Congress pursues 'status and re-election'
Written by Robert Libby
One week ago President Obama presented a State of the Union Address to the Congress, members of the Supreme Court, important leaders of the executive branch of government, and an invited gallery of regular citizens. Many in the gallery were chosen because they represented "We the people" who have suffered terrible events; they were focal illustrations for the camera operators to highlight while the president spoke, exhorting the Congress to act quickly to remedy the issues that are hurting our nation. President Obama used the "bully pulpit" to ask for elected representatives to do what they claimed they would do when they ran for election: legislate to improve our society.
Unfortunately after rising to their feet and cheering one statement after another, pointing to the courageous nurse who acted heroically to care for infants in a hospital in New York City when Superstorm Sandy brought New York City to its knees, applauding the return of troops from Afghanistan after a decade of fruitless waste of lives and treasure in the Middle East, applauding the one hundred and two year old woman in a wheel chair that endured the long lines to finally succeed in voting in the recent presidential election, and culminating in the teary eyed chorus "they deserve a vote" citing the families that have suffered the most tragic loss in our insanely angry culture of violence, unfortunately the members of the Congress walked out of that chamber determined to pursue their narrow agendas of status and re-election.
The president wisely stated that the citizens didn't expect representatives to agree on everything or to fix all the problems, but they do expect the government to fix what it can. The people elected representatives to make things better, not make things worse. Our present Congress is hopelessly degraded by finger pointing and demonizing of the opposition, cynicism about intentions, and arcane procedural rules that have made positive action almost impossible. So one week after the rousing public spectacle of the State of the Union call for action, nothing has been accomplished, rhetorical posturing has ratcheted up, and the Congress has gone home on vacation. Clearly this is the winter of our discontent and the signs of distress surrounding us are piling up faster than we can endure.
Gun control, immigration reform, deficit reduction, foreign policy dealing with atrocious regimes all over the world, and the ruinous environmental effects of fossil fuel extraction and use, all contend for attention. The members of Congress have gone home to their states and districts to gauge the attitudes of their constituents; they want to know what the most active and the most well funded want them to do.
It is emblematic of our political distress that more reporting comment is focused on the effects of Senator Rubio reaching for a water bottle in the middle of a prewritten boiler plate party response to the president's speech than any analysis of how real legislation might fix any problem.
Since the speech extreme storms have repeatedly ravaged the country, protest marchers demanded action on the climate change issue, Senators Boxer and Sanders offered the Climate Protection Act into the Senate with real remedies for reducing carbon dioxide pollution while reducing the budget deficit by one trillion dollars. The leadership of the Senate promptly reacted by tabling the proposal and going home on recess.
(One Man's Island columnist Robert Libby of Chebeague Island is a teacher, writer, organic gardener, executive director of the Maine Center for Civic Education.)
Unfortunately after rising to their feet and cheering one statement after another, pointing to the courageous nurse who acted heroically to care for infants in a hospital in New York City when Superstorm Sandy brought New York City to its knees, applauding the return of troops from Afghanistan after a decade of fruitless waste of lives and treasure in the Middle East, applauding the one hundred and two year old woman in a wheel chair that endured the long lines to finally succeed in voting in the recent presidential election, and culminating in the teary eyed chorus "they deserve a vote" citing the families that have suffered the most tragic loss in our insanely angry culture of violence, unfortunately the members of the Congress walked out of that chamber determined to pursue their narrow agendas of status and re-election.
The president wisely stated that the citizens didn't expect representatives to agree on everything or to fix all the problems, but they do expect the government to fix what it can. The people elected representatives to make things better, not make things worse. Our present Congress is hopelessly degraded by finger pointing and demonizing of the opposition, cynicism about intentions, and arcane procedural rules that have made positive action almost impossible. So one week after the rousing public spectacle of the State of the Union call for action, nothing has been accomplished, rhetorical posturing has ratcheted up, and the Congress has gone home on vacation. Clearly this is the winter of our discontent and the signs of distress surrounding us are piling up faster than we can endure.
Gun control, immigration reform, deficit reduction, foreign policy dealing with atrocious regimes all over the world, and the ruinous environmental effects of fossil fuel extraction and use, all contend for attention. The members of Congress have gone home to their states and districts to gauge the attitudes of their constituents; they want to know what the most active and the most well funded want them to do.
It is emblematic of our political distress that more reporting comment is focused on the effects of Senator Rubio reaching for a water bottle in the middle of a prewritten boiler plate party response to the president's speech than any analysis of how real legislation might fix any problem.
Since the speech extreme storms have repeatedly ravaged the country, protest marchers demanded action on the climate change issue, Senators Boxer and Sanders offered the Climate Protection Act into the Senate with real remedies for reducing carbon dioxide pollution while reducing the budget deficit by one trillion dollars. The leadership of the Senate promptly reacted by tabling the proposal and going home on recess.
(One Man's Island columnist Robert Libby of Chebeague Island is a teacher, writer, organic gardener, executive director of the Maine Center for Civic Education.)
Last Updated on Monday, 18 February 2013 22:37
Hits: 174
Scale implosion
Written by James Howard Kunstler
Back in the day when big box retail started to explode upon the American landscape like a raging economic scrofula, I attended many a town planning board meeting where the pro and con factions faced off over the permitting hurdle. The meetings were often raucous and wrathful and almost all the time the pro forces won — for the excellent reason that they were funded and organized by the chain stores themselves (in an early demonstration of the new axioms that money-is-speech and corporations are people, too!).
The chain stores won not only because they flung money around — sometimes directly into the wallets of public officials — but because a sizeable chunk of every local population longed for the dazzling new mode of commerce. "We Want Bargain Shopping" was their rallying cry. The unintended consequence of their victories through the 1970s and beyond was the total destruction of local economic networks, that is, Main Streets and downtowns, in effect destroying many of their own livelihoods. Wasn't that a bargain, though?
Despite the obvious damage now visible in the entropic desolation of every American home town, WalMart managed to install itself in the pantheon of American Dream icons, along with apple pie, motherhood, and Coca Cola. In most of the country there is no other place to buy goods (and no other place to get a paycheck, scant and demeaning as it may be). America made itself hostage to bargain shopping and then committed suicide. Here we find another axiom of human affairs at work: people get what they deserve, not what they expect. Life is tragic.
The older generations responsible for all that may be done for, but the momentum has now turned in the opposite direction. Though the public hasn't groked it yet, WalMart and its kindred malignant organisms have entered their own yeast-overgrowth death spiral. In a now permanently contracting economy the big box model fails spectacularly. Every element of economic reality is now poised to squash them. Diesel fuel prices are heading well north of $4 again. If they push toward $5 this year you can say goodbye to the "warehouse on wheels" distribution method. (The truckers, who are mostly independent contractors, can say hello to the re-po men come to take possession of their mortgaged rigs.) Global currency wars (competitive devaluations) are about to destroy trade relationships. Say goodbye to the 12,000 mile supply chain from Guangzhou to Hackensack. Say goodbye to the growth financing model in which it becomes necessary to open dozens of new stores every year to keep the credit revolving.
Then there is the matter of the American customers themselves. The WalMart shoppers are exactly the demographic that is getting squashed in the contraction of this phony-baloney corporate buccaneer parasite revolving credit crony capital economy. Unlike the Federal Reserve, WalMart shoppers can't print their own money, and they can't bundle their MasterCard and Visa debts into CDOs to be fobbed off on Scandinavian pension funds for quick profits. They have only one real choice: buy less stuff, especially the stuff of leisure, comfort, and convenience.
The potential for all sorts of economic hardship is obvious in this burgeoning dynamic. But the coming implosion of big box retail implies tremendous opportunities for young people to make a livelihood in the imperative rebuilding of local economies. At this stage it is probably discouraging for them, because all their life programming has conditioned them to be hostages of giant corporations and so to feel helpless. In a town like the old factory village I live in (population 2,500) few of the few remaining young adults might venture to open a retail operation in one of the dozen-odd vacant storefronts on Main Street. The presence of K-Mart, Tractor Supply, and Radio Shack a quarter mile west in the strip mall would seem to mock their dim inklings that something is in the wind. But K-Mart will close over 200 boxes this year, and Radio Shack is committed to shuttering around 500 stores. They could be gone in this town well before Santa Claus starts checking his lists. If they go down, opportunities will blossom. There will be no new chain store brands to replace the dying ones. That phase of our history is over.
What we're on the brink of is scale implosion. Everything gigantic in American life is about to get smaller or die. Everything that we do to support economic activities at gigantic scale is going to hamper our journey into the new reality. The campaign to sustain the unsustainable, which is the official policy of U.S. leadership, will only produce deeper whirls of entropy. I hope young people recognize this and can marshal their enthusiasm to get to work. It's already happening in the local farming scene; now it needs to happen in a commercial economy that will support local agriculture.
The additional tragedy of the big box saga is that it scuttled social roles and social relations in every American community. On top of the insult of destroying the geographic places we call home, the chain stores also destroyed people's place in the order of daily life, including the duties, responsibilities, obligations and ceremonies that prompt citizens to care for each other. We can get that all back, but it won't be a bargain.
(James Howard Kunstler is the author of several books, including "The Long Emergency," "The Geography of Nowhere" and "The Witch of Hebron." Contact him by emailing This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .)
The chain stores won not only because they flung money around — sometimes directly into the wallets of public officials — but because a sizeable chunk of every local population longed for the dazzling new mode of commerce. "We Want Bargain Shopping" was their rallying cry. The unintended consequence of their victories through the 1970s and beyond was the total destruction of local economic networks, that is, Main Streets and downtowns, in effect destroying many of their own livelihoods. Wasn't that a bargain, though?
Despite the obvious damage now visible in the entropic desolation of every American home town, WalMart managed to install itself in the pantheon of American Dream icons, along with apple pie, motherhood, and Coca Cola. In most of the country there is no other place to buy goods (and no other place to get a paycheck, scant and demeaning as it may be). America made itself hostage to bargain shopping and then committed suicide. Here we find another axiom of human affairs at work: people get what they deserve, not what they expect. Life is tragic.
The older generations responsible for all that may be done for, but the momentum has now turned in the opposite direction. Though the public hasn't groked it yet, WalMart and its kindred malignant organisms have entered their own yeast-overgrowth death spiral. In a now permanently contracting economy the big box model fails spectacularly. Every element of economic reality is now poised to squash them. Diesel fuel prices are heading well north of $4 again. If they push toward $5 this year you can say goodbye to the "warehouse on wheels" distribution method. (The truckers, who are mostly independent contractors, can say hello to the re-po men come to take possession of their mortgaged rigs.) Global currency wars (competitive devaluations) are about to destroy trade relationships. Say goodbye to the 12,000 mile supply chain from Guangzhou to Hackensack. Say goodbye to the growth financing model in which it becomes necessary to open dozens of new stores every year to keep the credit revolving.
Then there is the matter of the American customers themselves. The WalMart shoppers are exactly the demographic that is getting squashed in the contraction of this phony-baloney corporate buccaneer parasite revolving credit crony capital economy. Unlike the Federal Reserve, WalMart shoppers can't print their own money, and they can't bundle their MasterCard and Visa debts into CDOs to be fobbed off on Scandinavian pension funds for quick profits. They have only one real choice: buy less stuff, especially the stuff of leisure, comfort, and convenience.
The potential for all sorts of economic hardship is obvious in this burgeoning dynamic. But the coming implosion of big box retail implies tremendous opportunities for young people to make a livelihood in the imperative rebuilding of local economies. At this stage it is probably discouraging for them, because all their life programming has conditioned them to be hostages of giant corporations and so to feel helpless. In a town like the old factory village I live in (population 2,500) few of the few remaining young adults might venture to open a retail operation in one of the dozen-odd vacant storefronts on Main Street. The presence of K-Mart, Tractor Supply, and Radio Shack a quarter mile west in the strip mall would seem to mock their dim inklings that something is in the wind. But K-Mart will close over 200 boxes this year, and Radio Shack is committed to shuttering around 500 stores. They could be gone in this town well before Santa Claus starts checking his lists. If they go down, opportunities will blossom. There will be no new chain store brands to replace the dying ones. That phase of our history is over.
What we're on the brink of is scale implosion. Everything gigantic in American life is about to get smaller or die. Everything that we do to support economic activities at gigantic scale is going to hamper our journey into the new reality. The campaign to sustain the unsustainable, which is the official policy of U.S. leadership, will only produce deeper whirls of entropy. I hope young people recognize this and can marshal their enthusiasm to get to work. It's already happening in the local farming scene; now it needs to happen in a commercial economy that will support local agriculture.
The additional tragedy of the big box saga is that it scuttled social roles and social relations in every American community. On top of the insult of destroying the geographic places we call home, the chain stores also destroyed people's place in the order of daily life, including the duties, responsibilities, obligations and ceremonies that prompt citizens to care for each other. We can get that all back, but it won't be a bargain.
(James Howard Kunstler is the author of several books, including "The Long Emergency," "The Geography of Nowhere" and "The Witch of Hebron." Contact him by emailing This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .)
Last Updated on Monday, 18 February 2013 22:40
Hits: 179
Panhandling in Portland
Written by Cliff Gallant
They're all over the place. Up and down Congress Street, both sides, all through the Old Port, and in the median strips of roadways. Sometimes it's a solo act, sometimes groups of friends stake out a favored spot and take turns "working the sign." Interesting expression, that. Because it is work. Hard work. It gets cold out there, and you have to put up with a lot of abuse. So it's work, yes, but it's not a job. There's a difference.
There have been stories in the media lately suggesting that the increase in panhandlers is related to the down economy and the lack of job opportunities. Desperate people resorting to desperate means. Forgive me if I'm skeptical about that. I seriously doubt that begging in the street is the only option out there for people who genuinely want to work at a real job.
The majority of these people have drug and alcohol addictions. The social workers and other personnel who maintain homeless shelters in Portland generally acknowledge that, but for whatever reason, are reluctant to caution against providing panhandlers the means to feed their habits. The various quotes by them in the media recently definitely imply that there is a good degree of justification for panhandling. That is confounding because asking for money in the street leads nowhere. It's demeaning to the individuals out there doing it, and it also diminishes their chances of righting themselves and maintaining a healthy lifestyle.
Yes, there are exceptions among panhandlers, but they're very rare. For every victim of the down economy a big-hearted reporter finds out there, there's a crowd of other panhandlers who don't have a job because having a job requires that you maintain regular hours, behave in a prescribed manner, and dress in a particular way. All that runs counter to maintaining a drug and alcohol dependency.
Really want a job? How about getting up at five in the morning so you'll be the first one in line at the day labor office and will most likely get a day's work. Yeah, that could work. And the day's work you get might develop into a full-time job. Or, how about going down to the Career Center on Lancaster Street and having a resume done up. It's free and if you keep submitting here and there you will most likely land something at some point. It probably won't pay what you'd like it to, and it might not be as fulfilling as you'd like it to be, but you'll have a regular job and things will advance from there. There's no better time to find the job you're after than when you already have a job.
The reality is, though, that the majority of people out there asking for money don't genuinely want a real job, so they're not going to do those things. And it's not because they're lazy ... it's because they're addicts.
Anyone who thinks that the typical panhandler goes home and empties their take on the kitchen table for his life's partner to count, with both of them desperately hoping that they'll be enough to buy the kids food for the next day, or to get some needed medications for grandma, is hopelessly naïve. The typical panhandler operates in a self-enclosed sphere and their only object is to get enough to satisfy their personal craving.
Sound callous? Well, maybe the real unkindness is to provide the means to someone to continue their addiction. The good Samaritan is not around when the panhandler gets drunk on the hand-out and takes a "header" and lays in a back alley somewhere choking to death on their vomit. The involvement of the giver ended with the hand-out. They meant well, but in the end they would've been better advised to just keep walking.
None of this is to say that because someone is an addict they don't deserve our compassion. Alcoholism is a disease, not a moral failing. These are our neighbors and they are afflicted. We are indeed our brother's keeper, and if we have the means to do so we have a moral obligation to help. There is, in fact, a good deal of bounty in most of our lives and we can well afford to share. Luxuries have become necessities we can't imagine living without. Most of us are aware of that and therefore the twinge of conscience that makes us reach into our pocket and hand the panhandler a couple of bucks. Who among us wouldn't share if we could convince ourselves that the money would be going for food or other necessities.
So what to do?
On the panhandler's part, it's a matter of personal accountability. It's called getting a life. Doing what you can to help yourself. Get job and mental health counseling. Become a regular at AA meetings. It's the best organization on the planet. Work at a temp job as often as you can until something permanent develops. Life's not easy for any one of us, so suck it up and git'er done.
On the public's part, it's a matter of doing what one can to address the problem. Donate money to social services. Volunteer at a soup kitchen. Keep truckin' at your own job. That's what will serve your own needs, and it's what makes society stronger and better able to provide for those who are not able to care for themselves.
Really, really, want to help? You're someone who wants to get directly involved? Consider: Many other cities have free publications aimed at informing the homeless about resources that are available to them. How to get food and adequate clothing, where to get mental and medical health treatment, and where to get employment counseling and job training. As an added feature, they often include creative offerings by the homeless — poetry, short stories, and art. Portland has no such publication. Is there a good reason why you don't start one and get homeless people involved in keeping it going? The means exist to get this kind of publication up and running. If you'd like to discuss, send me an email.
Yes, there are things we can do, and should do. But one of them isn't giving the person on the street or in the median strip a couple of bucks, or even a quarter. When we do that we're only helping them down the slow but sure road to misery and despair.
(Cliff Gallant of Portland is a regular columnist for The Portland Daily Sun. Email him at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .)
There have been stories in the media lately suggesting that the increase in panhandlers is related to the down economy and the lack of job opportunities. Desperate people resorting to desperate means. Forgive me if I'm skeptical about that. I seriously doubt that begging in the street is the only option out there for people who genuinely want to work at a real job.
The majority of these people have drug and alcohol addictions. The social workers and other personnel who maintain homeless shelters in Portland generally acknowledge that, but for whatever reason, are reluctant to caution against providing panhandlers the means to feed their habits. The various quotes by them in the media recently definitely imply that there is a good degree of justification for panhandling. That is confounding because asking for money in the street leads nowhere. It's demeaning to the individuals out there doing it, and it also diminishes their chances of righting themselves and maintaining a healthy lifestyle.
Yes, there are exceptions among panhandlers, but they're very rare. For every victim of the down economy a big-hearted reporter finds out there, there's a crowd of other panhandlers who don't have a job because having a job requires that you maintain regular hours, behave in a prescribed manner, and dress in a particular way. All that runs counter to maintaining a drug and alcohol dependency.
Really want a job? How about getting up at five in the morning so you'll be the first one in line at the day labor office and will most likely get a day's work. Yeah, that could work. And the day's work you get might develop into a full-time job. Or, how about going down to the Career Center on Lancaster Street and having a resume done up. It's free and if you keep submitting here and there you will most likely land something at some point. It probably won't pay what you'd like it to, and it might not be as fulfilling as you'd like it to be, but you'll have a regular job and things will advance from there. There's no better time to find the job you're after than when you already have a job.
The reality is, though, that the majority of people out there asking for money don't genuinely want a real job, so they're not going to do those things. And it's not because they're lazy ... it's because they're addicts.
Anyone who thinks that the typical panhandler goes home and empties their take on the kitchen table for his life's partner to count, with both of them desperately hoping that they'll be enough to buy the kids food for the next day, or to get some needed medications for grandma, is hopelessly naïve. The typical panhandler operates in a self-enclosed sphere and their only object is to get enough to satisfy their personal craving.
Sound callous? Well, maybe the real unkindness is to provide the means to someone to continue their addiction. The good Samaritan is not around when the panhandler gets drunk on the hand-out and takes a "header" and lays in a back alley somewhere choking to death on their vomit. The involvement of the giver ended with the hand-out. They meant well, but in the end they would've been better advised to just keep walking.
None of this is to say that because someone is an addict they don't deserve our compassion. Alcoholism is a disease, not a moral failing. These are our neighbors and they are afflicted. We are indeed our brother's keeper, and if we have the means to do so we have a moral obligation to help. There is, in fact, a good deal of bounty in most of our lives and we can well afford to share. Luxuries have become necessities we can't imagine living without. Most of us are aware of that and therefore the twinge of conscience that makes us reach into our pocket and hand the panhandler a couple of bucks. Who among us wouldn't share if we could convince ourselves that the money would be going for food or other necessities.
So what to do?
On the panhandler's part, it's a matter of personal accountability. It's called getting a life. Doing what you can to help yourself. Get job and mental health counseling. Become a regular at AA meetings. It's the best organization on the planet. Work at a temp job as often as you can until something permanent develops. Life's not easy for any one of us, so suck it up and git'er done.
On the public's part, it's a matter of doing what one can to address the problem. Donate money to social services. Volunteer at a soup kitchen. Keep truckin' at your own job. That's what will serve your own needs, and it's what makes society stronger and better able to provide for those who are not able to care for themselves.
Really, really, want to help? You're someone who wants to get directly involved? Consider: Many other cities have free publications aimed at informing the homeless about resources that are available to them. How to get food and adequate clothing, where to get mental and medical health treatment, and where to get employment counseling and job training. As an added feature, they often include creative offerings by the homeless — poetry, short stories, and art. Portland has no such publication. Is there a good reason why you don't start one and get homeless people involved in keeping it going? The means exist to get this kind of publication up and running. If you'd like to discuss, send me an email.
Yes, there are things we can do, and should do. But one of them isn't giving the person on the street or in the median strip a couple of bucks, or even a quarter. When we do that we're only helping them down the slow but sure road to misery and despair.
(Cliff Gallant of Portland is a regular columnist for The Portland Daily Sun. Email him at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .)
Last Updated on Thursday, 14 February 2013 23:24
Hits: 708
New arts center poses parking challenges for Munjoy Hill
Written by Ross Fields and Tim Baehr
Many challenges lie ahead for creating a new performance hall at the St. Lawrence Arts Center on Munjoy Hill.
Parking, however, will be one of the biggest challenges.
It is rare to find a performance venue in a crowded residential neighborhood. Most, such as the Merrill Auditorium, Portland Stage, One Longfellow, and the Civic Center, are located on city streets, with nearby parking facilities plus some street parking that opens up when nearby businesses close for the day.
The St. Lawrence Parish Hall, home of Good Theater and many other productions, may be considered an exception. With a capacity of about 110 seats, it does not seem to generate significant pressure on residential parking. Even on snowy or rainy nights, patrons can usually find a parking spot within a few blocks of the theater.
In 2010 the St. Lawrence submitted plans to rebuild the old sanctuary, or a near-replica, on the site where the original church was dismantled because it was unsafe. The rebuilt sanctuary would hold more than 400 patrons. When the rebuilding plan proved too costly, the proposed performance hall was completely redesigned.
This new hall is designed to have an auditorium with just over 400 seats and a rooftop Promenade Room with 200 seats. We doubt that the neighborhood, even within four or five blocks of the Arts Center, has enough empty parking spaces to absorb the number of additional cars seeking a place to park. And if two or more venues are in use at once (we have been assured that they will not be, but unforeseen circumstances or revenue shortfalls could dictate otherwise), the parking situation could be even worse.
The 2010 plans submitted to the Portland Planning Board included a Transportation Demand Management Plan, detailing how parking would be handled.
Apparently in recognition of potential parking problems, the TDM plan included several alternatives to parking in the immediate vicinity of the St. Lawrence Arts Center. These included parking along the Eastern Prom, parking in lots in the Eastern Promenade Park, along Cutter Street, at the Adams School site, and at 118 Congress Street at the Theriault/Landmann Associates. In addition, the TDM plans included extension of the hours of METRO Number 1 bus, parking at nearby garages and lots, and shuttles between the more remote off-site locations and the Arts Center. Some of these arrangements would be paid for by surcharges on admission tickets to St. Lawrence events. Various means of informing patrons were mentioned, along with incentives to use public transportation or bicycles. The plan can be seen at this Web address: http://tinyurl.com/StLTDM.
Further investigation will no doubt be undertaken regarding parking as revised plans for the new St. Lawrence performance hall move through the approval process. Because the St. Lawrence neighborhood has not grown any new parking spaces since 2010, a new TDM plan may well continue to include remote parking and perhaps a shuttle.
Some questions should arise regarding parking, whether in the immediate vicinity of the Arts Center or including remote locations. (1) In the case of foul weather – bitter cold, snow, or rain: How far will folks be willing to walk once they've found a parking space? (2) Where will people find shelter as they wait for a shuttle? (3) After winter storms: How much will all parking be affected by streets clogged with plowed snow? (4) If a shuttle service is provided, how large a fleet of shuttle buses will be needed? The overarching question for all of this is, "What is a logical, reasonable, and workable parking solution?"
The hodgepodge of solutions in the 2010 TDM plan is not likely to be the answer.
A solution that does not cause chaos in the neighborhood or undue hardship for Arts Center patrons may entail a somewhat smaller venue.
It could be argued that a smaller venue would not be self-supporting. But the documentation so far provided in public meetings and on the St. Lawrence website does not show that the current larger venue would be financially viable and self-supporting either.
To the extent that the venue's size matches a workable parking plan might not spell the end of the whole enterprise. A smaller building would involve lower building cost and lower operating costs.
The approval process for the new Arts Center will be presented at the next meeting of the Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Organization at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Feb. 20 at the East End School. The meeting is open to the public.
(Tim Baehr and Ross Fields live on Munjoy Hill and are members of Concerned Citizens of Munjoy Hill, a group committed to promoting dialogue about matters important to residents.)
Parking, however, will be one of the biggest challenges.
It is rare to find a performance venue in a crowded residential neighborhood. Most, such as the Merrill Auditorium, Portland Stage, One Longfellow, and the Civic Center, are located on city streets, with nearby parking facilities plus some street parking that opens up when nearby businesses close for the day.
The St. Lawrence Parish Hall, home of Good Theater and many other productions, may be considered an exception. With a capacity of about 110 seats, it does not seem to generate significant pressure on residential parking. Even on snowy or rainy nights, patrons can usually find a parking spot within a few blocks of the theater.
In 2010 the St. Lawrence submitted plans to rebuild the old sanctuary, or a near-replica, on the site where the original church was dismantled because it was unsafe. The rebuilt sanctuary would hold more than 400 patrons. When the rebuilding plan proved too costly, the proposed performance hall was completely redesigned.
This new hall is designed to have an auditorium with just over 400 seats and a rooftop Promenade Room with 200 seats. We doubt that the neighborhood, even within four or five blocks of the Arts Center, has enough empty parking spaces to absorb the number of additional cars seeking a place to park. And if two or more venues are in use at once (we have been assured that they will not be, but unforeseen circumstances or revenue shortfalls could dictate otherwise), the parking situation could be even worse.
The 2010 plans submitted to the Portland Planning Board included a Transportation Demand Management Plan, detailing how parking would be handled.
Apparently in recognition of potential parking problems, the TDM plan included several alternatives to parking in the immediate vicinity of the St. Lawrence Arts Center. These included parking along the Eastern Prom, parking in lots in the Eastern Promenade Park, along Cutter Street, at the Adams School site, and at 118 Congress Street at the Theriault/Landmann Associates. In addition, the TDM plans included extension of the hours of METRO Number 1 bus, parking at nearby garages and lots, and shuttles between the more remote off-site locations and the Arts Center. Some of these arrangements would be paid for by surcharges on admission tickets to St. Lawrence events. Various means of informing patrons were mentioned, along with incentives to use public transportation or bicycles. The plan can be seen at this Web address: http://tinyurl.com/StLTDM.
Further investigation will no doubt be undertaken regarding parking as revised plans for the new St. Lawrence performance hall move through the approval process. Because the St. Lawrence neighborhood has not grown any new parking spaces since 2010, a new TDM plan may well continue to include remote parking and perhaps a shuttle.
Some questions should arise regarding parking, whether in the immediate vicinity of the Arts Center or including remote locations. (1) In the case of foul weather – bitter cold, snow, or rain: How far will folks be willing to walk once they've found a parking space? (2) Where will people find shelter as they wait for a shuttle? (3) After winter storms: How much will all parking be affected by streets clogged with plowed snow? (4) If a shuttle service is provided, how large a fleet of shuttle buses will be needed? The overarching question for all of this is, "What is a logical, reasonable, and workable parking solution?"
The hodgepodge of solutions in the 2010 TDM plan is not likely to be the answer.
A solution that does not cause chaos in the neighborhood or undue hardship for Arts Center patrons may entail a somewhat smaller venue.
It could be argued that a smaller venue would not be self-supporting. But the documentation so far provided in public meetings and on the St. Lawrence website does not show that the current larger venue would be financially viable and self-supporting either.
To the extent that the venue's size matches a workable parking plan might not spell the end of the whole enterprise. A smaller building would involve lower building cost and lower operating costs.
The approval process for the new Arts Center will be presented at the next meeting of the Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Organization at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Feb. 20 at the East End School. The meeting is open to the public.
(Tim Baehr and Ross Fields live on Munjoy Hill and are members of Concerned Citizens of Munjoy Hill, a group committed to promoting dialogue about matters important to residents.)
Last Updated on Thursday, 14 February 2013 23:46
Hits: 170
Loving 'Be in Love'
Written by Curtis Robinson
Fair warning: This a column about a song.
Not just any song, mind you. A love song. With a video.
Maybe that's timely for February, especially for anyone seeking a strong Valentine's Day, "candy-is-boring-flowers-again?" make-up offering. Or even if you need a quick shot of audio-visual summer in the midst of this Slush Puppy hellscape. What could be better than a feel-good, locally produced tune complete with political overtones, reggae-influenced sing-along qualities and a neat twist at the end?
"Be In Love" by Dominic and the Lucid was actually written by Dominic Lavoie around 2005 and released in a pumped-up, full-on, horns-section version produced by Spencer Albee in 2008. From an epic Live at Five concert to acoustic club shows, it was pretty much THE local hit during the summer of 2009.
That might have been the end of things pending eventual release of a Lucid Big Box Set.
But "Be In Love" gained a new life, and moved into cult status, thanks to a remarkable video released last fall and produced by filmmaker David Meiklejohn, who was working with the Maine Academy of Modern Music. The MAMA, as it's known, formed in 2007 and is likely best known for its high school music contests but really works to put young musicians into a network including professionals.
Total audiences are hard to track in our digital age, but just one of several online video-posting sites already lists more than 50,000 views of the video, including ongoing comments and social network sharing. Also, thanks to its quick-cut scene changes that somehow splice together dozens of Portland musicians and venues into a virtual mini-film, the video becomes a virtual tourism e-card for people who don't send e-cards (do they still have e-cards?)
Go ahead, ask around. Chances are you know somebody who has shared the song. Or soon will.
The video begins casually enough: Dominic playing at a downtown park. Then it cuts to folkie Sara Cox and that shut-up-and-listen voice, and you realize this is going to be something different; we linger a bit then zoom off to other artists at other venues. Those of us who have multiple-watch status naturally champion our favorite musician/venue hookups; mine include Jason Stewart on drums aboard a lobster boat in Casco Bay, saxophonist Ryan Zoidis channeling a Munjoy Hill summer's day and Dave Gutter singing outdoors on the West End during a lightning storm. Classic.
Okay, since "covering the coverage" has been called the last resort of the tardy journalist, let me confess that none of this exactly sneaked onto the local scene. I personally thought Aimsel Ponti of The Portland Press Herald was a stalwart of journalistic understatement when she accurately wrote of the video premier last year "... hats off to everyone involved in this absolutely fantastic and inspiring endeavor."
Coverage and comment was in the usual outlets and continues online. Some of the Internet comments illustrate why the song has a second life:
• "This song makes me proud to be a native of this city. I once used those stairs that young lady was playing drums on to enter Portland."
• "Perfect song to bring in the New Year. Thank you to all who contributed to the creation of it. My FAVOURITE winter song!!!"
• "I've been listening to this about once a day. Sometimes more."
• "I am in love with this video. I miss Portland so much at times, the ocean, the back bay, Deering Oaks Park, East Beach and all the kayaking I did. How do I download this to send to my friends?"
In an interview airing next week on Portland Channel 5, the songwriter talks a bit about writing the song, confirming rumors that the neat final verse was added to dilute the "preachy" aspect of the lyrics. He also notes that the filmmakers were pretty much on their own since he was all about a pending wedding at the time. Watching the video during the taping, he greeted the end with an under-the-breath "summer!"
Yes. Summer. And Portland. And a good mid-winter reminder of why it's wicked cool to live here even when it's wicked cold. For anyone who moved their Valentine's celebration into this weekend (looking at you, fellow parents of young kids), it's a warm up worth sharing.
(Curtis Robinson is the founding editor of The Portland Daily Sun and host of "Usually Reserved" on Ch. 5; check the channel website for frequent upcoming showings of his interview with Dominic Lavoie. Insider tip: watch for the truly lame query about a "List Serve," which is exactly like asking a young musician if they communicate via carrier pigeons in bamboo cages.)
Not just any song, mind you. A love song. With a video.
Maybe that's timely for February, especially for anyone seeking a strong Valentine's Day, "candy-is-boring-flowers-again?" make-up offering. Or even if you need a quick shot of audio-visual summer in the midst of this Slush Puppy hellscape. What could be better than a feel-good, locally produced tune complete with political overtones, reggae-influenced sing-along qualities and a neat twist at the end?
"Be In Love" by Dominic and the Lucid was actually written by Dominic Lavoie around 2005 and released in a pumped-up, full-on, horns-section version produced by Spencer Albee in 2008. From an epic Live at Five concert to acoustic club shows, it was pretty much THE local hit during the summer of 2009.
That might have been the end of things pending eventual release of a Lucid Big Box Set.
But "Be In Love" gained a new life, and moved into cult status, thanks to a remarkable video released last fall and produced by filmmaker David Meiklejohn, who was working with the Maine Academy of Modern Music. The MAMA, as it's known, formed in 2007 and is likely best known for its high school music contests but really works to put young musicians into a network including professionals.
Total audiences are hard to track in our digital age, but just one of several online video-posting sites already lists more than 50,000 views of the video, including ongoing comments and social network sharing. Also, thanks to its quick-cut scene changes that somehow splice together dozens of Portland musicians and venues into a virtual mini-film, the video becomes a virtual tourism e-card for people who don't send e-cards (do they still have e-cards?)
Go ahead, ask around. Chances are you know somebody who has shared the song. Or soon will.
The video begins casually enough: Dominic playing at a downtown park. Then it cuts to folkie Sara Cox and that shut-up-and-listen voice, and you realize this is going to be something different; we linger a bit then zoom off to other artists at other venues. Those of us who have multiple-watch status naturally champion our favorite musician/venue hookups; mine include Jason Stewart on drums aboard a lobster boat in Casco Bay, saxophonist Ryan Zoidis channeling a Munjoy Hill summer's day and Dave Gutter singing outdoors on the West End during a lightning storm. Classic.
Okay, since "covering the coverage" has been called the last resort of the tardy journalist, let me confess that none of this exactly sneaked onto the local scene. I personally thought Aimsel Ponti of The Portland Press Herald was a stalwart of journalistic understatement when she accurately wrote of the video premier last year "... hats off to everyone involved in this absolutely fantastic and inspiring endeavor."
Coverage and comment was in the usual outlets and continues online. Some of the Internet comments illustrate why the song has a second life:
• "This song makes me proud to be a native of this city. I once used those stairs that young lady was playing drums on to enter Portland."
• "Perfect song to bring in the New Year. Thank you to all who contributed to the creation of it. My FAVOURITE winter song!!!"
• "I've been listening to this about once a day. Sometimes more."
• "I am in love with this video. I miss Portland so much at times, the ocean, the back bay, Deering Oaks Park, East Beach and all the kayaking I did. How do I download this to send to my friends?"
In an interview airing next week on Portland Channel 5, the songwriter talks a bit about writing the song, confirming rumors that the neat final verse was added to dilute the "preachy" aspect of the lyrics. He also notes that the filmmakers were pretty much on their own since he was all about a pending wedding at the time. Watching the video during the taping, he greeted the end with an under-the-breath "summer!"
Yes. Summer. And Portland. And a good mid-winter reminder of why it's wicked cool to live here even when it's wicked cold. For anyone who moved their Valentine's celebration into this weekend (looking at you, fellow parents of young kids), it's a warm up worth sharing.
(Curtis Robinson is the founding editor of The Portland Daily Sun and host of "Usually Reserved" on Ch. 5; check the channel website for frequent upcoming showings of his interview with Dominic Lavoie. Insider tip: watch for the truly lame query about a "List Serve," which is exactly like asking a young musician if they communicate via carrier pigeons in bamboo cages.)
Last Updated on Thursday, 14 February 2013 23:25
Hits: 235