University Chronicle

While your observations of childish behavior inthe part of the gallery may be correct, they most certainly acted like children. The fact remains that the council did not need to consider Mrs. Murrays proposals in depth. You said it yourself in the opening paragraphs, she's been in office a matter of weeks and is requesting a pay raise. She created a job that has no description and is non-existant in the city charter and Is asking that the city pay this individual 70 grand. In addition to that she dismissed a city director without a verifiable plan to replace him within EPA standards, a decision that, had she not rehired the individual, would have cost the city 10,000 dollars a day, that's 70,000 dollars a week, or 3,650,000 dollars annually. In addition to all of this she requested 17,000 dollars to pay for repairs to her office which she started prior to getting council approval and without bidding the work out. I may be mistaken but aren't no bid contacts when it comes to government work a big no no?

To agree with you, she has only been in office afew weeks, but most citizens who are aware of how government works know that change at least meaningful change happens slowly. And frankly Mrs. Murray has done to much to quickly and has cost two many people thier jobs and lively hood. Because frankly anytime someone is dismissed without a CLEAR and DETAILED explanation thier is something.

Sincerly,
A Concerned Student

Editor's note: I'm saying this now before this gets out of hand or progresses to personal attacks, as it has the potential to. It is not the duty of our reporters to defend the political decisions of any official. Readers are allowed to disagree with a column writer's observations. However, everyone should understand that arguing on this website will not change policies in city governement, merely bring the disagreement to light. Perhaps "concerned citizens" should take these matters up with the officials who make the decisions.

City council meetings have in the past occasionally been circus acts, especially when certain community members repeatedly cry about their personal agenda no matter who is in office.
The mayor is responsible for all the heat she has taken before, during and after the meeting. You stated the fact that there was no show of organization in her office. Her alienation of the council when she arrogantly, reprimanded the council member with essentially a "HOW DARE YOU" statement and threatening council with misdemeanor charges did nothing to make the meeting anything but antagonistic.
Her firing of the department heads without having plans for the city to be within EPA guidelines is inexcusable. The obvious mistake of hiring people with no positions in the city government were ridiculous, especially considering her earlier arrogant remarks referring to her knowledge of the city charter. I have no pity for her because so much of what she has done have been personal issues that had no place being accomplished in the guise of Portsmouth city government. Her lack of respect for the Portsmouth people that elected her is also disheartening. The fact that she still has a $2,000,000 million dollar suit against the city is also troubling. All in all she reaps what she sowes....

Concerned Student is right...although I read this opinion piece
with an open mind, by the end, I feel I'm reading an article about the
Mayor against the good ole boys. Murray has some great ideas, but
she didn't follow the right processes to attain goals. As far as saving money,
as your other article on the council meeting states, no document has
been shown yet to prove how much money has been saved.

Also, in response to the editors note: as an academic, I'm open to healthy
debate and discussion on politics. You need to be able to discern the difference
between attacking and debating an opinion piece before you attack a fellow student.

This is an opinion piece-which means the author should have formed a decision-she
obviously did and now fellow students would like to comment with their opinion (it's an academic process).

To the author: good job on getting people interested-I hope you go to more meetings, I know they can get unbearable at times, but hang in there!

Thanks,
June

Perhaps I was unclear the first time. I find it inappropriate to stand idly by while allowing a personal attack on my reporter(s). My earlier post said "before" it becomes a problem. It was a request that people keep the discussion civilized rather than turn it into a flame war. While free speech allows for disagreement and debate, this website is not the forum for personal attack. I do not appreciate the accusation that I did so in issuing a general word of caution.

So I will reiterate, if anyone has a problem with something a politician has said or done, take it up with that politician, not the reporter who wrote about it. If you disagree with an opinion, voice your disagreement in a non-inflamatory manner. Separate the person from the written article.

This article deals with an extremely heated issue. I am pleased to see both student journalists who are willing to tackle it and so much community interest. However--again--these political issues are not going to be solved on this comment board, nor should anyone expect them to be. I encourage the people who are concerned enough to voice their opinions here to also take the matter up with the real decision and policy makers in city government.

Kalb and his group have made it their vendetta to do everything they can to see that the new mayor fails.

Kalb was noted as saying he is now retired and will spend all his time battling with the new mayor, this sounds like a guy that is afraid that the new mayor might find out something he doesn't want out in the public.
Look for him and his clan of vengeful followers to continue their attacks not only by their looser web site but in person. P Town will never change always some sore losers in the background mudding the waters.

Keep up the writings we need a open mind to see what these scabs real intentions are.

This reporter has not attended enough council meetings to make the judgments she made. She also does not know the language in the City Charter. It's good that you are attending the meetings and I hope you keep coming to see what is actually going on. A lot of the people attending were showing support for city employees fired to hire people from Kentucky to take their places. Also the mayor made very accusatory remarks about them even to the extent that they would be investigated so that charges could be filed against them. Of course, she has now hired one of them back.

I have read this article by Stephanie Phillips a few times now and I can no longer refrain from posting my "opinion" about it. From her writing it appears that Ms. Phillips was not and is not happy with the job I did as Mayor. She is absolutely entitled to her opinion and I can live with her lack of compassion for me. What I object to is her description of the actions of the people in the front row, which I was one of. She wrote that we (the front row) acted childish and were disruptive and bothering others attending the meeting. Other than my two second, perhaps improper, vocalization suggesting 'carpet shampooing', I witnessed nothing as Ms. Phillips described. I would ask that readers of this article watch the video of the meeting for themselves: http://www.watchthezone.com/citycouncilside.html
Then you will probably have the same question as me; what meeting was Stephanie Phillips reporting on? There were comments debating whether this article was an informational or an opinion piece. Watch the video and I think that you will understand why I consider Ms. Phillips article as 'fiction'. Stephanie, please share more with us more about the "good ole boy" system. That should be entertaining.

Also, as to the comment from "Boris"; just another name for the same guy who regularly slanders me and others on the less than accurate, rumor spreading, local blogsites. It seems that "Boris" is not happy with one of the newer local blogsites, The P-Town Underground. This is probably because the P-Town Underground site prints factual information backed by links to the documentation to support it, unlike most of the other sites. "Boris" also stated, "Kalb was noted as saying he is now retired and will spend all his time battling with the new mayor." In reality what I said was that I had spent the last sixteen years 'doing' for the City and now that I'm retired I intend to start 'doing' for my family.

So Stephanie, good luck with your future articles, though if you continue to report as in your first attempt, I think your articles will be better received in a blogsite such as MOE'S FORUM.

(former mayor) James D. Kalb

NO MORE COMMENTS to this opinion column will be allowed to post on this website. This is the equivalent of the editor/moderator locking the thread! (This is a general notice to all readers, not directed at any one person.) Please, take your debate elsewhere, and direct your dissatisfaction toward the city officials who may have caused it, not the reporter who wrote about what those people said or what they watched them do. People need to address the officials who make the decisions in order to approach issues of that nature.

This is the last comment that will be posted to this piece. For the three days since this latest edition first appeared on the website, I have had to spend far too much time moderating VERY derogatory remarks, most insulting the intelligence of the staff of this newspaper, specifically or in general. To call someone's opinions based on their own personal observations "fiction" is to call them a liar. To say that their exposition on how they feel the city is/has been run where they live and attend university is "amusing" as just about the most patronizing thing I have heard in a while. The above comment ONLY got approved because the person who wrote it has been a prominent person in city government. However, if any readers are seeking a more heated forum for their views, perhaps one of the blogs by private citizens which Mr. Kalb mentioned might be just what the doctor ordered. This is not the place.

Perhaps I should point out to all concerned that this is a college publication, not high school, not teen-agers. All the members of the Chronicle staff are legally adults, vote in elections, and are not just "future" leaders but already report the news in what is a viable and real newspaper. You read it this far, didn't you? (And by that I mean the collective and anonymous generalized "you" that could be any reader.) Don't dismiss us as "meddling kids," as one person called us this week. We are all just as much a part of the community in which we live as any of our readers.

The press, and the news media in general, has long been called the "fourth estate," a sort of "watchdog of government," with all that founding-father lingo about "of the people, by the people, for the people" thrown in for good measure. To have a true democratic process work right, the populace must have opportunity to be informed, and from that information and their own observations and values they form their opinion and vote accordingly. The Chronicle is a campus newspaper, but our campus exists within a city as well. We are a commuter school, with only about 15 percent of our students able to live on campus. The rest of our students (as well as faculty and staff) live, the same as everyone else, in the surrounding community. Right now Portsmouth is a town with a college in it, not a true, integrated college town. But with thousands--plural--of us living in the town I can only hope that attitude will change. Those times when this newspaper chooses to venture outside our campus boundaries to report the news of the town we live in because some matter has come up that affects us all, please understand that it is not just a bunch of "kids" writing about whatever they want to. It is journalists (and voters!) reporting the news as they encounter it.