DPW changes the seal of the city
I was struck by the fact that the city is changing the seal as shown here and there are residents and workers of the Department of Public Works who believe that we are losing part of our history.
I took some photos and talked to whoever was willing to share an opinion with me and then I called Carlos Jaquez, director of DPW, to ask the reason for this decision.
I could understand his desire to attract public attention to his department and the large number of responsibilities they have.
Agreeing with the detractors, I called Brian Peña, the water commissioner because Mr. Jaquez did not give me a convincing answer.
Brian is always very willing to respond to my requests and proceeded to describe how the decision was made. Having met several times, the department opted for a modern and vibrant sign showing mainly the name of the department. In the lower part, the different areas of responsibility would be written.
But Brian went further explaining the meaning of the graphics. The bridge over the river represents the valuable resource we have, the sun that shines over Lawrence and the lines represent the streets.
He believes that we need a new vision for the city and this is a way to start.
Surely I will miss the beautiful image that captures our history so clearly, the mills, our workers, the river and even the year in which the city was founded.
What do you think? Am I being too sentimental or is it really important? Leave me a message on Rumbo’s page on Facebook.
Back to “Reply to all” (Reply to All)
If you see me reading an email while smoke comes out through my ears, you can bet it’s another message from someone I probably do not know sent to “Reply to All.”
If people respond to an invitation to a party or meeting, only the person who sends it is interested in their response. I do not care who’s going to go either. Meanwhile, there are maybe 40 or 50 unnecessary answers in my mailbox.
Why is it that people do not press “Reply” and inform only the sender of their decision?
And a message for senders: put your list of recipients in BCC.
The future of elections in Lawrence
We thought the November State Elections were messed up with so many voting machines breaking down and were happy at the same time that Councilor at-Large Ana Levy came to the rescue. Everything was fine… or so we thought!
Last week, City Clerk William Maloney wrote a report outlining the problems and needs of his department, which was sent to Mayor Daniel Rivera and all city councilors.
Document #336/2018 was filed at the Full City Council and it is currently tabled. We know what that means: in a few years, they’ll bring it up and withdraw it, never to be discussed because this council doesn’t take this matter seriously.
The effort to obtain “working” voting machines for Lawrence has been going on since at least 2012. The last time we saw an update of voting equipment was the purchase of new voting booths by Mayor Lantigua in 2011. Councilor Levy is the only public official who is doing anything to assure voters in Lawrence are provided with working voting machines.
The voting machine failures that occurred during the last state election held in Lawrence were “predicted” and the Council and Mayor were notified. The City Clerk’s memo is a report on the resulting failure of voting machines which all public officials in Lawrence knew about in advance. Councilor Levy was the only Councilor who brought the issue to Mayor Rivera acquiring 10 voting machines to be available as machines broke down. However, this “reactive” type of response is simply absurd. It will be impossible to avoid a massive failure of voting machines if that occurs. This is no longer a “threat” but a “certainty” and will continue with each election until the voting machines currently in use are replaced.
According to his memo, there also has to be a change to the staffing policy in elections and a minimum of 5 year round permanent staff members is necessary to administer an election division that is minimally functional. The City Election Division is rooted in a 1950s or 1960s model where it is combined with the Clerk’s Office with minimal staff metered out to both the Clerk’s Office and Election Office resulting in services to the public being forced to be poorly served due to a “lack of staff”.
The information contained in the memo is not confidential and I believe is a public record concerning the actual conditions that presently exist evidenced by operations of the last election held on 11-6-18. Residents are entitled to see a copy.
It was not “good fortune” that spared Lawrence from the possibility of an invalid election with invalid election results but “good planning” and “reasonable advocacy” provided by Councilor Levy. Unfortunately, the matter presented will not be taken seriously until there is massive error in the vote count that cannot be resolved due to the failure of voting machines – it is now a matter of “when” not “if”.
