November 06, 2007



Anonymous said...

If one is hell bent on having comm air service at ORH....they would vote for.......???????....a write in candidate?

This 20 Million $$$$$ asset sits atop airport hill and barely a whisper is heard or read of it during election season.

Fire the City Board of Directors ............time for 100% new blood?

All I see or hear is too many pols cow-towing to city labor interests.......wait till the coming fiscal see the city deficit and the Enron -esque deferral of spending and cooked books............THE CITY HAS BEEN BANKRUPT FOR YEARS

Bill Randell said...


At this point the damage has been completely done by the current mgmt at ORH and it can not be reversed. Losing Allegiant was our chance to turn the tide and we blew it.

Our only option right now is to get out of the airport business and hope MassPort does a good job.

Anonymous said...

LMAO !!!!! Bill, maybe you should change Jahn's nickname from Unabomber to Unionbomber?!?!?!??! WHether you agree with him , or not -Jahn's rants are truly entertaining! I can see Hollywood casting Jahn for Michael Douglas' role in Falling Down 2 !!!!!!

Hardy, Har, Har , Harry !!!!

Harry Tembenis
Worcester, MA

Anonymous said...


MR mOYLAN says it costs $770K annually to keep pools open for 7 summer weeks.....that's $110k per week......presumably there is clearly a public benefit derived from these pools.......right?...keep in mind teh cost to keep pools open = the deficit to the city b/c no revenues are dervived from pools

Now I ask you bean counters out there (Bill?)...what does it cost (deficit) the City per week to keep the airport open and what does that tally up to on an annual basis. i.e. the weekly deficit multiplied by 52


What public (city taxpayer) benefit/purpose is derived from from these costs (deficits)


would not a rational person ( city councillor?) pay much more attention the TOTAL airport deficit...vs...the Total pool deficit............nope b/c pools are politically correct (children) and airports are not politically correct....i guess???

Christ almighty.........Grace Ross just said the city has to start paying attention to the subprime debacle ....WTH !!! I sense that my city tax dollars now have to be wasted on subprime mortgage issues.

Bill Randell said...

I have to admint Jahn has some great rants, but he usualy brings up some grea tpoints:

1) It is unreall that the airport was a non-issue this campaign
2) The cost of the pools does seem crazy?

Anonymous said...

the only one to say the airport negotiations have gone on too long is Lukes. Let's see if she really meant it.

Anonymous said...

Jahn is reasonably happy this morning (Lukes)....the reason.......she had NO endorsements from city labor.....

and ages ago for about 3 years.... I was a former union dues paying dude........but I got no vacation pay, no sick pay, no personal days, no bereavement pay, no holiday pay ....we had to be ready to roll at 7:30am and werent clocked in until 8:00am......and you were allowed 1 screw up ....2nd one and you were gone........a screw could be as small as calling in sick (unpaid) on a Monday or Friday.

The one big thing that is dragging down city finances is paying employee time drives up unit labor costs.......SICK DAYS.....average of 10 per city employee per year.............thats 4% of their annual pay that's tossed down a rathole.......was it a campaign issue at all??............what it costs pales in comparison to any swimming pool or airport deficit........maybe we should make city pools symbolic of our city finances

Dave from Worcester said...

Who would we want as mayor, Rushton or Lukes? (I'm only 15 so I don't know much about politics)

Anonymous said...


When you are old enough to vote , vote for who YOU want to vote for, not who we tell you to...

Harry Tembenis
Worcester, MA

Anonymous said...

Harry, If young Dave is an aspiring city empolyee he will vote for who ever his union or Mc Govern Or Murray tell him to vote for......and not for who he really wants.

Dont you know how it works {g }

We have 11 councillors.........1 district didnt have to run and another district (Clancey) had no real opponent and he's already in city employee's back pocket ....he's a teacher) of the 9 remaining how many were endorsed by the cops, teachers, firemen, and SEUI? 8 + Clancy = 9?

Think well have any real change in city finances? I doubt it.

Again, I speculate (I have no inside info) the fiscal 2009 city budget is going to be disaster.


Anonymous said...

Jahn brings up an interesting point, if the city was to ever declare bankrupcy , what effect would that have on city retirees pensions/benefits?

Anonymous said...

Worcester Magazine article...

And the exodus continues
Written by submitted
Thursday, 16 August 2007
The flight from Main Street to just about anywhere else

By Michael Nigro

The latest insult to the collective intelligence of Worcester taxpayers is the decision, by David Forsberg and his group of cheerleaders over at the non-profit Worcester Business Development Corporation, to move from 339 Main St. to 89 Shrewsbury St. The insult cuts deeper as they have the Massachusetts Development Finance Agency and Cardinal Construction moving with them to the same building. These moves come on the heels of a 250-person accounting firm moving to Westboro and the Visitors Bureau's move to Quinsigamond Village — wherever that is.

Groups of professionals continue to bolt our Main Street Business District for better digs. In the case of the WBDC, it's the easy parking and walking distance to the variety of eateries and watering holes along Shrewsbury Street. The exodus of professional people from the downtown now spans 30 years and no end is in sight. When one looks at Main Street and thinks about the looming crisis involving inadequate parking downtown, the reasons become obvious.

Who does Mr. Forsberg think he's kidding when he refers to the restoration of 89 Shrewsbury St. as part of the "downtown area"? That building is a half-mile from Main Street and has NO connection to it. More insulting is his statement that the move "keeps us in the heart of the action [and] very focused on downtown." Believe that and I've got a real nice bridge to sell you in London.

Our downtown looks like a wasteland. Nothing's there. Worcester has the dubious distinction of being the only medium-sized city where the Main Street McDonald's hamburger joint went bankrupt. Main Street shuts down at 5:30 p.m. and the only eatery is Woosta Pizza. How exciting, huh?

Sure, Gateway Park and the biomedical complex are important projects but do nothing to improve the downtown. And, with the new "Regional Justice Center" set to open in September, the situation is going to reach critical mass. Why? Because there's NO parking for the hundreds of employees who will be working there, NO parking for the hundreds of court clients who will be going to the District and Superior courts every day, NO parking for the hundreds of people who will be using the Probate Court every day to help solve their social problems, NO parking for entrepreneurs who might want to locate businesses downtown, and NO parking for visitors who might want to use the sports arena and convention center for day-time functions. Seems to me we have a parking crisis that some of the powers-that-be have overlooked.

For three years those powers-that-be have been touting the CitySquare project as THE thing that's going to save Worcester. I suspect that Young Park over at Berkeley Investments is re-thinking the project after fully investigating Worcester and learning that there is NO market for 600 high-end condominiums downtown, NO market for the planned office towers, and NO prospective tenants for his retail space.

Berkeley has owned the land for three years and not a dime has been spent on tearing down the old mall. A committed developer would have completed a project the size of CitySquare within three years to have revenues flowing and debt being paid down. What should that tell us? It tells me the original grand plan is on hold and may not happen at all.

We have a serious problem here. Worcester is a great city. It's a wonderful place to live and raise kids. But, we can't sell it. And we can't sell it because our Main Street Business District looks like a wasteland and no UNIFIED development and marketing plan is in place to promote Worcester as a DESTINATION. There are now a host of booster groups — the WBDC, the Central Mass. Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Worcester County Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Worcester Office of Economic Development, SMS — the crowd running the DCU Center, Grow Worcester, Inc., Choose Worcester Inc., and the Regional Chamber of Commerce — all working without a development or marketing plan.

Every now and then I go to the Crown Plaza when a convention is in town to survey visitors. The consensus is unanimous — people enjoy their conventions but will not come back to Worcester. They say there's nothing to do here. In short, we have development that's patchwork at best, a city people don't want to visit, an airport airlines don't want to use and a non-stop exodus of professional people from the downtown business district. That does not bode well for our future. We're close to going the way of Springfield and people like Mr. Forsberg and his cronies are contributing that reality by bolting the downtown.o

Michael Nigro of Paxton is a retired lawyer, currently teaching at Worcester State College.

Harry Tembenis
Worcester, MA

Anonymous said...

Ramdom TGIF musings:

* Unfortunately, the state will prob. bail out the city's long term obligatiions to retiree's.

* Let us not forget that downtown also could not support a Burger King and I think we have lost our CVS, too?

* I recall in the mid 80's how the likes of Jordan Levy and his council cromnies raised holy hell b/c some Worc heavy weights decided to build an office tower on Park Ave, near elm park....hindsight is always nice... but I guess they knew what they were doing and could see the handwriting on the as re: downtown

* I am surprised Fletcher let this letter be published....afterall teh proposed Canal Distirct is exactly how close to downtown?

* Calling Shrewsbury St and Union station downtown is like calling the Bio med park on Plantation street part of special financing district that includes teh DCU Center & Hilton Hotel locale.

* "Michael Nigro of Paxton".....need i say anymore?

* Speaking of regional justice centers....i read a while back of a poss proposal to build a centrally located state medical examiners office in North Worc almost in W Boylston. Why cant that be built in downtown Worc? I know it isnt privaste dev'ment...........but hey at this point anything will do.

* Speaking of private dev'ment, thus far what's the total amt given to the Hand It Over Theatre from both Corps', private ind's and gov't? Warning: Reload your calculator paper before commencing the addition process.
And when is that place slated to open?

* If we have a downtown parking crisis why we are we gung ho to raze the largest downtown existing parking facility...and then have the city pay for a new and smaller parking facility that a private developer will own??

Anonymous said...


Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese give us your input on the whole Rushton recount thing. I can't wait for the una, er union-bomber's take on the whole recount!

Harry Tembenis
Worcester, MA

Anonymous said...

Ok Mr Tembenis:

First, I am in Konnie's Kamp ( and Kounting)

I see Mr Rushton as just another appendage of the S.E.I.U., Mr McGovern, & Mr Murray; the three of which have (and will) smash the citys financial ship of state against the rocky shoals...........sooner than most think. The Beacon Hill well is running dry and the city has been tapping it since 1980 and the advent of Prop 2 1/2. Unlike Washington DC, Beacon Hill cannot print Geo Washingtons.

I Cant blame Mr Rshton for wanting a is very, very close and I am reasonably certain I'd do the same.

BUT, BUT, BUT I am Tired of hearing (Levy) and reading (T&G):

"Mr Rushton said he is asking for the recount b/c the difference in the vote totals BETWEEN he & Mrs Lukes is lass than one half of one percent...."

Evidently I am missing something here.

Konnie Votes 7,432
Rick Votes 7,327
Total Votes 14,759

x .005 (1/2 of 1%)
= 74 Votes

Conclusion: The difference is NOT less than 1/2 of one percent b/c ......105 votes is not less than 74 votes......or am I missing something here?

File under future 4th grade MCAS question.

OK so I am splitting hairs...but this is what gets under my skin about what comes outta city politics......

BTW, I know what the response (if any) to my claim will be.

No votes tabulated on 925 ballots.............agreed thats' huge reason to re count.

Per T&G:
"He (Rushton) estimates that it would cost $7,000 to conduct a hand recount of all 50 precincts".......................
"Mr Rushton said he he does not see the recount as an expense to the taxpayers, but instead lloks at it as an investment, b/c the citizens will have a 'verified election' "

WHAT !!!!!

And my $7,000 investment will earn what rate of return & be worth how much in 10 years? This is kinda like my investemnt in city employees sick time bank or the $200,000 monthly city investemnt in Worc Airport

VERIFIED?? huh????

Thank you for the invitation and the opportunity to respond. Opposing points of view are always welcome.

Bill, now your prediction on tomorrows letter from the editor. I'll go out on a limb & say it aint goin' be about Worc Airport

Anonymous said...

Someone please tell me, besides Lukes, which newly elected councillors WERE NOT backed by city employees groups?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the answer is none??

SSDD. Same Scam Different Day.

Anonymous said...

to pyhtagoras,
a) subtract rush total from lukes total

b)count all votes, including rush, rosen, coleman, lukes, overvotes and blanks, then

c) divide a over b

d) total should be less than 5%

Anonymous said...

As i said .i thought i knew what the rresponse would be....and thats it !!!!!!!!

If ya count all the mayoral votes..........then it meets teh 1/2% thresohold......but that aint what the T&G is saying was said by losing candidate.

Operative terms being , per T&G

"the difference in the vote totals BETWEEN he & Mrs Lukes is lass than one half of one percent...."