Article

NO GO FOR J-LO

The Planet heard from a Very Credible Source (VCS) by phone yesterday, who adding a few valuable cents to the controversy swirling around Chris Speranzo’s political intentions and the wake that will follow, particularly as it concerns Jonathan Lothrop.

Specifically, VCR told us in confidence (that is, not for attribution but to share) that Lothrop has no interest in running for state rep. VCR cited some things only a person on the Very Inside would know, so inside you might even think it WAS Speranzo. We took this authoritative verification to validate the info.

VCS said he or she knows “for a fact” that Lothrop will not run for a vacant seat that may emerge if 3rd Berkshire Rep. Chris Speranzo beats challenger Mark Miller on Nov. 2, wins re-election, then abandons the seat to take a position as clerk magistrate. Of course, if Miller pulls off the upset win, then never mind.

VCS said Lothrop “has a family,” and that would preclude him dedicating himself to a position in Boston. It’s interesting that VCS would not address if Lothrop had been approached by anyone about the job, skillfully dodging the question.

This makes sense, the fact that Lothrop is a family man. Also, it could indicate that since The Planet named him as the hand-picked successor to Speranzo — which, again, VCS says is factually in error — we scared “them” away from completing the coup. If Lothrop was being considered, and if Lothrop was weighing the option to the point of acceptance, and if Lothrop took the job, how would it look when we were proven right? Did someone who extended the 3rd Berkshire seat to Lothrop suddenly take it back because of our reportage?

The last time the 3rd Berkshire seat was tossed up for grabs to the lions was when Peter Larkin said “bye bye” for a cushy post elsewhere. Many ran for the seat — Matt Kerwood, Pam Malumphy, Rhonda Sere, and Terry Kinnas — but only Speranzo was left standing in the end. He did get the backing of establishment interests in that race, and critics say that all but turned the special election into an anointing.

The Planet attempted to reach Mayor Jimmy Ruberto, Speranzo, Lothrop for comment but was not successful.

Chief Wynn Advised City Not to Go After Inhelder

The Planet has learned that prior to the executive session meeting during which Mayor Jimmy Ruberto explained to the city council his reasons for not pursuing the case against serial OT abuser Matt Inhelder in court, the administration gave the evidence to Pittsfield Police Chief Mike Wynn to seek his advice. After review of what the city had, Wynn told the city, “We will never be able to prove anything” to a standard sufficient for a conviction in court.

The chief advised the city that without any witnesses to come forward, the case would be hard to prove. Wynn reported that no one among current or ex-city employees was willing to come forward to testify against Inhelder. The choice of the word “would” suggests a culture of reprisal had they talked. But reprisal by whom?

Though Jeff Ferrin has climbed aboard this issue and galloped into what may be a bright political future, a source within city hall claims it was not Ferrin who first alerted the city about the OT scheme but water department employee David Brites. Brites, we believe, was once a union president. If Brites did alter the city to what was going on, he deserves a medal along with the oak leaf clusters that have been awarded to Ferrin.

If Ruberto made one mistake in this matter, it was to leave it in the hands of DPW head Bruce Collingwood. The mayor’s mistake was to wait until consultant John Barrett came to town before calling out the hounds. Colligwood did nothing about the OT abuse, though he  apparently knew what was going on. One would think that when the public services sector of city government is reorganized under a new boss, Collingwood will be in for a demotion. He’s too good an engineer to let go but to inept a manager to keep in a position of top authority.

Lothrop and Speranzo: the Good of It

While The Planet has taken both J-Lo and Spurs into the boards, we will point out that each has served in a useful capacity. Lothrop, along with Peter Marchetti, play key roles in city governement  hammering out compromises in policy. Both are policy wonks with vastly different styles. Lothrop is cool, analytical, and intellectual. Marchetti is the opposite. Each blends opposing styles to help move policy forward.

True, they do this in support of the mayor’s agenda, but what effective (or ineffective, for that matter) mayor doesn’t have this sort of help? Lothrop and Marchetti can speak strongly to the mayor about elements of proposals they don’t like, and Ruberto will listen. Thus, they can affect change. To use political parlance, they “engage” the mayor in a way that Melissa Mazzeo won’t and Joe Nichols can’t. Lothrop and Marchetti can make recommendations to Ruberto. He may not agree, but he will consider.

As for Speranzo, we will give him this much. When he was elected to the House, he could have pulled an Andy Nuciforo. You’ll recall that when Sen. Nuciforo served us on Beacon Hill at state senator, he also had his shingle out as an attorney. Speranzo could have done the same and cashed in like Andy to the tune of $50,ooo or so a year, on the simple fact that he has access to certain seats of power in Boston. Speranzo didn’t do this. Spurs didn’t hang out his shingle. We can’t say why, only that he didn’t do that. That’s to his credit and speaks of some integrity, however large or small.

13 Responses to “NO GO FOR J-LO”

  1. R ALLEN
    October 22, 2010 at 11:22 am #

    DAn, you’re a mystery in a cipher in a riddle. First youre all over Speranzo and Lthrop and now you’re making nice. What is it? Enjoy this new site even though I often disagree. I’m in what you call “the Establishment” in the city but I ahve no pboblem with people who raise questions. Heard you this a.m. with Bill Sturgeon on WBRK talk about this. Ask away.

    • danvalenti
      October 22, 2010 at 7:02 pm #

      MR OR MS ALLEN
      Well, The Planet is just … uh, The Planet. I don’t “make nice” in the same way as I don’t “make lousy.” I let actions determine how I “make.” If A and B act in a way that is credible or incredible, we shall ID it that way. Thanks for disagreeing in a way we can both agree upon. I never mind spirited debate or being told I’m wrong. It’s idiocy that this site won’t publish when it comes to REPLY.

  2. Telephone Mucn
    October 22, 2010 at 8:25 pm #

    A telephone call to and conversation with Johnathan Lothrop, weeks ago, would have easily cleared this up. He certainly has not been shy, when asked, in sharing his utter confusion in whatever faux insider knowledge you so desperately crave to have.

    But then, I suppose, it wouldn’t be as much fun to speculate and then to supposedly back it up with Bogus Sources (BS).

    • danvalenti
      October 22, 2010 at 8:57 pm #

      TELEPHONE MAN
      Well, don’t you think The Planet tried that, weeks ago? Lothrop had forever and a day to respond to this, and HE could have easily cleared this up. He chose not to respond, and now it’s supposed to me my fault somehow. That’s pretty good, a variation of the old Blame the Messenger syndrome. Could it be that you are a little miffed that The Planet sniffed out the story, put sunshine to it, and thereby spoiled the game plan? Appreciate your thoughts, though.

      • Telephone Mucn
        October 24, 2010 at 11:30 am #

        There was no story to “sniff out.” The so-called messenger failed to perform the bare minimum of due diligence by simply speaking to the party in question before filling in the unknown with made up sources and made up stories.

        Appreciate your fiction, though.

        • danvalenti
          October 24, 2010 at 12:11 pm #

          Glad you appreciate this. You must, therefore, simply adore the fiction of your own belief there was no story there. Telephone Man, you’re playing with yourself again.

  3. Jim Gleason
    October 24, 2010 at 11:07 am #

    I know this is off-topic on this article, but there’s nothing on this story on the site. Clarance Fanto rips Joe Nichols for his decisions on votes and his manner of dissent on the tax cloaked in fee clothing on the supposed “blight” proposals made by ruberto to the all compliant, except for two, city council in Pittsfield. How many bootlickers does the Eagle employ to back ruberto and shoot down any opposing points of view from anyone? That’s right, I’m calling Fanto a bootlicker. His lack of correct info is staggering. Absentee landlords won’t register for this stupid ordinance any more than they do now. This just punishes the good landlords in the city to try and control the few bad ones. These people WILL NOT register under their real names no matter what Pittsfield tries to do to make taht happen. This is just another ploy by ruberto to get more money into city coffers to pay for his toys like John Barrett, nothing more. I can’t wait till he gets voted out in November ’11.

    • danvalenti
      October 24, 2010 at 12:14 pm #

      JIM
      I am in favor of the effort to bring deadbeat landlords to task. My parents were long-time landlords in Pittsfield, and they worked hard to keep their properties spic and span. My dad used to shake his head in disgust when he saw what other landlords were doing — make that NOT DOING — to keep up their properties. That being said, I agree with you on the issue of making sure the deadbeats register. Will they? If the city doesn’t get full compliance, this measure could devolve into what you say: another penalty for those who play by the rules.

  4. rick
    October 28, 2010 at 6:12 pm #

    my vcs says gerry doyle will be tapped for spurs seat. lol

  5. rick
    October 28, 2010 at 6:13 pm #

    im sorry… thats g-do

  6. Jeff Ferrin
    October 29, 2010 at 6:08 pm #

    I have to comment on the Mike Wynn article and what was or was not good enough to be brought forth for trial and witnesses. First I do not care who gets credit for the outing of the abuse by Inhelder. What I do take offense to is the very fact that this internal inverstigation was supposed to go to an independant auditor, second. If in fact an independant auditor was to uncover what was apparently enough to force Inhelder to resign then that evidence by all rights should have bypassed the Pittsfield Police for ethical reasons and been turned over to the DA and the state police for a full investigation and then a determination made based on the evidence. However. The mayor nor the council in this matter followed my petition and to many fingers were in the pie to cover up for the purpose of preventing any embarassment to the mayor (MY OPINION) As for witnesses. Who was asked. I sure was not. Who was asked what by whom during this so called investigation. The bottom line is that The Da when approached by me admitted he was at no time approached by the mayor nor the Pittsfield Police and confirmed it when asked on the radio by Jim Gleason. People can take what they want from this whole mess. The bottom line for me is I did what was right and made it transparent to the very people who were hurt by the mayors decision to be selfish of his own ass protection. The tax payers deserve better and justice should have been served. Most importantly for the mayor he should have been a man and come out to the public and informed all of us about what was discovered about there money being taken and not hide behind it being a personnel matter. It was embezzelement and a felony no matter how you slice it. So JAMES RUBURTO. I here as i have on the Sturgeon show challenge you to an open to topic no limits debate in a public forum and hope you have the guts to accept. After all I am just a vindictive stupid former highway guy who plowed roads. So what would the challenge or worries be? I hope you Dan can make that happen. If not then maybe we will see another Speranzo situation where silence admits guilt. I have nothing to hide and have never lied to the people. Can he say the same? My guess is based on his past record and current ongoing state investigations against him can not.

    • danvalenti
      October 30, 2010 at 5:51 pm #

      Let me clear comething up. Mayor Jimmy Ruberto never told me he had taken the Inhelder matter to the DA. Here’s what I heard from a Highly Placed Source on this story: Ruberto told Inhelder if the mayor didn’t have Inhelder’s resignation “on my desk in 30 minutes, I’m going to the DA.” Inhelder resigned immediately, and the matter was dropped. No harm, no foul. Only in Pittsfield? No, but that’s no excuse for it happening anywhere.

  7. rick
    October 30, 2010 at 1:50 pm #

    good idea, the billing for it goes something like this….ferrin vs the golly gee wiz guy…… or the ethel merrman imposter…roberto doesnt stand a chance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! u have the facts.