I just got home from the city council meeting tonight, and if you want to see city hall in action, this is the place to be. I am fascinated about the business that is conducted there and want to learn more about the process. And now, the process is more open to all of us than ever before.

At 6:30, I walked into Room 402 to listen to the discussion about broadcasting city council meetings on cable TV. Seth, a downtown Lynn resident, had already set up his camera and was videotaping the proceedings. I strongly suggest you go to Lynn Happens and watch it for yourself. The three councilors who were against public cable access--Cyr, Trahant, and Ford--introduced more than 30 stipulations to the proposal. A heated debate followed, the fallout of which was that the proposal was sent out of committee to be voted on that night.

Later that night, during discussion of the proposal in council chambers, councilor at-large Flanagan-Kennedy essentially lambasted the stipulations, calling them ludicrous. Indeed, some of these stipulations may be against open meeting law and only set up obstacles to fulfilling its intent. One of them requires LynnCam to pay for the electricity they use; another implements a "kill switch" so that the broadcast can be terminated at any time. Still another one severely limits rebroadcast of the meetings.

The genie is now, finally, out of the bottle, though. I left before a vote was taken; however, I think the proposal will be passed stipulations and all. I want to thank Seth for performing the public service of taping this meeting and exercising his (and our) rights to see it.

In contrast, during a different committee meeting, a councilor declared that the issue at hand should be discussed in private. Everyone at the table moved into a different room and closed the door. After several minutes, they emerged, sat at the table and passed whatever it was unanimously without another word. I admit I wasn't paying attention to what was at stake; I have no idea what this private meeting was about. Yet, one wonders why it was necessary to go behind closed doors.

The fate of My Brothers Table and the homeless shelter was also being decided at this meeting. The committee decided to approve the mayor's new lease terms, which seem calculated to make them move out of their present downtown location. Some of these terms, such as the requirement that certain shelter resident records be made available to the police, may be against federal HIPPA laws. The ban on Alcoholic and Narcotics Anonymous meetings is misguided.

Civic engagement requires an informed citizenry. Don't rely on the Lynn Item for all your news! Fight for the right to see it first hand by opening and printing out the attached petition to the Lynn City Council to act to cablecast Council meetings with all deliberate speed. Circulate it among your friends, family and neighbors. More details to follow...

...THIS JUST IN. My sources tell me that in order to hold a public hearing on this issue, a minimum number of signatures must be collected, somewhere around 150-175. When I handed him my signatures, Councilor at-large Paul Crowley told me that they should have the required number. However, don't let that stop you from getting as many signatures as you can. The more signatures we have, the more of an impact it will make. Should you choose to take it upon yourself to circulate this petition, I can help get it to Mr. Crowley. Just leave a comment on this blog!

Civic engagement requires an informed citizenry. That's why I nearly gagged on my morning coffee when I saw the headline in the Lynn Item: "Lynners Kept in Dark by Stubborn Councilors"  The councilors in question are Darren Cyr of Ward 3, William Trahant  of Ward 2 and the pugilistic Richard Ford of Ward 7. I'm dissapointed that Mr. Cyr, my own councilor who I have a lot of respect for, is one of the council members resisting progress televising city council meetings.

My respect went down a notch as I readCyr's comment that "we should do it right by spotlighting a different city councilor each week, or show them driving around in a city vehicle talking to constituents. It would cost more, but it would be better. And a kill switch should also be available like they have at the state house." This isn't a re-election tool or a reality TV show. It's a step toward a more open, accountable and accessible city government. I find it deploreable that Lynn is one of the only communities in the state that does not televise these public meetings.

Comcast and Verizon are contractually obligated to earmark funds for goverment access. The Massachusetts Open Meeting Law allows anyone who attends a public meeting to make an audio or videotape of that meeting.

We shoudn't stop at televising council meetings though. Take a look at Common Cause's Campaign for Open Government website and you will see that Lynn is not one of their "superstars" when it comes to open government. Our council's meeting agendas, minutes and the budget are all absent from the city's website. These documents should be public record.

While you're at the Common Cause website, click the Take Action link and see what you can do to help remedy this.

Some things have been getting me mad lately.  I can feel my blood boiling. But I suppose I wouldn't be moved to do anything about these things if I didn't get mad.

Case in point: the gentleman next door who insists on keeping 4 adult pitbulls, 2 of them inbred. I walk by with my dogs and the pits go crazy, lunging, barking growling, making the most horrific noises. I'm talking Damien, Omen 2. To make matters worse, he doesn't keep them on leash. One of the pits tore a slat off the wooden fence between our properties and threatened to get through, prompting us to call the dog officer. We have video of this dog tearing through the fence. I don't understand it , but this is apparently not enough to declare these dogs vicious.

This is why I'm going to the city council meeting this Tuesday to speak in favor of the vicious dog ordinance. I'm for anything at this point that will enable the authorities to take some action against irresponsible dog owners. I've read the ordinance and it does not single out any breed. It establishes criteria and a process for labelling a dog of any breed vicious based on the dog's behavior. It strengthens existing dog laws by increasing fines and penalties. I am attaching a draft copy I recieved from the city council in case you want to read it.

A public hearing on Lynn's “Vicious Dog” ordinance is scheduled for Tuesday, July 8, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. in Room 402 at City Hall. This ordinance is sponsored by Councilman Wayne Lozzi and strengthens current vicious dog laws to protect the public from vicious dogs and their negligent owners.

Among other things, it would require that the owner of the property where a vicious dog resides take out a $100,000 liability insurance policy for the benefit of public safety. Even if you don't agree with this particular solution, your voice is needed to push through some kind of reform. With all the incidents of dog attacks that have been in the news for the past few years, it is time for Lynn to strengthen its dog ordinance.

The new ordinance stipulates that no owner shall fail to exercise proper care and control of his animals to prevent them from becoming a public nuisance. Go to this public hearing and voice your concerns. Dog attacks are preventable if we enforce current laws, strengthen them where needed and make it difficult for negligent owners to keep them.