In DC, a reflecting pool no longer reflects. In Newburyport, a frog pond will soon evict frogs.
Yes, comparisons to Donald Trump will be taboo soon after he is gone. Now, however, his desecrations of our government, from its documents to its architecture, are fair game for comparisons to other places and those who hold office there.
After all, a comparison is not an equation, but a tool for understanding and analysis. Listen to any speech by Martin Luther King, and hear them unfold one after another.
Anyway, no one would ever mistake the Frog Pond for the Reflecting Pool, and I’m not about to talk about water or aquatic life or photosynthesis or shades of sky blue or algae green. My damp comparison is about a soaking budget–or is it someone soaking a budget?
Millions were wasted on lining the Reflecting Pool, just as $3.4 million will drown in the Frog Pond.
No Americans have ever called for a crayon-colored Reflecting Pool in the nation’s capital. Instead, at present, we call for a halt to inflation and the needless war and tariffs that have caused it.
So, too, no Newburyporters have ever called for an amusement-parked Frog Pond. Instead, for years now, calls have been for sidewalk and road repair.
Moreover, just as national services for the elderly are cut, City Hall has “not renewed” the Council on Aging’s Outreach Specialist at the Senior Center.
Daily News readers will recall letters in June telling of petitions to retain Ann Freeman in that position after Mayor Sean Reardon omitted it from the city budget.
Judging from many tributes to Freeman for her rapport with and effectiveness at meeting the needs of seniors, she was worth far more than her salary.
Forget the $3.4 million. Her salary would be less than the preposterous, big-square-peg-in-small-round-hole provision for recreational boating.
Just as in the White House, however, City Hall is run by an executive who will not take no for an answer while he ignores public needs and wants and craves attention.
Like Narcissus, he looks lovingly into his wet vanity project.
The “non-renewal”–a euphemism that fools only fools–has been a useful tool for Reardon to advance his plan. Since it was first introduced, he has “not renewed” at least one member of a civic board with scientific expertise who objected to City Hall’s skipping of environmental and liability studies in its rush to create photo-op boating on the Frog Pond.
In a pre-Trump and pre-Reardon world, objections and cautions based on expertise would count for more than a mindless “yes.”
Mindlessness doesn’t end there. In a document obtained by local gadfly Walt Thompson on a Freedom of Information request, one of the companies bidding for the project asks a straightforward question about contractual risk:
If, after dewatering, the sediment proves too liquid to support installation of the geogrid and liner, would that constitute an ‘unforeseen condition’ requiring renegotiation of the contract?
Here’s the city’s response:
This question is highly speculative and is contradictory to the findings of the various investigations. Based on this, the City declines to answer this question at this time.
Thompson, laughing at the word “dewatering,” called the exchange worthy of 1984. He’s not wrong, but I’d say Catch-22 is closer to the mark.
As for City Council’s hand in this, here’s a summary of what two councilors told me:
The City Council cannot make additions to the Mayor’s budget… What we CAN do is propose cuts to other departments in order to free up funds that would hopefully be used to fund the Outreach Specialist position… In the end, we succeeded in passing $240K+ cuts and encouraged the Mayor to fund the Outreach Specialist position. He chose not to do so.
Regarding DC’s pool, it’s just over a month before we decide what Congress will reflect. As for the Frog Pond, we’re stuck with a question for the foreseeable future:
How many more Ann Freemans will it cost us to float Mayor Reardon’s toy boats?
-823-























