The humility and pride of America

In the issue before July 4, it has been the custom in our newspapers to publish this humble hymn for you to enjoy on Independence Day. The words are moving. They don’t boast. They don’t futilely wave a flag. They don’t pontificate or insist that you believe this way or that to be patriotic.

Instead the hymn asks for God’s blessing. This humility seems appropriate in an era in which we are wreaking incredible havoc on the world.

This hymn celebrates the nation’s natural beauty. Will we have that beauty in 20 years, with global warming not addressed? It celebrates self-control and sternness, two qualities our leaders have not asked of us, even though thousands of our young people are at war.

It equates liberty with law. Those who supervise Guantanamo Bay and spy on American citizens might be surprised to learn the two are connected.

It hopes for nobility, not lies and deception. The words sing of values we want in our country, not those we have recently seen practiced. Perhaps its ideal is unattainable. But on July 4, 1776, the founders of our republic must have felt their goals were just as unreachable.


America, the Beautiful
by Katharine Lee Bates

O beautiful for spacious skies
For amber waves of grain
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain.
America! America! God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea.

O beautiful for pilgrim feet,
Whose stern impassion'd stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness.
America! America! God mend thine ev'ry flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self control,
Thy liberty in law.

O beautiful for heroes prov'd
In liberating strife,
Who more than self their country loved,
And mercy more than life.
America! America! May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness
And ev'ry gain divine.

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years.
Thine alabaster cities gleam,
Undimmed by human tears.
America! America! God shed his grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood,
From sea to shining sea.

credit: Lauren Patrick


David Bruce, Arlington Street, joined Holly McGrath, Arlington Street, Angela O’Dowd of Newton and Mary English of Beacon Street, at the 10th annual Rose Garden Party in the Back Bay Fens. The event, sponsored by Bank of America, was held to benefit ParkARTS, a series of performing and participatory arts offered throughout Boston’s parks and neighborhoods this summer.

Unsightly newspaper boxes in the Back Bay may disappear in coming years. Mayor Thomas Menino’s staff is in discussions to create an ordinance that would ban newsracks from city streets.

News “condos,” six-unit boxes that would replace the traditional, single-publication boxes, sound like a viable solution to those who take issue with dirty, neglected newsracks on Back Bay’s sidewalks.

The news condos would be maintained by street furniture company Wall USA and would include advertising on their exteriors, according to street furniture project director Peter O’Sullivan of the city’s Property Management Department. There are currently “a few hundred” newsboxes in the Back Bay, O’Sullivan said.

Implementing such an ordinance would require an examination of First Amendment issues. “It’s like saying [to the publishers] we’re going to take away all of your property and put you in our program,” O’Sullivan said. “There would be no color differentiation of the boxes.”

O’Sullivan said the “idea has been floated around for a few years” and was last rejected by a group of publishers in 1999. He is optimistic the plan can succeed in this subsequent attempt. “It’s just a matter of getting everyone on board,” he said. “I think everyone’s for having the news condos.”

By “everyone,” O’Sullivan meant the city offices whose cooperation is necessary to approve the ordinance, including the Inspectional Services Department, the Department of Public Works, the Boston Transportation Department, the Boston Redevelopment Authority and the Boston City Council.

Meg Mainzer-Cohen, executive director of the Back Bay Association, called the plan for an ordinance “a real good solution.” “We are very favorably disposed to newspapers, and that’s why I think having a city-instituted program would be a good compromise,” she said.

Newsboxes, especially those lining Boylston Street near the Boston Public Library, are in a “constant cycle of flux,” according to Mainzer-Cohen. “We don’t mind a couple of newsboxes, but when there are 25 and when half of them are filled with garbage, we find them a nuisance.”

“This has been an ongoing problem for years,” agreed state Representative Marty Walz. Walz said that the city is “not aggressively enforcing” the current ordinance that governs the placement and maintenance of newsboxes, the 1996 Citywide Newsbox Ordinance.

“We need the city to enforce the ordinance, and we need owners to comply with the ordinance,” Walz said. She added that newsboxes by the library and the Prudential Center are frequently stuffed with “trash and unsightly litter.”

The 1996 Citywide Newsbox Ordinance requires that publishers obtain a Certificate of Compliance from the Department of Public Works at a cost of $150. Several regulations stipulate where the newsboxes must be kept and how they must be maintained.

For example, a newsbox must be located between 18 and 24 inches from the curb and at least five feet from any fire hydrant. It cannot be posted with advertising or be chained to any light post, signpost, or tree. In addition, newsboxes may not be placed at any location where the sidewalk is less than four feet wide.

Owners are responsible for keeping the boxes free of debris, graffiti, rust and outdated material. A newsbox is considered abandoned if no printed material is dispensed for a period of 48 hours after the release of a publication’s current issue, according to the ordinance.

The Inspectional Services Department cites newsboxes that do not comply with these guidelines. If the violation is not corrected within 10 days, the Department of Public Works is called to remove the box. Owners may retrieve their box after paying the city a $25 removal fee, plus a $5 storage fee for each day the box is held.

One place newsboxes are banned is the Back Bay Architectural District. A 2004 lawsuit filed by several newspaper publishers, including The Weekly Dig, LLC and The Improper Publications, Inc., upheld this decision. Newsracks are also banned on Beacon Hill.

“Clutter is just a huge issue. The sidewalks are not wide on Newbury Street. On a summer day, you can have thousands of people walking by,” said Jolinda Taylor, president of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay, one of the lawsuit’s defendents.

O’Sullivan said that newsboxes in the architectural district are “always being removed,” including boxes placed on Clarendon and Exeter streets last month. He said that his office has received about 20 complaints this year, all from the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay.

Captain Mike Mackan of Code Enforcement Police, the Inspectional Services Department division that oversees newsboxes and enforces sanitary codes, said that his department has cited over 400 newsboxes in the city this year. Figures for Back Bay citations were not available.

“We take quite a few,” he said.

Writing an ordinance, reaching an agreement with publishers, and getting approval from the Mayor and City Council could take “a couple of years,” according to O’Sullivan. “The publishers worry they could lose their individuality. But if people want to buy a Herald, they’ll get a Herald,” he said.

Officially, the future of the Hynes Convention Center is in question: Two years after a commission was formed by an act of the legislature to study its use and possible sale, a report still has not been issued relaying the commission’s findings. But James E. Rooney, executive director of the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority, which owns and operates both the Hynes and the newer Boston Convention & Exhibition Center in South Boston, thinks no news is good news for the Hynes.

“I interpret [the silence] as positive,” said Rooney. “People feel good about [the Hynes] and it is something they don’t need to worry about. My sense it that [the commission] realizes that the Hynes is a viable convention facility.”

The commission, which is chaired by state Senator Dianne Wilkerson and Representative Antonio Cabral, was formed in response to both the new BCEC facility and the post-9/11 climate in which the tourism and convention markets were suffering. “Some folks suggested that it might be time to close the Hynes,” said Rooney. Simply put, the commission must to answer the question of whether or not the city needs two convention centers.

Rooney suggests that the numbers prove Boston can easily use both facilities. “We don’t have to wait for that data anymore,” he said. “We have two years of data that demonstrate how the Hynes performs with the new convention center.”

In fact, FY05 was the best fiscal year ever for the Hynes. The MCCA has 284 signed contracts for events to be held at the Hynes between now and 2017, according to Rooney. They also have 130 tentatively scheduled.

But, with no official answer from the commission, Rooney’s hands are tied as far as capital improvements to the facility. “I need to consider that anything might happen. I can’t make capital investment decisions without knowing the outcome,” he said. The Hynes is in need of simple upgrades like new carpeting, new drapes and new technology, including more wireless zones.

The uncertainty also plays into some contracts. “I’ve told our marketing and sales team that we need to behave as if the Hynes is going to stay open. But some people have asked us to commit to pay damages to help them relocate [if the Hynes closes],” he said. “That is a fair request, and we have said ‘yes, we’ll do that’.”

Rooney was pleased with the commission’s work and looks forward to closing the book on the matter. “They were terrific meetings. They asked a lot of the right questions,” he said. “I obviously wish it was behind us. From a closure standpoint, it is important because it is on the books legislatively, and it creates uncertainty from a marketing perspective and from a business planning perspective.”

Wilkerson’s office said the delay has been due to scheduling issues and logistical issues, but that a recommendation will be made to the legislature before the session ends in July. The final report should be issued within the next two to three weeks.

One city councilor’s latest proposal to keep filth off the streets? More trash cans—with sponsor’s names on them.

Modeled after New York City’s “Adopt-A-Basket Program,” a Boston program by the same name would allow businesses to advertise their names on “high quality” trash receptacles for the purchase price of the can. A hearing date for the legislation, proposed by City Councilor Felix Arroyo, has not yet been set.

“While the City of Boston’s Sanitation Division has been diligent in fulfilling its responsibility to keep our city clean, I receive frequent feedback from my constituents who feel that the city must continue to seek creative and cost effective solutions to combat the excess trash in Boston,” Arroyo said.

The Back Bay is home to 118 of the city’s 1,500 trash cans. The Mayor’s Office of Neighborhood Services and the Department of Public Works decide where to place the cans according to pedestrian traffic flow. Currently, the Department of Public Works maintains the cans, which cost about $150, and replaces trash bags several times a day in some districts.

The trash cans for sale will be more attractive and more durable than the cans the city currently uses, Arroyo’s office said. The cans, which weigh more than 200 pounds and can hold about 45 gallons of trash, will cost about $500. The city council is also open to the possibility of a sponsorship program for businesses to advertise their names on $45,000 solar trash compactors.

While non-profit groups help maintain the trash cans in New York City, the Department of Public Works would most likely continue to be responsible for the condition of the receptacles, Arroyo’s office said.

The addition of eight trash cans on key corners of Newbury Street last spring helped to alleviate trash concerns in the Back Bay. Tom Brennan, vice president of the Newbury Street League, said that there has since been a “noticeable difference” in the street’s cleanliness. “I’ve been pretty happy with it on the whole,” he said.

Brennan said windshield fliers and household waste are major culprits in keeping Newbury Street less than clean. When Back Bay residents miss garbage pick up on Mondays or Thursdays, they sometimes deposit their household waste in trash cans on Newbury Street. “That’s a problem,” Brennan said.

Peter Sherin, chair of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay, said that Back Bay’s trash problem is compounded during visitor season. “There will be a trash problem wherever there are people,” he said. Sherin said that he would likely support a city council measure that would control the trash as long as the advertising is kept out of the historic district.

Stephen Haag, chief administrator for the Newbury Street League, agreed that a sponsorship program would benefit the Back Bay if the advertising was not intrusive. “I don’t think more cans would hurt,” he said.

Advertising on public street furniture has proven profitable for the city, according to Patrick O’Sullivan, a project director with the city’s Property Management Department. In 2005, the city received $658,174 in royalty fees from street furniture sponsors. Wall USA, a Boston-based outdoor media company, was selected in 2001 to implement a street furniture program called “Boston Streetline.” The company has since installed 391 pieces of street furniture, with more automatic public toilets, newsstands, information panels, pillars and bus stop shelters planned for this year.