Risks of McIntyre deal to Portsmouth taxpayers far outweigh the benefits: Letters
Risks of McIntyre deal to Portsmouth taxpayers far outweigh the benefits
March 8 — To the Editor:
Remember when the McIntire redevelopment project was only going to cost the City of Portsmouth taxpayers $1 out of pocket?
In his March 7, 2023 column titled “McIntyre project facts are stranger than fiction," guest columnist Gerald Duffy expresses befuddlement over why our former mayor, four former councilors and 50 prominent Portsmouth citizen taxpayers are now asking the National Park Service to disapprove “the people’s plan that the city aims to submit in coming weeks, providing it can hammer out a financial deal with the developer that ensures value for residents."
Mr. Duffy argues, “It’s their [expletive] plan they are trying to sabotage!” But is it? Why no, it’s not.
While I previously supported the City Council proceeding with redevelopment of the McIntyre site based upon the Binnie proposal and had no objection to proceeding with redevelopment based on the “Community Plan” design, provided the council could negotiate “a financial deal with the developer that ensure[s] value for residents," I now do.
What has changed, I would respectfully submit, is that our present City Council has already failed miserably in that task.
According to even a casual reading, the settlement agreement the city manager “negotiated” with Redgate/Kane and the council approved by an in April: (1) gives the developer $2 million-plus of the taxpayer’s money; (2) requires the taxpayer’s to reimburse Redgate/Kane 50% of any undetermined “third-party costs” through National Park Service and local board approval, 75% reimbursement thereafter, if the transaction falls through; (3) guarantees the developer a 7.4 % rate of return on their invested capital; (4) promises the Redgate/Kane whatever unspecified “public financial support from the city [taxpayers]” towards the cost of development and construction the developer needs to “project” [guarantee?] a 7.4% rate of return; with (5) current preliminary cost estimates for construction of the “Community Plan” varying somewhere between $74 million and $147 million.
I sincerely hope I’m somehow reading that wrong, or otherwise misconstruing the terms, because if I’m not, the “facts are [indeed] stranger than fiction." Recall the near unanimous public opposition at the Jan. 10, 2023 council meeting after City Manager Karen Conard asked for an additional $150,000 after the cost estimates for developing the Community Plan with Redgate/Kane came in at a low of $74 and a high of $147 million – for a city with a total population of less than 22,000? How much per taxpayer is that going to be? The council further acknowledged that the draft form of ground lease previously negotiated by developer and the city but rejected by the former council (having a draft date Dec. 7, 2019) was substantially acceptable. What was the occupancy rate required before the developer would pay Portsmouth taxpayers any rent whatsoever?
How any responsible public official could possibly recommend a settlement that does not even specify the cost to the taxpayers whose financial interests they are sworn to protect is beyond me.
Remember, the task of the council and Redgate/Kane was not only to negotiate a design for the redevelopment of the McIntyre project but also a financial plan with substantial public benefit acceptable National Park Service. So yes, if our only choice now is for the NPS to take it or leave insofar as approving a financial plan that provides substantial public benefit to the taxpayers of Portsmouth, then I would ask them to leave it!
Timothy S. Wheelock, Esq.
Portsmouth
Bruce Valley is a dedicated man who loves Rye
March 8 — To the Editor:
I am supporting Bruce Valley for candidate for Rye School Board.
Since moving to Rye in 2004 I have been actively involved in the Friends of the Rye Library. The programs of the Friends led me to teaching and offering free classes of chair yoga for the past 15 years. I am a retired RN and trained yoga instructor and decided to offer my time and talent to the community. Since the pandemic, we closed down the yoga at the library. When places opened up again, The Rye Recreational Department offered the space to teach chair yoga at the Rye Congregational Church called the WAVE, a place for seniors and others to congregate. I have been actively involved with many organizations being connected to the community and developing many relationship with Rye residents.
I have been a friend and neighbor with Bruce Valley and his two wonderful dogs who greet me many mornings on my walks. He is a dedicated man who loves Rye. He would be a great asset to the school board, as a role model for his dedication and discipline to the community.
Please vote for Bruce Valley for School Board.
Amelia Mckenney
Rye
Sununu silent while extremist lawmakers peddle message of hate
March 8 — To the Editor:
What is “intersectionality?"
It’s not a good thing.
Look at the front page of the Wednesday (March 8) Portsmouth Herald for an unfortunate example. One article reports that a series of bills in the state legislature would make life harder for gay and transgender students. Another bill would strengthen the ability of crank parents to impose their ideology on teachers. A second article discloses that the state Department of Education is seeking the power to subpoena teachers. Although the article doesn’t say it, this would apply if the teachers were suspected of breaking the state’s racist “divisive concepts” law.
Intersectionality occurs when multiple forms of discrimination overlap. If the extremist Republicans in the state legislature have their way, the government can lawfully discriminate against gays, transgender people, and Black people. Discrimination against Black people would be subtle and indirect, by preventing their history from being taught.
Not everyone knows that the state Department of Education maintains an online form where parents may denounce teachers suspected of breaching the divisive concepts law, for example by teaching that any group is unconsciously racist. The law was passed and the form was posted during the tenure of Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut. It should be noted that Edelblut positioned himself with the haters last year when he wrote an op-ed accusing teachers of supporting Black Lives Matter and LBTQ+ causes.
Unfortunately, as these ignorant and discriminatory bills arrive in the state legislature, Gov. Chris Sununu is maintaining a discreet neutrality. Perhaps it furthers his national ambitions to stay silent as Edelblut and his allies in the legislature play to extremists, though he risks losing moderate support.
The recent demonstrations after hateful graffiti were posted in Portsmouth show that most of us don’t want to live this way — divided by the ignorance and fear reflected in this proposed legislation. Lets hope that our state legislators come to their senses and back away from a message of hate.
William R. Castle
Portsmouth
New Hampshire: The sorry state of our state budget
March 7 — To the Editor:
The recent article about New Hampshire's contribution to the cost of public transportation is a good example of the sorry state of our state budget. A payment of $200,000 for the entire state (COAST's share is $34,000) is a failed response to the needs of thousands of our citizens who can't afford to own a car or, for whatever reason, can no longer drive, and who rely on buses for getting to and from employment, medical appointments, shopping, and family visits. (Keep in mind that our "leaders" in Concord have refused to increase the state's minimum wage beyond $7.25 an hour.)
This token amount for transportation is nothing compared to New Hampshire's position as last or next-to-last in the nation for the level of state aid to public education. This is a long-standing condition, but these same "leaders" have decided to make the situation even worse by diverting millions of dollars to what are, essentially, private schools, thereby increasing the financial burden on local property owners and renters…many of these who are dependent on public transportation − see above.
There are almost daily stories of people, many of them teens and young adults, being housed in hospital ER areas because the State does not provide sufficient mental health facilities for emergency and/or long-term care. This is on top of frequent reports of battered spouses or neglected or injured children, the result of lack of staff and resources within out Department of Family and Youth Services.
The list goes on.
There are a lot of good reasons to live in NH, but these are very much dependent on not being elderly or disabled or homeless or addicted. Life can be good if you are healthy, able to work on a regular basis, with available child care if needed, and a good reliable income (and a car in the driveway). Otherwise, the so-called New Hampshire Advantage might not apply to you.
Do you know how much of our state budget is funded with federal money? Depending on the year, it may be anywhere between 30 and 36 percent. That amounts to a substantial contribution to existing state programs, but as we know, there is opposition in Concord to taking federal funds. Recently the Republican majority on our Governor's Council turned down free federal funding of several women's health centers and a study of potential commuter rail from Manchester south. What will happen, do you suppose, if the Republicans in Congress have their way with cutting many of the programs that form the basis of existing State programs? And if we don't have enough right now to adequately meet the needs of our disadvantaged citizens, what will be the result? Bus money is only the tip of the iceberg.
Anthony McManus
Dover
Boycotts are an instrument of change, whether in the US or Israel
March 8 — To the Editor:
I was under the impression that New Hampshire's motto, "Live Free or Die," was a sincere sentiment — that is, until I read the op-ed in the Portsmouth Herald by Spillane and Berch, entitled "New Hampshire anti-BDS bill will protect local businesses and stand against discrimination." Do the authors fail to understand that in a free-market democracy, private citizens and business owners possess the inalienable right to make their own purchasing choices? The government cannot force me to purchase items manufactured either in Israel or in an Israeli settlement in the West Bank, if I prefer to buy American-made goods or products of some other country. The reasons for my consumer choices should be of no concern to the government.
Moreover, BDS is not a "hate movement"; in fact, it is not even a coherent organization. BDS is a technique for accomplishing social or political change -- in this case, the end of the Israeli occupation -- and it is embraced by an assortment of individuals and organizations (including Jewish Voice for Peace) who fully intend to terminate their boycott just as soon as the Israeli government stops expropriating Palestinian land and subjecting Palestinians to abusive policies. When the human rights violations end, the boycotts will end.
Were the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the boycotts of Apartheid South Africa motivated by racial, ethnic, or religious discrimination? No. The boycotts were an instrument of change. Period. With regard to the economic disruptions caused by BDS, we can recall that the end of Southern slavery overturned an economic system that was dependent on that brutal institution. Doing the right thing can be painful.
"Live Free or Die": I hope that you really mean it, New Hampshire!
Carole C. Burnett
Silver Spring, Maryland
This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Risks of McIntyre deal to taxpayers far outweigh the benefits: Letters
