Category: Berlin NH

Writing or Reporting?

I got some very interesting feedback today: someone asked me why there was such a difference between my work on LPJ and my work in the Reporter. I started to say because I don’t feel like I can afford to have an opinion in the paper, while on here I can, but they stopped me. The style, they said, that’s what they wondered about. Why the rigid style in the paper and the much more comfortable, conversational writing on here?

It was an interesting question. Whenever I tell someone I work for a newspaper they respond, “Oh, so you’re a writer?” I never know how to answer that. I’ve never considered myself a writer; I consider myself a reporter. Writing is the medium I use to get stories across, but the real product I create is the story. I like to think I’m OK at writing, but writer isn’t a title I would bestow on myself.

But their comment caught me. They obviously were more intrigued with my LPJ work than my Reporter work, and they suggested I might try applying my LPJ style to my reporting.

I went and looked back through my stories and understood what they meant, but I still have a challenge to deal with: how much of me and how much of my subjects are supposed to come through in my stories? How does that apply to the paper?

LPJ is mine, wholly and completely. I set it up because I’m passionate about reporting and the region I cover, and I don’t get paid to write any of these posts. I’m not representing anyone but myself in this venture, and if my personality shows through that’s fine. The Reporter, however, covers a city. I work there, just doing my job (reporting), and I shouldn’t overwhelm my subjects. That would do Berlin no good. I should almost invisible in the story, so to speak, in some ways.

But that doesn’t work either, because people don’t read blah stories. I could attend every council meeting from now until eternity, but if people aren’t reading what I’m writing what does it matter? It’s got to be captivating to get into people’s heads, or else they’ll put down the paper for the remote.

So I’ve decided to try to meld my reporting with the LPJ style, the one that has a bit more of my stamp in it. Hopefully it will help me improve what I’m producing  and people to get reading about their city.

I started tonight with a council story about Councilor Danderson and his comments about the police department. Honestly I think it makes me look  like I disagree with Councilor Danderson’s every word, but instead I just point out some hypocrisy in recent statements he’s made. I actually had one extra line that made him look even more of a hypocrite, but I took it out because it didn’t seem fair. But maybe it’s not fair to remove the line, because it’s all things he’s said and suggestions he’s made.

It’s a tough line to draw. It’s doubly tough because I’m not surrounded by colleagues who can weigh in with their opinions and experiences. But that’s the nature of the 21st century newsroom, where a laptop and a wireless connection are what make the news world go ’round.

This all goes along well with the last post about neutrality in the newspaper business. Hopefully I can toe the right line here, and inspire a more engaged citizenry in Berlin. One can only hope, right?

Independent, but…

I was just checking out the Colebrook News and Sentinel to find out what was going on with the explosion that destroyed a gun factory on Friday, and I saw their slogan at the top of their website: Independent but not neutral. I couldn’t agree more. The job of the newspaper is to provide information to citizens so they can better self-govern. The information has to be timely, accurate and without political bias, but it isn’t necessarily neutral. In many arguments someone is wrong. Laying out in print both sides of an argument without first establishing each argument is true doesn’t help citizens make decisions, and it isn’t what papers should do.

Unfortunately for Berlin many of the discussions that dominate the community are not true or false discussions. Was the city better off with the mill? By some measures, yes. Would it be better off without a biomass plant or a prison? In some ways. Is it more important to retain services or maintain the tax rate? It depends on your view.

Those arguments aren’t decided by newspaper coverage. They make it onto the editorial page, but they aren’t matters of fact that make for crisp stories. Ultimately residents have to decide where they want the future to be. At times democracy is a messy business.

Crisp Days, Level Nights

If you’ve been just looking at the photos in the recent blog posts without clicking on them, click on them now. I’ve been getting some great shots lately that I’m just disappointed I can’t tie in to anything to get them into the paper. The colors look dull in posts, but when they pop open they look great.

It was a crisp, cold day today, and the council finished the budget. Everyone got level funded, from the police and schools on down. There will be two fewer firefighters and two fewer public works employees. I get an interesting picture, because at the police department they complain about the council, and at council they complain about the police department. To hear each side tell it the other is railroading them.

Budgets are quirky. This one is thin. I’m scheduled to be at the Balsams for the Coös Symposium during the May 26th public hearing, but I may have to make a trip to Berlin for that. This has been hot lately, and I don’t want to miss where it goes. I wonder what cuts are going to matter to residents and how their comments will affect the council. I have a hard time believing support for expanded policing would cause many changes, but the school, fire and recreation departments may find themselves with some friends. It promises to be eventful from now until July first.

Nowhere Near Capacity

During the council budget hearing the other night there was some discussion about the Jewish cemetery on East Milan Road. I thought that sounded interesting, so when I was at the historical society today to talk about a story I asked about the cemetery. There are two, in fact, I was told, both side by side. One is German and the other is Russian. I couldn’t remember which was which, but based strictly on the names I think the German one is to the north. I was driving past to take a photo of something else and I decided to stop. While there I noticed something interesting: the cemetery is 3/4 empty. They built it with the expectation Berlin would continue to grow and thrive, and the Jewish population would grow and thrive right along with it.

I did see a newer headstone in the Russian section, but it was most of them were decades or more old. Even the cemeteries stagnated in the 1950s, it seems.

But the Hebrew inscribed gravestones are a testament to the city’s vibrant past. Today the nearest synagogue is in Bethlehem, but the history of Judaism survives in Berlin. I’ve been there a year and had never heard of it. Councilors who have lived in Berlin for decades had to be reminded of it. I imagine the treasures of the North Country will continue to reveal themselves slowly for years to come. I look forward to discovering them.

Long Days

There is a lot going on lately in Berlin. Yesterday I spent 10 hours in city hall, between the SEC technical session and the city budget meeting. It was interesting to watch Laidlaw and CPD face off yesterday. The technical session is really just a chance to ask the applicant for more data and for clarification about any points they made, but it did get a little heated toward the end. The two competitors are coming up with close time lines, and their consensus seems to be there is only room for one project. The next few months should be interesting.

And of course the email between Mel Liston of CPD and Jon Edwards has been making it’s way around the web. I’m supposed to talk to Mr. Liston later today, and I’ve still got to get in touch with Mr. Edwards to set up a time to talk to him. I’m hoping to get their side of the story for the story that will be in the paper next week. The email clearly raises questions.

Today is more of the same, with a 10 or 12 hour Berlin day. The focus, however, will be the budget rather than the SEC. Swing by city hall at 6 p.m. tonight if you want to watch the council in action working on the most important thing they do all year. The police department’s budget will be the opening topic, which should be interesting. It’ll be a good time to be watching.

More Projects…

I’ve been a little quiet recently, because in addition to my Reporter work I’ve been working on two NHPR pieces and two other side projects. All of them have connections to or roots in the North Country (well, not one of the NHPR pieces) and I’m am super excited about them. It is interesting the possibilities available around here to people with the right set of skills and the right level of enthusiasm. I’m hoping they all come to fruition, because every one of them will tell a little part of the story of the North Country.

Also, I’m heading to the Coös Symposium in a couple weeks. It’s right at the wrong time, in some respects, as I have to figure out if I want to miss the budget hearing in Berlin or if I’ll be commuting. But I’m excited to hear what people in Coös have to say and what sort of solutions come out of the event. What do people think of it, I wonder? Do you look at it as a worthwhile exercise? I don’t really know what to expect, but I’d love to hear people’s opinions, both from people who have gone and those who have watched it happen for the past few years.

The City That Just Won’t Quit

The spring was a little depressing, with both Rumorz and J.C. Penney announcing they would be closing. It hits hard when two faces on Main Street, one a new upstart and the other an old standard, move on. It had me back on my heels a bit, though Berlin is accustomed to such setbacks.

Today, however, I did the downtown tour, and I got to see another half-dozen reasons why Berlin with eventually survive. Three of them will be in next week’s paper, I hope, so I won’t ruin them, but suffice it to say they are there. One is the impending opening of Tea Birds. The paper is off the windows now, and it’s clear the owners have done a ton of work to get the building up to speed. Soon that’ll be one more busy storefront on Main Street.

WREN is moving into the old Gill Building, where SaVoir Flare is now, and they are moving to the larger space next door. That’s one more window filled and one taking up more real estate.

I keep hearing about “green shoots” in reference to the economic downturn. It may even apply to Berlin. For so long this region felt left behind by the economic success of the rest of the state and the country; now it may be catching up.

There are significant challenges still, however. City councilor Mark Evans showed me a letter from a realtor who said many of the people looking to move to the region for the federal prison were looking at property in surrounding communities. But if Berlin can sprout success in this economic climate, what will it do once millions of federal payroll dollars are headed its way?

The challenge now is to address the short-term budget problems the city faces to build a foundation for long-term success. Prison employees choose Berlin if the schools and housing prices are good. One of those variables is secure — there is certainly inexpensive property in Berlin. The other, however, is in a tough spot, and the budget guidelines set by the council may hurt the city more than help it.

No one wants to lay off 10 teachers. Every councilor knows that’s 10 good citizens the city risks loosing. But more importantly, those ten teachers hurt the student/teacher ratio and reduces the city’s appeal as a place to move. The short-term gain of a $1 million in reductions may result in a long-term loss if it keeps federal employees from settling here.

Every councilor needs to weigh these factors carefully. While they disagree on one project or another, they all agree they want Berlin to succeed. They also all agree that the city’s taxes are too high. Efforts to cut taxes in the short run, however, can raise them over the long-term. In the flurry to keep people here today it is important not to alienate those who might be here tomorrow.

But city government isn’t the city. I can’t imagine the city ever failing because the strength of conviction of its residents. Berlin pride will remain, I imagine, long after these discussions have been forgotten. Main Street is resurgent regardless of city officials, not because of them. The city, in many ways, just needs to stay out of the way. It’s amazing to see these efforts, which have kept the city moving despite decades of disappointing setbacks. It is convincing evidence that the city won’t ever quit. I am happy to sit by and watch to see what it can become.

More on Energy

Another North Country reporter, the unstoppable Edith Tucker, said the other day that she’s learned more about energy than she’d ever hoped working in Coös County. I agree.

I just got off the phone with Martin Murray, the spokesperson for PSNH. There are recent developments at the federal level that affect the Clean Power/PSNH discussion at the PUC, and I wanted PSNH’s opinion.

Mr. Murray and I have talked several times now, since a significant portion of my reporting has covered energy and PSNH. Each time, somewhere either in the middle or near the end, we start to dance around as I try to pin Mr. Murray into a corner on just how it is PSNH decides who to negotiate with. Mr. Murray wordsmiths knowingly past my best jabs, never giving more than he intends. He has put up with my incessant questions a number of times, which come from different directions but always with the same target. I rephrase and reword, but we keep going in circles. It is a merry-go-round I have come to expect, at least until the PUC rules on the topic.

I understand the CPD complaint to be that PSNH has to negotiate with the company in order to determine if they are achieving the least expensive option for rate payers. If they don’t negotiate with CPD, the logic goes, then how do they know CPD isn’t offering a lower price than the competition?

Mr. Murray’s explanation into the question doesn’t go so deep. Is PSNH required to negotiate with CPD? is the question, he said, and PSNH believes the answer is no.

I must admit, I’ve had a lot of conversations with both sides of this discussion, and I have looked at lots of documents. I am also not particularly familiar with the PUC’s process, or just how in deep they delve into the logic and the arguments that constitute the reasons behind their dockets. But the way I see it, on the surface, both companies are right, if there’s is the question you’re asking.

PSNH is not required to negotiate with CPD, according to the letter of the law. They are (or would have been) required to buy CPD’s power at the market rate under the federal PURPA guidelines, but that wasn’t what CPD was requesting. They wanted to negotiate, not invoke the federal standards.

So PSNH is right, if the PUC is looking at the argument at that level. There is nothing that says they have to negotiate with anyone; CPD is in no way special.

It’s hard to imagine, however, how PSNH can decide what offer to go with if they are unwilling to listen to the various offer. How do they know one power producer will generate power at a lower cost to the rate payer if they don’t at least entertain all offers?

But that’s digging deeper. I’m not sure if the PUC does that. CPD is asking the PUC to look beyond the letter of the law to the reasons behind it. PSNH is looking for a requirement to negotiate, and not finding one, they feel they have done no wrong. That may be where the complaint lands. Alternatively, CPD is looking at what it takes to achieve a least cost option and making a leap to negotiation as a requirement. Perhaps that is where the PUC will look.

Either is right, when the argument is framed in their language, and either is wrong if it isn’t. Where the PUC will land in this conversation is still unclear, but the generalizations “right” and “wrong” clearly do not apply.

I do see something else, however: a possible design for this recent moves in this dance. You’ll need the upcoming copy of the paper to get this, but I think I’ve stitched a bit of strategy together.

CPD’s complaint is now protected by a recent FERC ruling, so any decision the PUC makes will be enforceable regardless of the exemption granted PSNH (Confused? Check out this Wednesday’s Reporter.) But should CPD’s complaint fall on deaf ears they will no longer be protected by the FERC exemption. The exemption is in regards to this one pending complaint, not to CPD in general. Should CPD go back to PSNH and demand they buy CPD’s power under PURPA guidelines PSNH can point to the FERC waiver and deny the request. PSNH closed one avenue CPD could have taken to sell their power, even if it wasn’t the one CPD was going for. What looks like a loss for PSNH may actually be a win, as long as the PUC uses PSNH definitions for the complaint.

That is, of course, unless CPD is producing less than net 20 megawatts. Their proposal will generate between 17 and 22 megawatts, which cuts close to the FERC ruling cutoff. Then it becomes a matter of skirting the line, something CPD did at the SEC already with the 30 megawatt cutoff.

FERC may have given PSNH an insurance policy, at least in this one regard, but the question remains just how deep the PUC will go into the obligation and logic for negotiation, and who will be vindicated as a result. Either CPD and PSNH would win the argument if it was their rules the other were forced to follow. Now the PUC has to choose which version to abide by, and then the matter will be settled.

I don’t imagine, however, this was the last story I’ll write or the last post I’ll put up on the subject. More twists than a North Country road. My energy education, it seems, is still underway.

Mornings

Mornings in Coös County are the best. Mondays and Thursdays are my consistent early days in Berlin, with an 8 a.m. meeting police department for the weekly log. In winter my drive over the notch starts before sunrise, but now that the days have grown the sky is usually bright and unspoiled.

The city streets are always still, and all the parking spaces on Main Street are empty. It’s a gift to roll in and watch the city wake up. The mist burns off the river, shops unfurl their open flags, and cars start to roll out of driveways. Morning has always been my favorite time of day, and in the North Country it’s the way always remember it.

I have come up a few times at 6 a.m. or earlier to shoot photographs before dawn. The streets are always eerily quiet. I always wonder if people wonder what the heck I’m doing, as I pull over on the roadside and duck under fences, dragging my camera bag with my tripod under my arm. As of yet no officer has wound up tapping on my shoulder, so I’m guessing people either don’t notice or don’t care.

Between the area’s landscape, architecture and industrial infrastructure there are always ghosts poking out of the darkness. Trying to capture them in interesting light is a fantastic challenge. The mornings, of course, are the time to do it.

When I come up for work, as I’ve said before, it’s like I’m leaving one world for another. I leave a town largely devoid of community, where neighbor is a geographic distinction, not a reference to personal relationships. I come to a city and a region undiluted by fast-paced existence. There is no rat race here. People know each other, and they still attend community suppers and barbecues. Berlin still fosters community, builds it and wrestles with how to preserve it.

The premiere of On the River’s Edge this weekend exemplifies this quality. More than 400 free tickets to the local showing disappeared almost instantly, and the historical society sold more than 200 DVDs of the documentary. It was a remarkable show of local pride for a city constantly on guard against its own demise.

Berlin residents have a sense of pride, however, that grew out of the city’s reputation. They loved Berlin even when others ridiculed it for the smell of the mill and its remoteness. Today the mill is gone but the pride remains. Along with it, however, are the scars left by being the butt of too many jokes. The armpit of the state and Stinktown USA are no longer, but the affects remain.

But today the view of Mount Madison is crystal clear. The river runs clean, and the woods have more trails than loggers. Every morning I come north I marvel at the country Coös County residents live in, and I wonder how it can sustain itself so they can keep living there. The answer is there, I am sure of it, but the recipe hasn’t been discovered yet.

The mornings, however, convince me that recipe is worth searching for.

This morning, after police log, I was driving along Riverside Drive, when I looked over the river and saw a sea of white dots: seagulls, perched on the boom piers, huddled together during a rain shower. The sky and the river were almost black and the birds popped from the background. They were so numerous and so brilliant I had to turn around. I walked to the river’s edge with my camera and tried to capture the moment. Instead I got a few snapshots of birds too far away to make an impact. But they made their impact on me. They woke me once more to the many things northern New Hampshire has that other places lack. A river through town, for instance, that hasn’t been completely overrun with construction. A sense of wildness and life even in the downtown.

It’s hard to appreciate, I think, when you are there all the time. But try leaving and coming back and see what it is you first see. See if you notice the morning sun on the mountains turning the snow shades of gold, or the mist rising off the river in trails. See if you notice the muskrats in Tondreau Park searching for fresh grass, or the birds soaring around Mount Forist. Ordinary? Drab? Not for a moment, particularly in the mornings.

Damage Control Only

I was listening to the Exchange on NHPR on Monday, where they were talking about the state’s budget challenges. One of the guests, Steve Norton from the New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies, commented that the state budget was essentially in crisis mode, trying to keep things moving until next year when they might be able to make some long-term decisions if the economic situation improved. This year, he said, was just stopgap measures to keep the ship afloat.

That, unfortunately, is where Berlin is as well, and its easy to see where it leads.

The school department laid off 10 teachers last week. They had to make the cuts in order to keep their budget flat, which the council requested/mandated. That’s 10 middle class, upstanding residents that will be out of work unless something changes.

The school department is a big employer in Berlin. Like the hospital, the prison and numerous other social service agencies around the city, it does not contribute to the tax base, but it contributes jobs. The city is in the position where it needs to slash funding for fire fighters, teachers and possibly police officers, but these cuts simply mean the city loses a few more upstanding residents.

Councilor Danderson often comments that the good people are leaving. What can the city do to stop it? Not eliminating their job would be one way, but then the expense falls on everyone else.

The goal of keeping the tax rate flat is important, as Berlin already taxes higher than most of the rest of the state. But when does keeping it flat become too much of a risk? When the city starts speeding up the very exodus it is trying to prevent it may just be time to start reevaluating.

Now I say this without being a property owner. Because New Hampshire doesn’t have an income or sales tax I largely escape the impact of the state’s taxes, and I completely escape the impact of Berlin’s. But the city can’t support vital services it needs, and because of it they lose twice. First, there are fewer teachers, so class size goes up, and second, those teachers move away to find work somewhere else. Heck, they may even lose a third time: the teacher sells the house they had bought and stop paying taxes on it. It may wind up just one more vacant building.

The council, however, doesn’t have much choice; no one wants to squeeze an extra $1 million out of Berlin residents. But somehow the city has to find a balance between fiscal prudence and maintaining adequate services. No one will move there if the fire department can’t respond or their kids get a poor education.

Up to now city departments survived with meager resources, and they have done the job well. But the accounts I’ve heard is that this year budgets are too tight to keep shaving the dollars off. Something has got to give. It’s either jobs or taxes, and no one wants to give up either. It’s a terrible choice, and I wouldn’t want to have to make it.

People need go to council meetings and voice their opinions. Is it worse to raise taxes or to lose services and people? They aren’t my taxes, so I can’t say, and they aren’t my services either. Where I live there aren’t city level services, so I have no idea what is a fair price for such things. The people who pay for and use the services need to tell the council how they feel, and what direction they want to see these two things go. Too often people comment on the budget only during the public hearing, when everything is set, finalized and printed. They make changes at this point, but only minor ones. If people want a major change in policy they have to speak up early.

But maybe they don’t. Maybe, like some people have said, Berlin should essentially become a town and forget about maintaining city-level services. The city has the population for it, maybe it would work. I’m not sure who would watch over the excess infrastructure, but that would be a problem for another day.

A city may be like a business, however: if you aren’t growing you’re failing. Berlin isn’t growing right now, and turning into a town or cutting jobs doesn’t help. They need growth, certainly, but the question is what decisions this budget cycle will best spur such growth, maintaining taxes and cutting services or raising taxes and maintaining services? What will do more good over the long-term? At this point, the city is writing a budget based on damage control. For a shot at a future, however, the city needs to take deliberate action. Hopefully they are fully invested, one way or the other.