Claps for the Town Council
After years of speaking before the town council at regular and special meetings, I have come to expect nothing more in response than a polite "thank you." There were occasional memorable episodes in the past where I'd be called various names, but fortunately that has not happened in more recent years.
Now I learn that last night the council, spurred on by other events as well, took up the subject about which I spoke, and decided to take action.
So in the spirit of outreach, Side hereby rises to deliver a standing O to the council for last night's discussion, and we look forward to reporting on the outcome of future actions.
Slaps for this Reporter
Conversely, you can color Side embarrassed for having left the meeting shortly after finishing its "testimony," and before the discussion just referred to occurred. The reason is plain enough; after dozens of occasions speaking to the council, and watching those being addressed riff through papers, yawn, look unhappy, or otherwise wish the yapping would come to an end, there seemed to be no good reason to stick around for a one in a million chance of follow-up.
Last night that was the wrong thing to do, and so we offer a sitting raspberry for our own behavior.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Due Diligence and Oxford: A glimpse
OK, you information groupies. I'm here to pass along some specifics that should illustrate my earlier points, and provide a launching point for your own pursuits should you feel an insatiable intellectual curiosity on the matter.
Aircraft painting and the related services proposed by Oxford Aviation at BNAS are not an under-served market. It is zealously courted by a worldwide array of established companies – from the very smallest like Oxford, to multi-national groups that have existing arrangements with Airbus and others.
Their capabilities, locations, facilities, staffs, and experience are impressive.
Here are some examples:
The STTS Group of Europe and QAPS, one of their subsidiaries. Be sure to see the pictures as well. STTS has facilities in Spain, France, the Netherlands, and elsewhere, and can handle aircraft from business jets to A340 and B747 airliners.
Domestically, look at Leading Edge Aviation Services, with four facilities in the US, and one in Malaysia. Be sure to check their portfolio , which includes many major airlines and UPS.
Try their video gallery; it's really something.
There are too many others to count, like Duncan Aviation, with more than 20,000 active accounts, 2000 worldwide employees, full repair capability, and multiple facilities with five times the total space of Hangar 6 at BNAS. You can look at the Fact Sheet linked on the page.
If anything, there may be overcapacity in the industry at this point, given the reduction in routes and flights, and the switch to smaller aircraft.
The only way I can see for Oxford to fulfill F. Lee Bailey’s extravagant but verbal only promises is to take business away from other well established and entrenched providers. There's no reason to expect Airlines to buy more airplanes or service them more frequently because Oxford moves into a Brunswick hangar. Or to expect them to pay the OJT costs and the absence of economies of scale at Oxford. Not to mention the lion's share of any "airport operations" costs.
Could we please have someone do a real business case analysis on this, before our public treasures and assets are committed?
Pretty pretty please?
Aircraft painting and the related services proposed by Oxford Aviation at BNAS are not an under-served market. It is zealously courted by a worldwide array of established companies – from the very smallest like Oxford, to multi-national groups that have existing arrangements with Airbus and others.
Their capabilities, locations, facilities, staffs, and experience are impressive.
Here are some examples:
The STTS Group of Europe and QAPS, one of their subsidiaries. Be sure to see the pictures as well. STTS has facilities in Spain, France, the Netherlands, and elsewhere, and can handle aircraft from business jets to A340 and B747 airliners.
Domestically, look at Leading Edge Aviation Services, with four facilities in the US, and one in Malaysia. Be sure to check their portfolio , which includes many major airlines and UPS.
Try their video gallery; it's really something.
There are too many others to count, like Duncan Aviation, with more than 20,000 active accounts, 2000 worldwide employees, full repair capability, and multiple facilities with five times the total space of Hangar 6 at BNAS. You can look at the Fact Sheet linked on the page.
If anything, there may be overcapacity in the industry at this point, given the reduction in routes and flights, and the switch to smaller aircraft.
The only way I can see for Oxford to fulfill F. Lee Bailey’s extravagant but verbal only promises is to take business away from other well established and entrenched providers. There's no reason to expect Airlines to buy more airplanes or service them more frequently because Oxford moves into a Brunswick hangar. Or to expect them to pay the OJT costs and the absence of economies of scale at Oxford. Not to mention the lion's share of any "airport operations" costs.
Could we please have someone do a real business case analysis on this, before our public treasures and assets are committed?
Pretty pretty please?
Monday, September 21, 2009
Follow-up to "Due Diligence and Oxford Aviation"
Side is well aware that you were teased with the prospect of a forthcoming "breaking story." And we here at headquarters are looking sorely ashamed for not having delivered on that tease.
There are reasons, although a critical reader would consider them petty personal problems, so I won't go into them.
Instead, I am posting the text of the statement Side presented to the Brunswick Town Council tonight, which addresses the "breaking story" issue without going into exhaustive detail. The text has been slightly edited only for readability in this format.
==============================================
• I’m here tonight because I am extremely, and I mean extremely concerned about base redevelopment and how it will relate to and affect this town.
• I’ve yet to see any evidence that town government has even begun to grapple with the challenges, obligations, burdens, and expenses that will accrue to it as the transition gets underway.
• I don’t believe any work has been done to determine the “business model” for the immediate future as the base closes, and in the longer term as the MRRA departs the scene. If it has, I haven’t seen or read any evidence of it.
• For the life of me, I can’t understand how this could be. I could talk about ostriches and elephants and monkey trios, but they wouldn’t communicate my concerns with sufficient force. So instead I’ll use the word negligence, unless you can convince me otherwise. The negligence amounts to running from your duties.
• I suppose it’s easy to get wrapped up in the Maine Street Station buildings, the excitement about a new school, new police buildings, and all those other fun things.
• Well let me slap you upside the head with a verbal 2 x 4. The MRRA is about to make the town of Brunswick a partner in a very sketchy business proposition, one month from now, whether we want to or not, and without the slightest due diligence or agreement on the town’s part.
• Oxford Aviation has been getting considerable examination these days, no thanks to our local paper. We should be grateful that the Forecaster sees this as a worthy issue to investigate and report on.
• MRRA is about to lease the single biggest, newest, most valuable facility on the base to a company whose reputation and resume are, to be kind, problematic; a company that feels it’s in their best interest to use a celebrity California attorney as their public face. His stake in Oxford’s future is mysterious, just as the details of the lease are completely unknown. But as you’ll recall, Commissioner Richardson says “protocols” are necessary and “confidentiality is king.”
• Poppycock, balderdash, and nonsense. This is the business of the public being conducted by a public body using public funds. And they are about to saddle the town and the region with the consequences of this transaction before the town wakes up and gets its pants on.
• The greater part of my career was spent in business development, where a good deal of time and attention was spent on market analysis and understanding the competition. From time to time, potential acquisitions came into view.
• Due diligence was the key to making sure that that investments required were based on sound analysis and facts, and that a reasonable return on any investment could be expected.
• We see none of this discipline and rigor in our current situation. Instead, we see undue negligence. It’s amazing how working with other people’s money can eliminate the healthy skepticism and survivalist instincts that would otherwise apply.
• Well, just to see what was going on, I conducted a little “due diligence” myself this weekend. I used a sophisticated research apparatus called Go Ogle. Some people pronounce it “google,” I think.
• I researched the competitive landscape in “aircraft painting” and “commercial aircraft painting.” What I found in this brief effort astonished me and set off reasonability alarms. I am convinced that further study is urgently called for, and would amass a wealth of vital and troubling information before any commitments are made.
• We don’t have time to go through details here. I will simply say that F. Lee Bailey’s grandiose pronouncements of an international business base and global leadership in aviation for Brunswick are bizarre and unwarranted, and should be completely disregarded until such time as a serious and objective case study and business plan is developed. But given the politics of the situation, it’s more likely I’ll have a full head of hair when I wake up tomorrow morning. And I almost forgot about his teasing us with contracts ready to go if we would please, please, please just sign on the dotted line.
• Numerous well established companies exist to serve this marketplace, many with multiple facilities, some bigger than Hangar 6, with complete painting, engine and structural maintenance, and avionics capabilities. With established and proven business relationships with Airbus, airlines, and others. In other words, on a prima facie basis, buying into Oxford’s promises seems reckless and irresponsible at this point. I see no reason to believe this David can conquer numerous Goliaths. Especially when you are putting public money and public assets at risk.
• Perhaps these realities were a major factor in OSO backing out of venture financing for Oxford in Sanford. Not to mention that commercial aviation is not exactly a growth business these days, with routes and expenses being cut everywhere you look.
• Unless this council takes immediate and forceful action, you will have committed the citizens of this town to a partnership with Oxford of unknown consequence and unknown costs, and with zero understanding of the long term effects on the town. How much will it cost to provide fire protection and other public safety coverage? What other obligations will be incumbent on the town and those who pay the bills? How big an iceberg are we heading for?
• I don’t see how you can possibly stand by and watch this happen. I don’t understand why you haven’t already planned a weekend retreat or something of similar scale to get away from the normal course of town business, where you can come to a thorough understanding of the scope and consequences of base transition so that an orderly plan can be developed and executed, and so that your constituents will know what to expect.
• We’d like to see the trains come to Brunswick. Based on the foregoing, I suggest we may see a major train wreck before regular service arrives, and nobody can see it coming or assure us that it will be avoided in time.
• I’ve heard from some people that the town has “no voice in this matter.” Well, you better find one. To start with, our Town Manager is on the MRRA Board of Directors. If that doesn’t give us a voice and full disclosure, than we’re in a far more political and troubling mess than I thought, and I’m pretty damn cynical in such matters.
• And maybe you should think about issuing a disclaimer to MRRA and Oxford saying that Brunswick officially declines any financial obligations or encumbrances now and in the future. If that doesn’t get some attention, the battle is truly lost.
• I’ll close with an irony or two; I just can’t help it. I don’t know how many times I’ve read complaints in the paper about the disturbing practice of “corporate welfare and tax loopholes” for greedy capitalists, and how they’ve got to be stopped. Hmmmm; it’s hard not to snicker given the situation we’re in.
• Then there’s our environmentally concerned neighbors. I well remember the great poop deliberations of some years back, or should I say “biosolids.” When the debate against application could not be won on the merits, the arguments came down to “but why take a chance?”
• Now we’re entertaining the stripping, metallurgical treatment, and painting of massive high speed aircraft. It would seem that the environmental and toxicity challenges here are immense, and I suggest, completely unknown and undisclosed in the case before us. Yet I hear nor read nary a peep.
• Oh well. Don’t worry, be happy, I guess. It’s ever so much easier.
There are reasons, although a critical reader would consider them petty personal problems, so I won't go into them.
Instead, I am posting the text of the statement Side presented to the Brunswick Town Council tonight, which addresses the "breaking story" issue without going into exhaustive detail. The text has been slightly edited only for readability in this format.
==============================================
• I’m here tonight because I am extremely, and I mean extremely concerned about base redevelopment and how it will relate to and affect this town.
• I’ve yet to see any evidence that town government has even begun to grapple with the challenges, obligations, burdens, and expenses that will accrue to it as the transition gets underway.
• I don’t believe any work has been done to determine the “business model” for the immediate future as the base closes, and in the longer term as the MRRA departs the scene. If it has, I haven’t seen or read any evidence of it.
• For the life of me, I can’t understand how this could be. I could talk about ostriches and elephants and monkey trios, but they wouldn’t communicate my concerns with sufficient force. So instead I’ll use the word negligence, unless you can convince me otherwise. The negligence amounts to running from your duties.
• I suppose it’s easy to get wrapped up in the Maine Street Station buildings, the excitement about a new school, new police buildings, and all those other fun things.
• Well let me slap you upside the head with a verbal 2 x 4. The MRRA is about to make the town of Brunswick a partner in a very sketchy business proposition, one month from now, whether we want to or not, and without the slightest due diligence or agreement on the town’s part.
• Oxford Aviation has been getting considerable examination these days, no thanks to our local paper. We should be grateful that the Forecaster sees this as a worthy issue to investigate and report on.
• MRRA is about to lease the single biggest, newest, most valuable facility on the base to a company whose reputation and resume are, to be kind, problematic; a company that feels it’s in their best interest to use a celebrity California attorney as their public face. His stake in Oxford’s future is mysterious, just as the details of the lease are completely unknown. But as you’ll recall, Commissioner Richardson says “protocols” are necessary and “confidentiality is king.”
• Poppycock, balderdash, and nonsense. This is the business of the public being conducted by a public body using public funds. And they are about to saddle the town and the region with the consequences of this transaction before the town wakes up and gets its pants on.
• The greater part of my career was spent in business development, where a good deal of time and attention was spent on market analysis and understanding the competition. From time to time, potential acquisitions came into view.
• Due diligence was the key to making sure that that investments required were based on sound analysis and facts, and that a reasonable return on any investment could be expected.
• We see none of this discipline and rigor in our current situation. Instead, we see undue negligence. It’s amazing how working with other people’s money can eliminate the healthy skepticism and survivalist instincts that would otherwise apply.
• Well, just to see what was going on, I conducted a little “due diligence” myself this weekend. I used a sophisticated research apparatus called Go Ogle. Some people pronounce it “google,” I think.
• I researched the competitive landscape in “aircraft painting” and “commercial aircraft painting.” What I found in this brief effort astonished me and set off reasonability alarms. I am convinced that further study is urgently called for, and would amass a wealth of vital and troubling information before any commitments are made.
• We don’t have time to go through details here. I will simply say that F. Lee Bailey’s grandiose pronouncements of an international business base and global leadership in aviation for Brunswick are bizarre and unwarranted, and should be completely disregarded until such time as a serious and objective case study and business plan is developed. But given the politics of the situation, it’s more likely I’ll have a full head of hair when I wake up tomorrow morning. And I almost forgot about his teasing us with contracts ready to go if we would please, please, please just sign on the dotted line.
• Numerous well established companies exist to serve this marketplace, many with multiple facilities, some bigger than Hangar 6, with complete painting, engine and structural maintenance, and avionics capabilities. With established and proven business relationships with Airbus, airlines, and others. In other words, on a prima facie basis, buying into Oxford’s promises seems reckless and irresponsible at this point. I see no reason to believe this David can conquer numerous Goliaths. Especially when you are putting public money and public assets at risk.
• Perhaps these realities were a major factor in OSO backing out of venture financing for Oxford in Sanford. Not to mention that commercial aviation is not exactly a growth business these days, with routes and expenses being cut everywhere you look.
• Unless this council takes immediate and forceful action, you will have committed the citizens of this town to a partnership with Oxford of unknown consequence and unknown costs, and with zero understanding of the long term effects on the town. How much will it cost to provide fire protection and other public safety coverage? What other obligations will be incumbent on the town and those who pay the bills? How big an iceberg are we heading for?
• I don’t see how you can possibly stand by and watch this happen. I don’t understand why you haven’t already planned a weekend retreat or something of similar scale to get away from the normal course of town business, where you can come to a thorough understanding of the scope and consequences of base transition so that an orderly plan can be developed and executed, and so that your constituents will know what to expect.
• We’d like to see the trains come to Brunswick. Based on the foregoing, I suggest we may see a major train wreck before regular service arrives, and nobody can see it coming or assure us that it will be avoided in time.
• I’ve heard from some people that the town has “no voice in this matter.” Well, you better find one. To start with, our Town Manager is on the MRRA Board of Directors. If that doesn’t give us a voice and full disclosure, than we’re in a far more political and troubling mess than I thought, and I’m pretty damn cynical in such matters.
• And maybe you should think about issuing a disclaimer to MRRA and Oxford saying that Brunswick officially declines any financial obligations or encumbrances now and in the future. If that doesn’t get some attention, the battle is truly lost.
• I’ll close with an irony or two; I just can’t help it. I don’t know how many times I’ve read complaints in the paper about the disturbing practice of “corporate welfare and tax loopholes” for greedy capitalists, and how they’ve got to be stopped. Hmmmm; it’s hard not to snicker given the situation we’re in.
• Then there’s our environmentally concerned neighbors. I well remember the great poop deliberations of some years back, or should I say “biosolids.” When the debate against application could not be won on the merits, the arguments came down to “but why take a chance?”
• Now we’re entertaining the stripping, metallurgical treatment, and painting of massive high speed aircraft. It would seem that the environmental and toxicity challenges here are immense, and I suggest, completely unknown and undisclosed in the case before us. Yet I hear nor read nary a peep.
• Oh well. Don’t worry, be happy, I guess. It’s ever so much easier.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Due Diligence and Oxford
This is a heads up to Side readers.
I will have "breaking news" to report in the next day or two on the pending agreement with Oxford Aviation to occupy the huge new hangar at BNAS. As I reported from Forecaster coverage, barring any surprises, MRRA will be signing a lease with them in one month, based almost entirely on the charm and persuasiveness of F. Lee Bailey. And without revealing a single detail of the agreement to the public. You know, "protocols" and "confidentiality is king."
I am compiling the details of the story, and it will take a few more days to complete the effort.
From my perspective as a retired business development/marketing manager, this looks like enough to be a deal breaker.
Stay tuned.
I will have "breaking news" to report in the next day or two on the pending agreement with Oxford Aviation to occupy the huge new hangar at BNAS. As I reported from Forecaster coverage, barring any surprises, MRRA will be signing a lease with them in one month, based almost entirely on the charm and persuasiveness of F. Lee Bailey. And without revealing a single detail of the agreement to the public. You know, "protocols" and "confidentiality is king."
I am compiling the details of the story, and it will take a few more days to complete the effort.
From my perspective as a retired business development/marketing manager, this looks like enough to be a deal breaker.
Stay tuned.
Brunswick "Truthers"
Side wrote last week on the appearance of a "truther commentary" in our local paper on the anniversary of "9/11."
We heard from friends who were disturbed about this editorial act, but waited in vain all week for some sort of reaction to appear in the letters section, to no avail.
Finally today a group of letters took issue with the practice, and in generally very strong terms.
In particular, Side appreciates the letter from Captain Will Fitzgerald, CO of BNAS, who probably feels more strongly offended than just about any other reader.
Thanks to those who wrote for restoring some confidence in the sanity of the local populace. And a sense of decorum and sensitivity.
Now, Mikey, you can have your friends come on over and hyperventilate like they did last week. We could use the income.
We heard from friends who were disturbed about this editorial act, but waited in vain all week for some sort of reaction to appear in the letters section, to no avail.
Finally today a group of letters took issue with the practice, and in generally very strong terms.
In particular, Side appreciates the letter from Captain Will Fitzgerald, CO of BNAS, who probably feels more strongly offended than just about any other reader.
Thanks to those who wrote for restoring some confidence in the sanity of the local populace. And a sense of decorum and sensitivity.
Now, Mikey, you can have your friends come on over and hyperventilate like they did last week. We could use the income.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Reflections.....on yesterday.
"Double, double toil and trouble
Fire burn, and cauldron bubble."
"Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog,
Adder's fork, and blind-worm's sting,
Lizard's leg, and howlet's wing,--
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble."
Macbeth, Act IV
Sometimes, in the bubbling cauldron of my mind, things cook quickly, I serve them up, and just like that, what to cook next grabs my attention.
Other times, things bubble and cook slowly, ingredients meld, flavors take on new complexity, and a surprising new dish results.
Yup; it's me being silly again. But not THAT silly. I told you yesterday that the two posts occurred to me separately, but as I composed the second one, something more came to mind.
After a day of casual reflection, I am convinced that there may well be more to the story than a first reading revealed.
Let's review the circumstances. The Forecaster report on the MRRA board meeting in Bath earlier this week described the discussions related to Oxford Aviation's proposal to occupy the massive new hangar at BNAS, specifically mentioning comments by F. Lee Bailey, Commissioner John Richardson, and Steve Levesque, the MRRA head. And how approving the lease agreement between Oxford and MRRA was a top priority, and would be voted on at the October meeting. That's right; the deal could be sealed in a month, before anyone locally knows what hit them.
The Times Record report on the same meeting didn't mention Oxford, Bailey, or Richardson at all. Instead, it focused on no-cost transfers, Blue Angel visits, and more space for MRRA, so it could accommodate a "clean energy" manager. Or should we say clean energy czar? (Note to MRRA: a national expert in such matters recently became available, and has impeccable Washington czar-level experience.)
How could our local paper completely miss the Oxford/Bailey/Richardson nexus?
THIS is how the slow cooking in the cauldron of my mind came to pass.
I tried to remember what coverage the local paper had provided over the last year on the Oxford initiative, and the pickings were pretty slim. I remembered the three commentaries I submitted on base redevelopment, the second of which raised some concerns about Oxford claims and comments.
This second column elicited a letter in response from Jim Horowitz, CEO of Oxford. The letter showed little rigor in vetting by the editors, if any at all, since Horowitz refuted an assertion I had not made. This was curious to say the least.
His letter in turn caused me to delve more deeply into Oxford's past, and the result was a third commentary. Only after repeated probing did the editors retreat from their "still considering it" excuse making and demand that I substantiate everything in the column. Detailed 'exchanges' ensued, following which a slightly modified version was printed. This episode led reluctantly to the creation of this blog.
The only other published item I can recall on this subject is a commentary authored by a well known "pillar of the community," who argued that MRRA was doing a swell job and that they should be cut some slack because of the tough challenges they face. I took it as a back door dismissal of my last commentary on the subject.
Since then, I cannot recall a single news report or editorial piece on the Oxford initiative, the consequences for the town, the corporate welfare issues, and the very obvious political implications of the negotiations.
Flash back to the 2000 Brill's Content article. It turns out that the author of the "cut MRRA some slack" commentary, who I characterized as a pillar of the community, was prominently mentioned in the article. And in a troubling and unflattering way, specifically related to who decides what our "free press" covers and how.
Which is what led to the "slow cooking" analogy. New and complex "flavors" came to the fore, along with curiosity about how things really work in our little town of "Perfect."
I'd link to all the relevant items, but as I noted yesterday, the Brill's article is not available on the web. And the local newspaper's web based archive spans all of the last two weeks, which is to say it isn't really an archive. This eliminates the possibility of compiling a meaningful history of their coverage on just about anything.
Side has no other option, then, but to pose the following questions for Chris, Robert, and Jim over at the Times Record, and just for the heck of it, for Doug the Director as well:
1) Who actually runs the paper?
2) How is it decided, and by whom, what gets reported on and what doesn't, and what approach the reporting takes?
3) What does it take to make the cut on what is relevant to the local region, its residents, and its future?
Jeez, Louise, if Oxford, Bailey, and Richardson don't make the cut, what would?? Those concerned have my offer of unlimited column inches here to answer.
It's enough to make some wonder whether the sale of the "old" Times Record building to the town doesn't warrant concern in retrospect.
There's more than one "elephant in the room" these days; but this "white" one is looking more and more un-adoptable. If you know anyone who could provide a foster home for it, give the town office a call.
Please.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
News from Lake Basebegone, Sept 16 2009
It’s with an eerie sense of apprehension that I draft this post, just hours after posting on the Brill’s Content article of 2000, and the less than flattering views it expressed on our local newspaper and various “town fathers.”
You have my word that this juxtaposition happens to be, well, happenstance. After completing the “Color me clueless” post, I discovered that the Forecaster had once again done some solid reporting on the MRRA and the Oxford Aviation proposal. I stopped work to gobble down some victuals, and glanced at the local paper’s coverage of the same meeting while I did.
Then it hit me; could we be witnessing the same pathologies described in the 2000 article here and now as base redevelopment unfolds?
To the point. The Forecaster reported on yesterday’s MRRA meeting in Bath with an emphasis on discussions about the Oxford Aviation proposal, citing comments by Commissioner John Richardson, the irrepressible and irresistable F. Lee Bailey, and Steve Levesque, head of the MRRA. Levesque is a predecessor of Richardson in the Commissioner spot, and was appointed by Gov. Baldacci to his current post.
Our local paper's report on the same meeting, on the other hand, mentions not one word about Oxford, Bailey, or Richardson, but instead dwells on issues of broader general interest, featuring a picture of the Blue Angels with a suggestion that they may someday return if things work out right.
As readers know, this reporter in months past, and the Forecaster more recently, have focused on exploring the history of Oxford Aviation and its pursuit of corporate welfare and tax loopholes from MRRA and local taxpayers.
The local newspaper, other than carrying this reporter’s op-ed pieces some months ago, and with “vetting” rigor not applied to other authors, has blithely ignored the Oxford situation and the political posturing surrounding it.
The referenced Forecaster article gives cause for concern. First, there seems to be a rush to consummate the deal, as indicated in this passage:
Careful reading of the article further reveals a change in the status of the Oxford deal. MRRA in the past had only gone so far as to say that they had a “memorandum of understanding” from Oxford, and refused, under cover of their lawyers, to disclose any content or details.
Now the rhetoric is about a “lease agreement,” or even more binding, a contract:
Inquiring minds also have to wonder why MRRA, its board, Richardson, and the rest take the word of F. Lee Bailey in discussions about Oxford. He is not an officer of the company, and has no accountability or stake in these matters. At least none that have been disclosed.
Are our “public servants” that blinded by celebrity? Are they that in awe of it? Will it trump their fiduciary obligations for our interests?
There’s no denying that Richardson and Oxford are in a rush to get it done. The only reasons for such haste that come to mind are unseemly and troubling. And they suggest a vulnerability to gamesmanship of the vilest sort, primed by personal ambition.
Get it done by October 20th, that is. Set your clocks, you interested students of the local scene.
From Side’s perspective, it looks like the rush is a bum’s rush. And it’s probably not a good idea to stand in the way. Hell hath no fury like an ambitious politician denied.
You have my word that this juxtaposition happens to be, well, happenstance. After completing the “Color me clueless” post, I discovered that the Forecaster had once again done some solid reporting on the MRRA and the Oxford Aviation proposal. I stopped work to gobble down some victuals, and glanced at the local paper’s coverage of the same meeting while I did.
Then it hit me; could we be witnessing the same pathologies described in the 2000 article here and now as base redevelopment unfolds?
To the point. The Forecaster reported on yesterday’s MRRA meeting in Bath with an emphasis on discussions about the Oxford Aviation proposal, citing comments by Commissioner John Richardson, the irrepressible and irresistable F. Lee Bailey, and Steve Levesque, head of the MRRA. Levesque is a predecessor of Richardson in the Commissioner spot, and was appointed by Gov. Baldacci to his current post.
Our local paper's report on the same meeting, on the other hand, mentions not one word about Oxford, Bailey, or Richardson, but instead dwells on issues of broader general interest, featuring a picture of the Blue Angels with a suggestion that they may someday return if things work out right.
As readers know, this reporter in months past, and the Forecaster more recently, have focused on exploring the history of Oxford Aviation and its pursuit of corporate welfare and tax loopholes from MRRA and local taxpayers.
The local newspaper, other than carrying this reporter’s op-ed pieces some months ago, and with “vetting” rigor not applied to other authors, has blithely ignored the Oxford situation and the political posturing surrounding it.
The referenced Forecaster article gives cause for concern. First, there seems to be a rush to consummate the deal, as indicated in this passage:
Richardson, who has not returned phone calls seeking comment about Oxford Aviation, on Tuesday appeared anxious for MRRA to vote on the lease agreement.This is the same Richardson that sermonized on “protocols” and “confidentiality is king” just a few short months ago at a town council meeting. Apparently Richardson wants to rush this through, raising questions about a desire to take credit for the deal when he makes his widely rumored pending announcement to seek the Governor’s office. Time is a wasting, one surmises.
"When can we expect to ratify the (contract)?" Richardson asked. "I feel like we've had this in front of us for quite some time."
Careful reading of the article further reveals a change in the status of the Oxford deal. MRRA in the past had only gone so far as to say that they had a “memorandum of understanding” from Oxford, and refused, under cover of their lawyers, to disclose any content or details.
Now the rhetoric is about a “lease agreement,” or even more binding, a contract:
Richardson asked MRRA Executive Director Steve Levesque if the contract between MRRA and Oxford Aviation was signed. Levesque told Richardson that the MRRA board needed to ratify the agreement.Side can’t help but wonder whether the influence peddling described in 2000 isn’t alive and well and working its magic even today, in what is surely the most far reaching and consequential era in Brunswick history.
Inquiring minds also have to wonder why MRRA, its board, Richardson, and the rest take the word of F. Lee Bailey in discussions about Oxford. He is not an officer of the company, and has no accountability or stake in these matters. At least none that have been disclosed.
Are our “public servants” that blinded by celebrity? Are they that in awe of it? Will it trump their fiduciary obligations for our interests?
There’s no denying that Richardson and Oxford are in a rush to get it done. The only reasons for such haste that come to mind are unseemly and troubling. And they suggest a vulnerability to gamesmanship of the vilest sort, primed by personal ambition.
Get it done by October 20th, that is. Set your clocks, you interested students of the local scene.
From Side’s perspective, it looks like the rush is a bum’s rush. And it’s probably not a good idea to stand in the way. Hell hath no fury like an ambitious politician denied.
Color me clueless.....
I used the word "clueless" to attract "Mike" and his friends that consider my posts "disgusting." Any publicity is good publicity, right?
For the more charitable among you, if there are any, consider the title to read "Color me uninformed...."
A friend of Side recently provided me with a copy of an article that appeared in a short-lived and now defunct magazine called "Brill's Content." I actually subscribed to it for a brief period, and as I recall, it was intended to be a critical eye on the world of "media." This was before my level of engagement had reached the fever pitch that led to the creation of "The Other Side of Town."
The article was called "small-town minded," and describes the experiences of author Sandor M. Polster in his brief stint as Editor of the Times Record. It must have caused quite a stir in town when it appeared, and I am at a loss to understand how I could have been "out to lunch" during the entire fallout period. Perhaps certain interests gobbled up every available copy and did their best to snuff the story. We'll never know, unless those in the know forward the details to me.
That's water over the bridge, and in a way, reading the article now with the benefit of greater awareness of our beloved "community", and accumulated experiences with said newspaper, is all the more delicious. And confirms all the more that my view of editorial policies over the years was well founded.
Perhaps readers will remember the article, and in particular, if one of you has an electronic version of it, I'd love to get it. Failing that, I will pursue other means of digitizing the article and making it available to readers.
For now, suffice it to say that the article is none too flattering to the reputation of the Times Record, nor to various town "movers and shakers." Including some I know. The article falls into the "making sausage category" but clarifies things a good deal.
It will certainly effect the lens through which Side views things from here on out.
Good night, Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are.
For the more charitable among you, if there are any, consider the title to read "Color me uninformed...."
A friend of Side recently provided me with a copy of an article that appeared in a short-lived and now defunct magazine called "Brill's Content." I actually subscribed to it for a brief period, and as I recall, it was intended to be a critical eye on the world of "media." This was before my level of engagement had reached the fever pitch that led to the creation of "The Other Side of Town."
The article was called "small-town minded," and describes the experiences of author Sandor M. Polster in his brief stint as Editor of the Times Record. It must have caused quite a stir in town when it appeared, and I am at a loss to understand how I could have been "out to lunch" during the entire fallout period. Perhaps certain interests gobbled up every available copy and did their best to snuff the story. We'll never know, unless those in the know forward the details to me.
That's water over the bridge, and in a way, reading the article now with the benefit of greater awareness of our beloved "community", and accumulated experiences with said newspaper, is all the more delicious. And confirms all the more that my view of editorial policies over the years was well founded.
Perhaps readers will remember the article, and in particular, if one of you has an electronic version of it, I'd love to get it. Failing that, I will pursue other means of digitizing the article and making it available to readers.
For now, suffice it to say that the article is none too flattering to the reputation of the Times Record, nor to various town "movers and shakers." Including some I know. The article falls into the "making sausage category" but clarifies things a good deal.
It will certainly effect the lens through which Side views things from here on out.
Good night, Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Morning Update
The Numbers
Thanks to Mikey the elder, I guess, because at close of business yesterday, the totals were about triple the normal traffic. I don't keep records too far back, but as best I can recall, this was the second highest total ever.
I guess I'll have to work harder if I'm going to break the record.
(My darling daughter tells me that the "Mikey likes it" commercial was for Life Cereal. Interesting, since we have our own little "life serial" unfolding here.)
Portland-the foodiest small town
You can find info from the magazine here.
Berry's Knutt Farm
You may have seen my letter on Rep. Seth Berry's knutty behavior in yesterday's paper. It ran right above a praise song to Berry and Thom Watson, thanking them for working so hard to deprive the state of revenue so that we could have more money in our pockets. (If Berry doesn't last in politics, he can always join the circus. P. T. Barnum would approve of his tactics.)
Now there are reports that Berry and his minions have kicked things up several notches to force the tax money give back down our throats, whether we want it or not. There are recent reports of signature collectors cars being keyed, air being let out of tires, and even windows smashed to steal signed petitions.
What determination! What dedication!
As details come in, I'll be sure to keep you posted. I'm acquainted with some of the people involved, and I'm confident in the integrity of their reporting.
Thanks to Mikey the elder, I guess, because at close of business yesterday, the totals were about triple the normal traffic. I don't keep records too far back, but as best I can recall, this was the second highest total ever.
I guess I'll have to work harder if I'm going to break the record.
(My darling daughter tells me that the "Mikey likes it" commercial was for Life Cereal. Interesting, since we have our own little "life serial" unfolding here.)
Portland-the foodiest small town
You can find info from the magazine here.
Berry's Knutt Farm
You may have seen my letter on Rep. Seth Berry's knutty behavior in yesterday's paper. It ran right above a praise song to Berry and Thom Watson, thanking them for working so hard to deprive the state of revenue so that we could have more money in our pockets. (If Berry doesn't last in politics, he can always join the circus. P. T. Barnum would approve of his tactics.)
Now there are reports that Berry and his minions have kicked things up several notches to force the tax money give back down our throats, whether we want it or not. There are recent reports of signature collectors cars being keyed, air being let out of tires, and even windows smashed to steal signed petitions.
What determination! What dedication!
As details come in, I'll be sure to keep you posted. I'm acquainted with some of the people involved, and I'm confident in the integrity of their reporting.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Update on "the numbers"
Side's devious and immature mind was churning after posting that last item on zeitgeist, and it occurred to me that I could have used the classic line from a famous commercial series of some years ago: "Mikey likes it."
At the moment, I don't remember the product, but it will come back to me.
For now, thanks to the 'Mikey of the moment.' The numbers are continuing to climb, and by the end of the day, I expect a new record will have been set. I suppose I'll have to live down to his expectations to keep the numbers up and climbing.
On a completely different tangent, for you foodies out there, the newest issue of Bon Appetit magazine, dated October 2009, has chosen our own Portland as "America's foodiest small town for 2009." It mentions many places Side knows, and many it doesn't. It even includes Micucci's Groceries on India Street, one of our most loved places for delicious staples.
It's all about flavors and quality, which has been discussed here before. Scarlet's and Back Street Bistro in Brunswick were cited as masters of the art.
It's great to hear about more places to try in Portland, but no doubt the publicity will make it even harder to get a res at Fore Street, one of the best places in the entire world to enjoy a classic martini (up.)
What a shame that Mikey and friends will not get to try one; the carbon footprint required to get to Portland renders such pleasures declasse'. Cretins like Side are expected to engage in such despicable and unsustainable behavior, and so one feels a sense of duty to partake of said martinis before they are outlawed.
One must do what one must do. Or as Jimmy Hoffa put it, "ya gotta do what ya gotta do."
At the moment, I don't remember the product, but it will come back to me.
For now, thanks to the 'Mikey of the moment.' The numbers are continuing to climb, and by the end of the day, I expect a new record will have been set. I suppose I'll have to live down to his expectations to keep the numbers up and climbing.
On a completely different tangent, for you foodies out there, the newest issue of Bon Appetit magazine, dated October 2009, has chosen our own Portland as "America's foodiest small town for 2009." It mentions many places Side knows, and many it doesn't. It even includes Micucci's Groceries on India Street, one of our most loved places for delicious staples.
It's all about flavors and quality, which has been discussed here before. Scarlet's and Back Street Bistro in Brunswick were cited as masters of the art.
It's great to hear about more places to try in Portland, but no doubt the publicity will make it even harder to get a res at Fore Street, one of the best places in the entire world to enjoy a classic martini (up.)
What a shame that Mikey and friends will not get to try one; the carbon footprint required to get to Portland renders such pleasures declasse'. Cretins like Side are expected to engage in such despicable and unsustainable behavior, and so one feels a sense of duty to partake of said martinis before they are outlawed.
One must do what one must do. Or as Jimmy Hoffa put it, "ya gotta do what ya gotta do."
Reading the Brunswick "Community" Zeitgiest
If you haven't personally dabbled in it, take it from Side; blogging is an interesting "hobby."
If nothing else, it puts you in touch with the apathy and sense of futility that are such driving realities in the conduct of our "common" affairs.
I've posted well over 100 items in the months that Other Side has been in operation. Most were intended to report, to inform, or to advocate a particular view. Every now and then, an item was posted to draw some fire, to stimulate some engagement.
What a failure those attempts have been. The number of comments submitted can be counted on one hand. The number of items submitted as guest posts can be counted on no hands.
Side does have a tracker that provides "analytics" of blog traffic. It's interesting to look at the results, but anything but scientific. Traffic does spike following ads, or when the blog is referenced in a letter to the editor.
The last day or two has seen a change in things, however.
On Saturday, September 12th, I posted a strongly worded piece on the "truther" commentary run by the local newspaper on the anniversary of the attack against our country (or should I say "this" country?) In it, I touched on editorial sympathies and how they relate to the local 'peace at any price' folks.
Not much happened in the day following the post, but the wires sure lit up this morning! Early hour traffic was the heaviest I've seen, and the numbers have continued to increase to what are currently the second highest on record. We'll see what happens by midnight.
The commentary has drawn reactions elsewhere in the state, including one from Al Diamon, a legend in his own mind, and in the minds of many others. Al pulled his punches, suggesting only that the TR had run an op-ed "full of lies."
As to this blog, a thoughtful comment was posted by "Mike," and you can read it here. He goes to some lengths to argue logically for the Shaw truther perspective.
Apparently, Mike stirred up the local 'truther' coalition and vectored them to Side's compelling and cogent treatise.
And in so doing, he has helped this reporter gain a more accurate profile of the local community.
In the interest of keeping the 'dialogue' going, Side extends an invitation to Mike to submit essays on the bombing of the USS Cole, the '93 bombing of the WTC, the train bombings in Spain, and all the other fabricated reports of terrorist attacks upon American interests and those of other countries.
Hopefully, when he does, he'll maintain the same control of his passions demonstrated in his first comment, so that we can have the same confidence in his further disclosures, and what they say about the rationality of he and his associates.
Meanwhile, Side thanks him for boosting circulation. And for teaching us what they mean by "earned publicity."
If nothing else, it puts you in touch with the apathy and sense of futility that are such driving realities in the conduct of our "common" affairs.
I've posted well over 100 items in the months that Other Side has been in operation. Most were intended to report, to inform, or to advocate a particular view. Every now and then, an item was posted to draw some fire, to stimulate some engagement.
What a failure those attempts have been. The number of comments submitted can be counted on one hand. The number of items submitted as guest posts can be counted on no hands.
Side does have a tracker that provides "analytics" of blog traffic. It's interesting to look at the results, but anything but scientific. Traffic does spike following ads, or when the blog is referenced in a letter to the editor.
The last day or two has seen a change in things, however.
On Saturday, September 12th, I posted a strongly worded piece on the "truther" commentary run by the local newspaper on the anniversary of the attack against our country (or should I say "this" country?) In it, I touched on editorial sympathies and how they relate to the local 'peace at any price' folks.
Not much happened in the day following the post, but the wires sure lit up this morning! Early hour traffic was the heaviest I've seen, and the numbers have continued to increase to what are currently the second highest on record. We'll see what happens by midnight.
The commentary has drawn reactions elsewhere in the state, including one from Al Diamon, a legend in his own mind, and in the minds of many others. Al pulled his punches, suggesting only that the TR had run an op-ed "full of lies."
As to this blog, a thoughtful comment was posted by "Mike," and you can read it here. He goes to some lengths to argue logically for the Shaw truther perspective.
Apparently, Mike stirred up the local 'truther' coalition and vectored them to Side's compelling and cogent treatise.
And in so doing, he has helped this reporter gain a more accurate profile of the local community.
In the interest of keeping the 'dialogue' going, Side extends an invitation to Mike to submit essays on the bombing of the USS Cole, the '93 bombing of the WTC, the train bombings in Spain, and all the other fabricated reports of terrorist attacks upon American interests and those of other countries.
Hopefully, when he does, he'll maintain the same control of his passions demonstrated in his first comment, so that we can have the same confidence in his further disclosures, and what they say about the rationality of he and his associates.
Meanwhile, Side thanks him for boosting circulation. And for teaching us what they mean by "earned publicity."
Random Thoughts on the "Health Care Reform" Debate
When the "Reform" would take effect
We hear over and over that our health care system is "in crisis," and that we must act now! And that our economy will not and cannot recover until we enact this reform.
How can it be, then, that any time you hear dates mentioned, the claim is that the "new" system would not go into effect until 2013?
Could it be, pray tell, so that we could sneak in another Presidential election and two more congressional elections before the rubber meets the road, before reality sets in?
Could it be that the current administration wants to get hired for another four years, and make sure that its congressional majorities survive until that happens?
Nah.....that couldn't possibly be. It's just me being cynical again.
What else would you expect from an organized, overdressed, anti-American Nazi? At least according to our high ranking "public servants."
Dropping Medicare Advantage
As I understand the debate, Medicare Advantage plans will be dropped, because they are "windfalls for the insurance companies." Anytime you see reason focused on a villain, you should be suspicious.
We've been on a Medicare Advantage plan since signing up for Medicare. It doesn't cost a penny more than we are already paying for Medicare, yet provides additional benefits, including prescription coverage (with the donut hole, of course.)
So from where I see things, the private Medicare Advantage plan provides a far better value than the plain vanilla government offering. Yet opponents see it as a big profit maker for the evil capitalists.
I don't understand how this could be a "windfall" for the insurance companies, unless Medicare is also a "windfall" for the government if you stick with the basic government option.
So there you have it; a private entity can provide better value than the government for the same price, and supposedly make big bucks doing it.
Is there any clearer explanation of why you want the government running less of the health care system, not more???
Buehler? Anyone?
We hear over and over that our health care system is "in crisis," and that we must act now! And that our economy will not and cannot recover until we enact this reform.
How can it be, then, that any time you hear dates mentioned, the claim is that the "new" system would not go into effect until 2013?
Could it be, pray tell, so that we could sneak in another Presidential election and two more congressional elections before the rubber meets the road, before reality sets in?
Could it be that the current administration wants to get hired for another four years, and make sure that its congressional majorities survive until that happens?
Nah.....that couldn't possibly be. It's just me being cynical again.
What else would you expect from an organized, overdressed, anti-American Nazi? At least according to our high ranking "public servants."
Dropping Medicare Advantage
As I understand the debate, Medicare Advantage plans will be dropped, because they are "windfalls for the insurance companies." Anytime you see reason focused on a villain, you should be suspicious.
We've been on a Medicare Advantage plan since signing up for Medicare. It doesn't cost a penny more than we are already paying for Medicare, yet provides additional benefits, including prescription coverage (with the donut hole, of course.)
So from where I see things, the private Medicare Advantage plan provides a far better value than the plain vanilla government offering. Yet opponents see it as a big profit maker for the evil capitalists.
I don't understand how this could be a "windfall" for the insurance companies, unless Medicare is also a "windfall" for the government if you stick with the basic government option.
So there you have it; a private entity can provide better value than the government for the same price, and supposedly make big bucks doing it.
Is there any clearer explanation of why you want the government running less of the health care system, not more???
Buehler? Anyone?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)