RichardHowe.com – Voices from Lowell & Beyond

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. 

My New Year’s Eves

My New Year’s Eves

By Leo Racicot

When I was growing up, it was a New Year’s Eve tradition for families to gather around the radio or t.v. set to listen to Guy Lombardo ring in the new year. He and his band, The Royal Canadians, had begun their broadcast in 1928 and it had caught on with the public, was still going strong throughout the 1950s and ’60s. I wonder if Guy’s style of music, a mellow blend of bouncy strings and horns would appeal to kids today. Probably not. But generation after generation looked forward to “Mr. New Year’s Eve” reprising his hits, “Boo-Hoo” and “Coquette” (super danceable tunes) every December 31st. Then, of course, as the New Year approached, it was, and still is, the beloved annual tradition to watch in anxious anticipation for a 12 foot wide, ton-heavy crystal ball to slide down a flag pole as the country chanted the countdown to midnight. Only in the years 1942, 1943 was the ball drop cancelled due to city lights having to be kept low for fear enemy pilots would see them.      As the 1970s started, networks replaced the Lombardo sound in favor of a more modern sound. New Year’s Rockin’ Eve sought to draw a younger, more hip viewing audience with a younger, more hip host., popular DJ and sometime actor, Dick Clark, who’d gained fame as the host of American Bandstand, the monster, long -running cultural phenomenon that introduced rock music and youth trends to mainstream America. Clark’s fresh-scrubbed features and boy-next-door demeanor, combined with a certain cool cat vibe, was a perfect choice to replace Lombardo’s rather stodgy approach to the holiday and to a changing America. He (Clark) had a knack for bridging the old with the new, not so radical a presence that he offended the public but just groovy enough to make a smooth transition from what used to be to what was becoming a mood shift in the country.

You could count on two hands the number of times in my life I’ve been to a party; I wasn’t much for parties, only small house gatherings with a few friends, so I can’t say I went in for big New Year’s Eve bashes. In fact, I just now reminded myself, anomaly that I am, that I’ve only been to two weddings in my lifetime: my cousin Ray’s marriage to his wife, Marcy, and my friends, David and Brenda Bowles’s nuptials at Saint Patrick’s and the reception after. Now, as we age, and friends and family leave this Realm, it’s more “wakes than weddings”, isn’t it?  Sigh…This is a roundabout way of stating that I’ve never been to a New Year’s Eve celebration.

I’ve also never been one to sidestep sad events, the sad aspects of my life’s experiences, and I attribute, in part anyway, a marked melancholia to my nature, to the fact that our father died very young, when Diane and I were very young. So, I thought about omitting this next anecdote but feel I simply can’t; it comes to mind whenever I hear the words, New Year’s Eve.     It was 1968 and the first New Year’s Eve since our mother had suffered her stroke that summer, leaving her sad, depressed over her immobility, the numbness that had left her arm and face frozen in time. She was trying hard to bring herself back to herself but I could see the struggle was exhausting. I wanted to do something to cheer her, bring her hope for the future. I was 13, struggling myself to be the “man of the family”. I set about planning and making a New Year’s Eve fete for Ma; I bought crepe paper down at Prince’s Department Store, spent hours and hours cutting/shredding it into pieces for confetti, blew up a dozen or so balloons, later affixing the whole shebang in a blanket-type canopy on the living room ceiling, to be released at the stroke of midnight. I put together a spread of eats: deviled eggs, small, party cakes, peanuts, popcorn, a tray of cookies. I made Mama a mock cocktail, a highball, complete with one maraschino cherry (her favorite bar drink). I bought fun hats, tooting horns, silver whistles. I told my mother nothing about all this, hoping to surprise her on the night itself. At the stroke of midnight, I brought it all out of my bedroom into where she sat on the couch. As the clock turned 1968 to 1969, I blew the whistle, tooted the horn, hatted mom with a wacky chapeau, shouted, “Happy New Year!” and released the balloons and confetti from their net. Honestly, I had never seen such a sad, deflated reaction on anyone as I had our mother’s face as the confetti fell onto it and onto her blouse and pants. Even her striped slacks looked sad. She did manage a wan smile but I, too, have never felt as deflated as I did that New Year’s Eve. I had only wanted with my mini-celebration to help rouse Ma from her torpor. She looked at me as if I was the strangest kid she’d ever laid eyes on. I joined her in her depression; my efforts had been for nothing. A few days later though, I overheard her defend me to a neighbor who’d said to her, “Your son, Leo, is such a strange duck.”  Ma put the full force of her weight on her cane, drew herself up much taller than her height of 5’4″ and answered the neighbor with “Leo’s a gem. What other thirteen-year-old son do you know who’d do a thing for his mother like what he did for me?!!”

When it was brand spanking new, one of the special movie theater treats in those days was going to see a picture at Lawrence Showcase Cinemas. Joe and I went a few times but for the life of us, neither can remember how in the world we got there. This was before I had my driver’s license and Joe never did get his so we couldn’t have driven ourselves. Somebody drove us there but we can’t remember who. We think maybe my sister, Diane, or Joe’s dad or his sister, Janie. But then we ask, where did our driver go for the two hours we two were at the movie??  We know they didn’t see one themselves, that much we’re sure of. Only Janie remains to ask but she doesn’t remember. We like that it remains a mystery of our outings together as kids. We did love it that on Showcase’s second floor was a mini-museum of sorts. While customers waited for their movie to start, they’d pass the time viewing the wall art, mostly the work of local artists. It was fun to go up there. There was something sophisticated about seeing a movie and an art gallery, an unprecedented combination in those days. Anyway, one New Year’s Eve, we went to see a show that was timed to wrap up at midnight. Joe says it was the Barbra Streisand version of A Star is Born. I say it was Rocky but don’t go by me; I don’t even know how I got there. The theater was mobbed, and throughout the movie, there was a palpable energy and excitement among the crowd, not only for the movie but also for the approach of a brand, new year. As midnight struck, more than a few audience members stood up and cheered, blew horns, shouted Happy New Year!! I remember lots of celebratory jostling as Joe and I fought our way to the exit and whoever it was picking us up. A memorable New Year’s Eve.

__________________________

Time’s Square ball drop

Showcase Cinemas in Lawrence

Showcase Cinemas Art Gallery

Guy Lombardo

Dick Clark’s Rockin New Year’s Eve

A Star is Born poster

Happy New Year!