RichardHowe.com – Voices from Lowell & Beyond

Lowell’s 1st Centennial Council Meeting

Lowell’s 1st Centennial Year City Council Meeting – (PIP #91)

By Louise Peloquin

     Lowell’s city agent jobs have evolved with time. Some remain and others have disappeared.

L’Etoile – Front page January 4, 1926

INAUGURATION OF THE COUNCIL

GALLAGHER IS ELECTED PRESIDENT

The present City Council president re-elected after nine rounds of voting against McPadden and Thomas – The Mayor, whitewashes his administration – The majority of the nominations are approved – Donnelly remains on the table.

__________

MANY PROMINENT CIVIL SERVANTS AT THE INAUGURATION

_________

     The inauguration of the City Council took place this morning in the presence of a large crowd which included several former mayors, department heads and a considerable number of well-known Lowellians.

     The room was full to capacity and several hundred people, unable to enter,  stood in the corridor during the City Council meeting which lasted for more than three hours.

     Among the city officials and other prominent people, we noted Patrick O’Hearn president of the Planning Board; Fisher H. Pearson, ex-member of the Bureau of Hygiene; Dennis J. Murphy, president of the Public Service Commission; William Arnold, State Public Welfare Service superintendent; Hugh J. Molloy, superintendent of schools; assessors James E. Donnelly, John H. Dyer and Wilfrid J. Achin; deputy Cornelius J. O’Neil; prosecutor Patrick J. Reynolds; James Reynolds, aqueduct superintendent; Dr. Forster Smith, superintendent of the hospital for tuberculosis patients; E. Gaston Campbell, president of the Lowell Real Estate Exchange; Daniel O’Brien; Dr. Richard O’Connor; John Reagan, president of the Plumbers Association; Daniel T. Moriarty, deputy of the Legislature; Dominick Molloy, member of the electoral commission; auditor Daniel E. Martin; Harry Doherty, road superintendent and many others.

     Long before the ceremonies opened, the following Public Security members arrived at City Hall to represent their department and to maintain order: Lieutenant Martin Connors, officers William A. Frey, Fred McNulty and John J. Leahy. The fire brigade was represented by Thomas Burke, James Nelligan and Joseph Sheehey.

     At 10:19, messenger Owen Monahan announced that everything was ready for the ceremony. The procession immediately commenced with Hugh Downey from Public Security; chief Edward F. Saunders of the fire brigade, Lieutenant Martin Connors of Public Security; Mayor John. J. Donavan and ten councillors.

     The new councillors were sworn in by Clerk Stephen Flynn then Mayor Donovan read his message to the Council and to the public.

     The mayor began by stating that the elected were not chosen to satisfy themselves but to serve the public in a worthy manner. He asked the council for its complete  cooperation and said that he would do everything possible to carry out his tasks during his term of office.

     The mayor said that the year which had ended was marked by an upheaval and considerable disorder in city affairs. Little was said about the good which was accomplished by the municipality but the errors committed were covered by newspapers all over the United States. He pursued by saying that the conditions of our city are hardly worse than they were before. However, in the eyes of the public, and especially in the eyes of strangers, they seem to be pitiful. In general, a merchant runs his business as he pleases and if he makes a mistake he alone is responsible. If a city servant makes a mistake, he is accountable to the people he represents. Sometimes he unknowingly commits errors and, as a result, he is brought to court to respond to serious accusations. “I fear nothing from the result of the accusations made against me. I simply ask the public to be just in its decisions” he added.

     In his message, the mayor recommended the nomination of a special committee to study the question of opening a municipal garage in the city.

     He also recommended the nomination of a committee to study the question of replacing the present police staton by a more modern building.

     Regarding the Public Welfare bureau, the mayor said that this department had often been criticized and even accused of all sorts of things but he recommended that city officials visit this institution in order to see for themselves what this department needs. He added that last year the Council voted to appropriate $5000 to create a camp for sick children. This camp should open this year.  

     In his message, the mayor congratulated the Public Service commission which had done a great deal of good in the city.

     When the mayor’s message ended, the meeting was adjourned for ten minutes.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

     The first official City Council meeting for 1926 was called to order at 11:10. The first motion made was that of Councilor John J. McPadden who asked for a ten-minute adjournment but his motion was lost.

     The councilors were then called to elect the president for 1926. At the first round of voting, Councilor James J. Gallagher received the support of Councilors Bailey, Chrétien, Cleary, Cosgrove, Gallagher, Genest, Montminy, and Preston, a total of 8 votes. Councilors Campbell, Rubin, Kiggins, McLean and McPadden voted for Mr. Mr. McPadden, a total of 5 votes. Councilor Robert R. Thomas received 4 votes, those of Mr. Haggerty, Mr. Inglis, Mr. O’Brien and his own.

     A second round of voting had the same results.

     At this point, Councilor Chrétien asked for a ten-minute adjournment which was approved by the Council.

          Many councilors participated in a long discussion about city servants who had recently been indicted by the Middlesex County grand jury.

     Councilor Cleary made a motion to abolish the posts of superintendent of the Chelmsford Street hospital and of city physician. He suggested that the latter be left to a competent physician at a salary of $4000.

     It was voted to leave this ordinance on the table.

     The nominations of Fred H. Rourke to the post of city treasurer for a two-year term was unanimously approved.

     The Council also voted favorably on the nomination of Dr. Francis R. Mahoney as member of the Bureau of Hygiene for a three-year term.

     The Mayor submitted the nomination of Dominick F. Molloy to the post of superintendent of the Chelmsford Street hospital for a two-year term.  All of the councilors, with the exception of councilor Clery, voted in favor.

     The nomination of Wilfred J. Sachin to the post of assessor for a three-year term was unanimously approved. 

     Charles L. Gallagher, electric wiring inspector, was unanimously elected for a two-year term.

     Charles Riley was named and elected fire inspector for a two-year term.

     John B. Kenefick was named and elected fishing and hunting warden for two years.,

     William A. Arnold was named and elected State Welfare superintendent for a three-year term.

     John J. Gordon was named and elected superintendent of the caterpillar extermination department. This nomination is subject to the approval of the Civil Service.

     Edward F. Saunders was named forest ranger for one year. 

     The nomination of Dr. W. A. Sherman to the post of livestock inspector was unanimously approved. (1)

 ****

1) Translation by Louise Peloquin.

Race for Middlesex District Attorney : more than just another generational contest? by Marjorie Arons-Barron

The entry below is being cross posted from Marjorie Arons-Barron’s own blog.

Incumbency combined with voter inertia are a mighty force in keeping officials in office, be they high-performing or flawed.  Nowhere is this truer than in down-ballot races, when all the excitement is at the top (e.g., the 2026 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate, the race for Massachusetts governor and controversial referenda (e.g., statewide rent control in the Commonwealth.) But less prominent down-ballot races are still critically important, notably the contest for Middlesex County District Attorney.

At the helm of this largest county in New England, Marian Ryan , approximately 70 years old, is working hard to retain her longtime incumbency as district attorney. The only female among Massachusetts’ 11 district attorneys, Ryan has held the top job since 2013 has worked in the office for a total of 45 years. Perhaps not surprisingly, she has support from many in the political establishment. At a recent gathering in Newton, for example, she was lauded by a range of elected officials, who praised her as “compassionate, effective and experienced.” Gatherings like this are doubtless happening across Middlesex, the county’s 54 municipalities comprising a quarter of the Commonwealth’s population (1.8 million people).

Those present repeatedly cited her treatment of victims of crime and their families as well as her opting for diversion programs for non-violent first offenders, offering them support services to turn their lives around. As important as prosecuting to the fullest extent of the law when warranted, the gathered elected officials credited Ryan with the wisdom to exercise discretion about when not to prosecute.

Ryan herself proudly claims that her team has “the most robust conviction integrity program in the country” and calls Middlesex “one of the safest counties in the United States.”  In the last two general elections, she has run unopposed.

So, given the power of incumbency and predictable loyalty of other elected officials, why would a member of Ryan’s own leadership team resign his position in order to challenge that apparently sterling track record?  Making the case for change is David Solet, 49, a highly accomplished prosecutor in the very same office, someone whom Ryan herself recently honored as Middlesex County Prosecutor of the Year for 2025.

Is he mounting the campaign against his former boss just because he thinks that simply being in the Middlesex D.A.’s office for 45 years, 12 years running it, is just too long?  It wouldn’t be the only race in Massachusetts where a legitimate challenger is making generational change the basis for his candidacy: witness Seth Moulton taking on Ed Markey for U.S. Senate. Solet says his challenge is about much more than generational change. So, what is it about, and who is David Solet?

A Cambridge native and summa cum laude graduate of Princeton, Solet went to work in the Middlesex D.A.’s office right out of Harvard Law School. He was there from 2001 to 2025, except for four years as chief legal counsel to the Massachusetts Secretary of Public Safety.  Under Ryan’s leadership, Solet held key positions — Chief of the Cold Case Homicide Unit, Chief of the Cyber Protection Unit, and General Counsel supervising ethical practices in the office. As an assistant D.A. under Ryan, he was responsible for successfully prosecuting hundreds of criminal cases from organized crime, street crimes, murder, sexually dangerous persons, child exploitation, police misconduct, and more.

Obviously, Solet knows Ryan well. He says his decision to run against her is “professional not personal.”  And even some of Ryan’s supporters agree that Solet is “a credible opponent.”

Solet paints a big picture. He asserts that, given the prominence of Middlesex County throughout New England, its District Attorney must be a vigorous leader on Beacon Hill for necessary changes in the law, pressing hard to close legal loopholes. For months, he said, he pushed for greater protection of public safety by eliminating the statute of limitations for rapes of adult victims by strangers, just as it was eliminated for murder or for rape of a child. But, as an assistant D.A., he doesn’t have standing to lobby the legislature or take on the criminal defense bar to make that change in cases of rapes of adult victims. Only in December, after Solet’s resignation, did  Ryan herself came forward on the issue, stating support for the change.  (I posed questions to Ryan’s office, but they did not get back to me.)

Another concern for Solet are loopholes in laws governing bail where, in addition to determining whether the accused is a flight risk, a dangerousness hearing is held to determine if releasing the defendant is a danger to public safety. The legislature, he notes,  needs to add certain serious crimes not now covered,  (like aggravated rape of a child, or bomb making), and the District Attorney, he adds, should be pressing legislators, some of whom are defense attorneys, to fulfill that responsibility.

Another of Solet’s concerns is the need to crack down harder on hate crimes. Ryan did file a bill for stiffer penalties for hate crimes (H. 1766, now refiled as #1995), but, says Solet, her proposal just to mandate diversity awareness training is not an adequate punishment. For his part, Solet would treat certain hate crimes as felonies (not misdemeanors) opening up the possibility of punishment by time in state prison.

Beyond the need to push for improving laws, Solet criticizes what he sees as Ryan’s failure to prosecute vigorously enough some laws already on the books in Massachusetts.  He notes, for example, that, while Massachusetts has the most stringent firearm licensing laws, the office must go more aggressively after gun traffickers, using serial numbers, informants and other investigative tools used, for example, in drug cases.

He also wants the office to do more to prosecute gangs, not waiting for the most extreme acts of retaliatory violence but dismantling gangs’ capacity to operate by targeting lower-level gun and drug crimes as well as armed robbery.

There are administrative issues as well. Solet claims that more also needs to be done to staunch the departure from Middlesex of many talented young prosecutors for private law firms.  Those willing to forego private practice salaries do so because of a commitment to public service. They want their professionalism rewarded by respecting their competence and experience and allowing them to exercise more discretion in building their own cases.  Solet believes that Ryan’s tight reins on staff decision-making drags cases on, delaying the administration of justice and undermining staff professionalism.

Solet, who has been connected with the D.A.’s office for some 20 years, insists that what was good enough to lead the office years ago isn’t the same as what’s required today. To him, nowhere is that clearer than in the handling of Cold Cases, where sophisticated scientific developments (like forensic genetic genealogy) enable a more vital and conclusive delivery of justice. (He used this in his Cold Case review of a 1980 murder case that not only identified the real killer but freed a wrongly convicted man who had spent 17 years in jail for a crime he did not commit.)

In this long campaign, both the candidates will exert maximum effort to build support. But, in this down-ballot race where typical voter inertia favors the person already in office, will Solet’s points of distinction persuade enough voters for Middlesex County D.A. to look beyond the powers of incumbency?  Recent fundraising reports suggest Solet, who has already raised more than $100,000, is definitely getting measurable traction. But, given a nationally watched Massachusetts U.S. Senate race, a vigorously contested gubernatorial battle and hotly contested referenda questions,  voters will have to do their homework. This race is definitely one to learn more about and to follow.

Lowell Politics: January 4, 2026

Today I’ll look back at the Lowell City Council in 2025 and identify some of top issues that arose over the past twelve months.

Three Incumbents Lose – In the 2025 city election, a quarter of the city council was ousted by voters. District councilors Corey Belanger, Wayne Jenness, and Paul Ratha Yem, all lost their reelection campaigns. Succeeding them will be Belinda Juran, Sean McDonough, and Sidney Liang. A fourth district councilor, John Descoteaux, had a close call when he finished second in the preliminary election to Marcos Candido, however, Descoteaux prevailed in the general election by receiving 724 votes to Candido’s 685. Notably, three district incumbents, Corey Robinson, Dan Rourke and Sokhary Chau, were unopposed. Given the difficulties some of their colleagues faced from challengers, it’s possible there would have been even more turnover on the council had there been more candidates.

Lowell High School Project – The Lowell High School renovation project was back before the city council several times in 2025. At the first meeting of the year, councilors inquired about a leak in the HVAC system that occurred during the Christmas break; the difficulty of using the bleachers in the gymnasium; problems with the floor of the gymnasium; and door locks that worked erratically. A much bigger issue arose in March when contractors reported that when they began renovating the northern half of the 1922 building, they discovered that the soil beneath the cement floor slab had mostly washed away, leaving a void that had to be corrected before work could continue. That required digging up the existing floor, filling the vacant space with dirt, then pouring a new floor. Later in the year, contractors acknowledged that the subfloor void existed in the rest of the 1922 building and in the adjacent Coburn Hall. Fixing this problem will add $40 million to the project. Because this add-on was discovered so late in the process, it is unlikely to be eligible for any reimbursement from the state so the entire additional cost will be borne by Lowell taxpayers. Or perhaps it won’t be since, in one of its final acts of 2025, the council rejected a vote to authorize the borrowing of the additional $40 million. We’ll have to wait until early 2026 to learn how this impasse will be resolved.

Federal funding cuts and policy changes – The Trump Administration’s cuts to federal spending were felt in Lowell, especially by the Lowell Folk Festival which faces perilous finances in the coming years due to the elimination of federal funding. Harm from fiscal cuts was not limited to the Folk Festival. As a pre-condition to receiving federal funds, the city and entities that receive federal money through the city, must purge from the websites and writings any mention of DEI, LGBTQ+, climate change, and others. Although applying for these funds is voluntary, they represent a substantial portion of the operating revenue of many nonprofit organizations which face the dilemma of adhering to their values and foregoing the money; or erasing their values to take the money. The repercussions of this will be more evident in 2026 than they were this year.

Lowell 311 system debuts – The long-awaited Lowell 311 system became operational in March. Utilizing a website, a telephone, and a smartphone app, the system allows residents to efficiently request city services while providing the city with data to help better manage the city’s workforce and resources.

Hamilton Canal Innovation District – In March, the city council enacted a controversial amendment to a Land Disposition Agreement relative to the use of several HCID lots between the city and the Lupoli Companies. Originally, the Lupoli Companies had promised to construct a 12 to 14-story mixed-use building; a second building of 50,000 square feet on an adjacent lot; and a privately owned parking lot on a third parcel. However, in 2024, the Lupoli Companies returned to the council to request permission to scale back the high rise building to a smaller, wood frame residential apartment building. Although most of the discussion took place in executive session, enough was said in public to know several councilors opposed the requested modification and preferred declaring a default in performance. However, the city administration and most councilors concluded that the modified deal was the best the city could get so the council endorsed the amended plan.

Smith Baker Center – In January, the council voted to demolish the Smith Baker Center which was originally constructed in the late 1800s as the First Congregational Church and later became the home of the Lowell Senior Center for several decades until the new center on Broadway opened in the early 2000s. The vote to demolish was six to two with one abstention and two absent. Those voting for demolition argued that the building had deteriorated so much that hopes to renovate it were unrealistic. However, a grassroots citizen group created to help save the building did not surrender but kept pressing the council. In March, the council rescinded the demolition vote and by the end of the year the council authorized the conveyance of the building to the citizen group with some conditions attached to ensure the building is made safe within a reasonable amount of time.

Jack Kerouac Center – The former St. Jean Baptiste Roman Catholic Church located just a few blocks up Merrimack Street from Smith Baker was rescued from similar precariousness when Zach Bryan, a generational talent and one of the most commercially successful country music stars in the world, purchased the former church to be used as the Jack Kerouac Center. It’s a fitting location since Kerouac’s funeral was held in the church which was also central to Lowell’s Franco community.

Frontrunner City – In July, Mayor Dan Rourke and City Manager Tom Golden announced that Lowell had been named the first “Frontrunner City” in the United States. Sponsored jointly by the United Nations Institute for Water, Environment and Health, the Urban Economy Forum, and the World Urban Pavilion, the Global Frontrunner Cities Initiative provides designated cities with access to global investment capital, expert urban planning, and international publicity. Relatedly, in December, Lowell was the first city in the United States to be added to the UNESCO Global Network of Learning Cities. Together these international recognitions will heighten Lowell’s stature on the global stage and should expand the pool of financing available for development projects in the city.

Lowell Innovation Network Corridor (LINC) – Perhaps the most exciting developmental news in the city during 2025 came from UMass Lowell with its massive Lowell Innovation Network Corridor project. This undertaking seeks to transform the school’s West Campus which runs from the Tsongas Arena to LeLacheur Park by partnering with major technology companies like Draper Labs that will leverage advanced research being done at the school and provide employment opportunities for students. LINC also includes new housing developments that will allow people to live within walking distance of their jobs. A major component of LINC is the cultural amenities offered in nearby downtown Lowell and the beautiful river-front setting of the neighborhood.

Where is our national comfort when we need it the most?

Where Is Our National Comfort When We Need it the Most?

By Rev. Steve Edington

[This is the text of an op-ed piece that appeared in the December 30, 2025, issue of the New Hampshire Union Leader.]

Our Constitution is clear on the matter: “No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” That’s Article VI, Clause 3.

There’s an irony in that clause. While we quite rightly prohibit the adherence to a specific religion as a qualification for “any Office [President included] under the United States” there are times when we also, quite rightly, look to The President for spiritual leadership and nurture.

By “spiritual leadership and nurture” I mean those times when we need to be called to a higher place of common ground and to a unifying purpose, especially in a time of widely felt tragedy or deep division. It’s the kind of leadership Abraham Lincoln offered in his Second Inaugural Address following the Civil War when he said: “With malice toward none, with charity for all…let us bind up the nation’s wounds.” I don’t believe those wounds have been fully bound up even to this day, but Lincoln knew those words needed to be spoken at the time.

Over a century later, the best moment of Ronald Reagan’s presidency was the eloquent and moving words he offered in the wake of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion, and the deaths of the astronauts on board, in January of 1986. In that moment politics didn’t matter. We were a nation united in grief, and we needed unifying words of comfort and assurance from the President. And Mr. Reagan delivered.

In June of 2015 President Barack Obama stood in the pulpit of the African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina and sang “Amazing Grace.” The occasion was a memorial service for the church’s pastor, and several of its members who had been shot dead by a hate-filled white racist who, after being invited into the church’s prayer meeting, opened fire. In the service that followed the President sang a hymn for America itself.

We have completed a Holiday season with its themes of love, peace, hope and joy: Four pillars of the Christian Advent that transcend the bounds of any one faith. They are among the themes the aforementioned Presidents sought to hold up when their times called for the spiritual leadership and care that was needed of them.

My gratitude for this kind of leadership is greatly tempered these days by my grief and anger over a President who is giving us the very antithesis of any kind of spiritual leadership and nurture when we need it. What we’re getting instead is a mockery of the whole idea.

USA Today called Trump’s response to the horrific murders of Robert and Michele Reiner a “vile new low.” I agree. These two beloved American figures from the film world were killed at the hand of their terribly mentally damaged son. Rather than follow the examples of his predecessors at a time like this, and offer some words of sympathy and care, Trump disgustingly blamed the victims due to their perpetuation of so-called “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

This incident took place just days after the shootings, that included two deaths, of students at Brown University. While sending his regards to the families of the victims and the wounded, his closing words on the subject were disturbingly dismissive: “things can happen.”

Earlier in the fall, at the memorial service for Charlie Kirk, and after Mr. Kirk’s wife had expressed words of love and forgiveness for her husband’s killer, Donald Trump came back with this: “He [Kirk] did not hate his opponents…That’s where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent, and I don’t want the best for them.” Read those words while knowing that in Trump’s mind an “opponent” is anyone who takes issue with him, or in any way speaks ill of him, under any kind of circumstances.

And then there are the matters of Trump calling Governor Tim Walz “retarded” and Somali’s (Some of whom are American citizens, and one—Rep. Ilan Omar–a member of Congress) “human garbage.”

To return to my larger topic: All of our past Presidents sought to meet the challenge of offering spiritual leadership and comfort when their times called for it. Some did a better job of it than others; some came up way short of the mark. But no President until now has made such a mockery of the whole idea of spiritual nurture itself. Instead, he gives us the opposite.

I’ll end with a question for those who identify with Trump’s MAGA movement, including his political supporters in the US Congress: Do you have a tipping point? Will his degradation of the Presidential office ever reach a point where you’ll say, “enough is enough?” Or will you continue to follow him on his downward spiral?

****

Rev. Steve Edington is the Minister Emeritus of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Nashua. He is a 30 year member, and a past President, of Lowell Celebrates Kerouac.