "study the matter"
That's the usual mantra of a politician who has no plans to do anything at all. If only Michael had some concrete proposals, then he could be a candidate worth supporting.
I can understand why some people would think that Clare Higgins, who obviously is well informed on all the issues, might also have knowledge that isn't being shared. But Michael Bardsley has either been in on these secret dealings in his many years in city government, or he doesn't have a clue.
If people disagreed with Clare on past issues, they now have to choose between her and a candidate (Michael) who they also disagreed with but doesn't seem to know as much, and isn't as sure about what to do. Some people will prefer the vagueness. I don't.
a candidate worth supporting
The city council has no budget for studies and no lawyer of their own. It has been dependent on what Higgins provides. Her record has been vote to take it or leave it as she provides it to the council, just as she has dismissed public challenges to her proposals. She knows the councilors' votes she always has.
If Bardsley cannot yet clearly define the better solution on our complex important issues, like the landfill, it is because he and the public have been excluded from the information they need to consent to what is their decision.
He pledges to open the process to the public and address valid views critical of what is being proposed on the budget, the environmental policies, and economic development. He clearly explains his views of what we should have as goals and believes we should be able to do instead of and what he thinks has been wrong in Higgins’ proposals and policy. No candidate could responsibly offer anything more, and only a candidate worth supporting proves to be that responsible.
this endorsement
came as no surprise. Actually, I think it is so appropriate that across from the endorsement is a paid advertisement from the Higgins campaign. This ad, which must have cost at least $1,000 is one of many that have been run in the Gazette during the election. Certainly, there is some question as to bias on the part of the Gazette with this endorsement.
What I have found is that this Newspaper is really just a Stenogropaper. (spelling?) They just write exactly what The Powers That Be want written. Case in point, new information was released by the Barnes Aquifer Protection Advisery Committee on the landfill. http://www.pvpc.org/bapac/docs/NorthamptonLandfillPosition.pdf Along with minutes http://www.pvpc.org/bapac/docs/minutes/2009/m_9_1_09.pdf that outline how the City of Northampton needs to focus on remediation of the unlined cell of the landfill. Yet, no coverage whatsoever by the Gazette.
Accusations of racism at the Northampton Housing Authority are made without the slightest hint of interest from the Gazette.
As for closing a school, it has been widely discussed at many debates of all candidates, who say that it is not cost effective to close a school and rather we should be looking to increase school choice students as that brings in more money.
Worst of all, the Gazette lied when they generated a huge headline stating that the Governor endorsed Higgins.
And I can't remember, did the Gazette report on the disgusting email sent by Bill Dwight and then forwarded by Paul Spector and Lisa Baskin?
If anything, this election has been the "lifting of the veil" in regards to the Gazette as a news source. Real news, that has not been filtered, truly is falling to individuals who blog what is really happening locally. When my subscription runs out this time, it will not be renewed.
Gazette is missing story on Mayoral Race
I'm afraid the Gazette's editorial board is being swayed more by Clare's campaign rhetoric than by the realities in this race when they endorse Clare for Mayor. We would all have benefitted by more fact-checking and investigative reporting of what the candidates have put forth in this campaign. Clare's explanations re: the possible school closing, the landfill issues, the Hospital Hill development, etc., have veiled the behind-the-scenes maneuvering and consequences that have many citizens so upset. I think the Gazette is missing the big story. Citizens from all walks of life and all parts of the city are joining together in support of Michael Bardsley for Mayor for some very strong reasons. He knows how to pull people and creative ideas together to craft a budget of true priorities, even in these challenging fiscal times. He is responsive, not reactive. He has vision and intergrity. People are tired of the fear-mongering and the jaded, disdainful attitude of a group of the citizenry who feel they know what is best for the rest of us. This is in strong contrast to the excitement, energy, commitment, hope and hard work emanating from supporters of Michael Bardsley. What a breath of fresh air many of us feel to be truly engaged in our community again. Clare has had ten years to be Mayor of Northampton. It is past time for fresh vision, fresh energy, new engagement by all citizens and a leader who will unite us in the hard work of bringing Northampton through these challenging next few years. Michael is the best candidate for Northampton's Mayor at this moment in time.
Doer and closer...
maybe, I really don't know. But, definitely not an ironer. Seriously, how hard is it to put our best foot forward here?
Landfill Facts Wrong
I admire Higgins for her intelligence, her diligence, and her ability. But we are in no way getting "the straight dope" from Higgins about the landfill.
Higgins misspoke when she, at a recent debate, asserted that closing the landfill would amount to a doubling of trash disposal fees. In fact, the Stantec/HDR waste options study, commissioned by the Board of Public Works at Higgins' request, features a chart showing that hauling trash to an out-of-state landfill would cost approximately $73-$83 a ton, in no way a doubling of the $67 a ton tipping fee currently charged at the Northampton landfill.
The Massachusetts DEP, in its latest draft Solid Waste Master Plan, says the following: "Even with increased fuel costs, the cost of out-of-state disposal remains very low compared to in-state disposal, because inexpensive rail transport carries waste to out-of-state landfills with lower tipping fees."
Higgins' moral argument—that "Northampton should deal with its own trash"—has been challenged by opponents who assert that there is no strong moral argument— and no strong economic argument, for that matter— to be made for dumping trash at a local, poorly-managed and poorly-sited landfill.
I'm surprised that the Gazette is merely taking the incumbent at her word on this complex issue.
Further Rebuttal to Mayor's Claims about Landfill
For further rebuttal to Mayor Higgins' claims about the landfill and its alternatives, please see NorthAssoc.org.
I would say it's a moral argument
I think there's no question that taking care of our own trash is our moral imperative. And doing it responsibly is our obligation as well. I don't think our landfill is poorly managed, but in any case, that's an easier thing to fix then shipping our trash out of state, to a facility that we have no control over (who knows how well or poorly managed it is, we have no oversight).
Northampton is a city full of intelligent caring people who want to do the right thing. I think we should start from the premise that our garbage is our problem, and work from there to figure out a way to reduce it, and dispose of it responsibly.
Can we vote for a new editorial board?
This editorial boards’ rationale for their endorsement of Higgins confirms that the Daily Hampshire Gazette is a problem, not the solution a daily newspaper, as fourth estate, needs to be to preserve democracy in its city.
Higgins “steady handling” of the efforts and ability of Christopher Pile as “steward of Northampton’s finances” would serve the community better if he was directed by a leader with a better understanding and vision for this city’s future.
“Bardsley's call to use a closing as a moment to rethink the city's waste-disposal practices, including recycling, is appealing …” was reluctantly just endorsed by Higgins --- had this editorial board paid attention to the debates.
The landfill will close both agree, and we will have to then ship away. The cost for shipping away is comparable. The question is whether we can or want to make money taking in other cities’ trash. Higgins' argument that we would be ethically irresponsible not to store our own trash, while we beg for it from others, is ludicrous.
Higgins isn’t a “leader of the public or willing to tackle problems” when the evidence is that she always says she had to decide for us without us because all those decisions were unavoidable and emergencies, or it is too late for our input because it has already been done: Smith College, Hilton Hotel, Hospital Hill.
Shredding was not a misstep it was a cover up and a violation of public law, not to be commended for simply saying it won’t happen again. Common Cause would rail against your use of their name for this.
You question Bardsley’s understanding of promoting economic development because of the “compromises that must be made to woo new business to the city.” Higgins had no economic development plan “for the last new decade” because development was driven by what she was told to do by those developers who would supporter her. She just created that new department.
This Hotel will not draw visitors, and our regional tourists don’t stay overnight. She bought the idea of a trade show and convention city, which would destroy the genuine arts and five-college city we know and tourists come to enjoy.
The stabilization fund exists in nearly all cities. If it had been well-managed by Higgins, her solution would not have only been more taxes.
Higgins has squandered the talent of Northampton’s public to have already addressed solutions to problems that were foreseen by ignoring them in favor of rewarding a circle of supporters, who used their influence to keep her as mayor to decide for their profit. Suppressing public involvement in decision-making frees her from a commitment she would have to a public vision, so she can decide for what she wants without that accountability.
Higgins’ only solution becomes cuts. It has always been her solution. The harder the threatened cut, the more hopeless and compliant the public becomes to allow she can be the only one to avoid it. Bardsley gave the vision, to stand for something better: He offers to be accountable --- We won’t close the neighborhood school, because there never was, or will be, a reason that we must.
We are impatient with her lip service “of not being perfect” and simply “impatient.” We are tired of “being abrasive” to her. Your editorial board opinions are confounding. And we all need to be refreshed by what we can do with Bardsley helping us, as our new mayor for the next two years
Editorial
So silly.
Editorials are opinion. There's a long standing history of newspapers having editorial opinions, whether they be national, city, or town papers. Such is the nature of the beast.
I'd be disgusted if my newspaper had no editorial opinion.
Maybe you're right...
Fox News gives there biased opinion every day. Why shouldn't The Daily Hampshire Gazette?
To give an opinion is one thing- to try and sway voters like this is another.
I don't feel that this is appropriate
I do not believe that The Daily Hampshire Gazette should be able to try and sway voters in one direction like this. I believe that it is the job of our local newspaper to give unbiased FACTS, and not to urge voters to vote one way. A good news source should give enough information for voters to make an informative decision themselves. I just can't even express how very wrong I think this article is. I don't care if it is in the "opinion" section. I guess this is why so many residents refer to this paper as "The Fish Wrapper". I wonder how much money Higgins has given the Gazette for them to feel so strongly as to print this? You should be ashamed. I am disgusted.
I'm sure you sent a similar letter to the Valley Advocate...
...for their endorsement of Michael Bardsley, right?
Post new comment