Donahue's actions disappoint
To the editor:
I watched with great interest and deep disappointment the Haverhill City Council meeting of Aug. 12.
During the discussion leading up to the vote to censure Councilor James Donahue I was struck by two very different things. First was the unanimous sense of dismay and near sadness expressed by the members of the council. Each was eloquent and firm in stating how they felt. Most striking was the reaction of Councilor Ken Quimby, who looked as if someone had slapped his face. After all, someone had.
Second was the unapologetic arrogance of Councilor Donahue. Rather than try to understand why his colleagues were upset about his blogging, he played the victim trying to make the case that his right to free speech was under attack.
Hogwash. The only right that was threatened was Councilor Donahue's right to bad mouth his colleagues using multiple pseudonyms in a vain attempt to establish a phantom constituency.
Councilor Donahue seems to forget that this is an issue of public trust. The standards of conduct are and must be higher for public officials. As an educator Mr. Donahue should already know this.
As a taxpayer I expect my elected officials to behave professionally and to make policy with the interests of the community foremost in mind. I do not expect self-promotion and belligerence for its own sake. I further expect intellectual honesty and the courage that leadership demands.
I voted for Councilor Donahue last time around. I won't do it again.
LEO T. MARTIN
Haverhill
Haverhill needs a new City Council
To the editor:
First let me state that I am not friend or family to Haverhill City Councilor James Donahue. However, that doesn't mean that I don't support his principles.
Regardless of what was said, printed, or implied, his behavior, disrespect, or malice, he is still protected under the U.S. Constitution. He has the same constitutional rights as any citizen regardless of who he is and what position he holds.
The fact that Donahue was censured by Haverhill City Council was apparently due to calling out his fellow councilors and his lack of remorse for doing so. I heard mentioned by several councilors he wouldn't have been censured if he exhibited different behavior.
Statements such as those should immediately raise a red flag. If Donahue apologized and acted in a matter other members of the council wanted him to, he would not be censured? Wouldn't that be some sort of intimidation or perhaps even blackmail?
Donahue did not break any federal, state, or city law. He did not violate anyone else's rights nor did he physically harm anyone. He may have hurt someone's feelings, but that's a far cry from breaking laws. He may not have behaved like his fellow councilors wanted him to, but that is still not breaking law. He stood up for his rights as a U.S. citizen and was censured for doing so — isn't that a great lesson to teach citizens of Haverhill. What next? Are they going to intimidate me if I apply for a variance or want to put an addition on my home or start a business?
The Haverhill City Council should not have censured Donahue and us taxpaying citizens of Haverhill should pray that he doesn't decide to take legal action for having his constitutional rights impinged. This current City Council is a disgrace and an embarrassment. At least we have a mayor who has a vision for the future of Haverhill, someone who truly wants Haverhill to be great. Unfortunately, we have a City Council that's caught in the past and does not have the ability to see a new vision for Haverhill. They are obsolete and are an obstacle to progress.
What the city needs is an across-the-board replacement of the City Council with people who genuinely believe in Haverhill and want to make this city great, make this city a place where people want to go, make this city a place where people want to live and raise a family, a city where it's easy to do business in. We don't need a City Council that wants to punish people for exercising freedoms, or walk around the city yelling at people, or constantly opposing good ideas to improve the quality of life in this city. We need to remember this next election day.
An across-the-board replacement will allow an opportunity to move this city forward in a new light, have fresh ideas, use latest technologies, and get us into the 21st century. It all starts with a vision and action to take a path to get us there. This is well beyond the ability of the current Haverhill City Council.
FRANK PANNIELLO
Haverhill
