By most accounts, Newton Alderman Emily Norton is among our city’s and even our state’s most dedicated environmental champions.
The proud driver of an electric car, Norton is the director of the Massachusetts Sierra Club, a group of over 50,000 members and supporters in Massachusetts that lists clean energy/climate, transportation and finding ways for “cities and towns to demonstrate environmental leadership” as its priority issues.
Here in Newton, Alderman Norton was co-sponsor of our plastic bag ban and is pushing for a proposed leaf blower ban.
But in Wednesday’s TAB editorial endorsing the proposed project at 28 Austin Street, the paper calls out Norton for being a leading opponent of the project, located in her ward, even though it’s been praised by Green Newton, Mass Smart Growth Alliance and others for being environmentally and transit friendly.
Here’s the full quote from the TAB:
… it is difficult to comprehend why the project’s leading adversary on the board, Ward 2 Alderwoman Emily Norton, director of the Massachusetts Sierra Club, can fight so hard against a project that would serve as a model for energy-efficient, environmentally friendly, transit-oriented development.
I’ve invited Norton to comment on the TAB statement. I know she has been traveling and hope that she will have an opportunity to respond soon.
Sayonara!
I am done with this blog and these cheap tactics, of slandering a person with high integrity.
As long as you’re examining what Andy Levin has to say in the TAB about the project, consider also the points that Marti has raised about “hyperbolic and foreboding” statements in that editorial.
In another thread, Marti’s comment on the murkiness of several points in the Draft Board Order raises several reasons why an Alderperson might vote against granting the special permit for this project at this time, separate from any particular environmental issues pro or con. Yes, this project is somewhat transit-oriented, but based on the schedule and accessibility of the MBTA Purple line, this project is not so “transit-oriented” that environmental factors should trump all else.
Sam S., I’m sorry you feel that way, but it isn’t slander to point out the disconnect. And the Tab was the one that wrote the editorial, not Greg or this blog. Perhaps the comment hits home just a bit, and you are overreacting?
Bruce, I think you are ignoring the point of the post. The Tab directly called Emily out on her opposition to something that the wider “green” community supports. There is another post for the editorial. For the record, I agree with Marti that the editorial had some rhetorical “over the topness”. But that doesn’t explain the disconnect.
And to be honest I hadn’t really focused on the green aspects of the project, but they exist of course, and the Mayor especially has made a big deal about the “green” benefits. I believe I wasn’t exactly impressed with those “green” aspects in a prior post, but then again, I’m not the head of a environmental organization…
Again folks, this isn’t personal. I think the folks who support the project have been very respectful of the various aldercritter opponents (somewhat because our complaints have been directed to certain NVA members I’d say if I was taking the anti-Austin Street side). But now that the vote is here, again, challenging our aldercritters on their special permit stand isn’t being mean, or slander, or over the top. It is part of the process, so long as folks do it respectfully.
Again, it isn’t bullying to point out someone’s bull. And maybe it isn’t hype to point out someone’s hypocrisy.
Enough said on my part. Folks can draw their own conclusions on all of these matters. While I certainly care about the improvements to my village center, I look forward to the day when this is decided and I can post on something else.
What is so ‘Green’ about the construction of a 68 unit apartment building? Solar panels on the roof ? Any new construction has to be green by code. It’s just common sense these days. Insulating double panes windows , spray foam insulation etc etc.
And what’s not green about a redesigned, tree lined, parking facility as is being advocated by the NVA ?
It’s a stretch to be calling out Emily here for her lack of advocacy for the urbanizing of Newtonville . How green is the densification of Newton ? The tearing down of perfectly habitable ( affordable ?) , homes to build Mc Mansions. Talk about environmental waste and being ‘green’ !
I find it interesting that Ald. Norton was given credit for co-sponsoring a docket item that preceded her election to the Board of Aldermen:
#254-12 ALD. HESS-MAHAN, SANGIOLO, DANBERG, KALIS, CROSSLEY proposing an ordinance relating to plastic bag reduction that would add a fee to single-use plastic and paper bags that are not at least 40% post-consumer recycled content, at certain retail establishments in Newton. [07/18/12 @4:34 PM]
The Programs and Services Committee subsequently docketed related items as a committee, recommending a ban on plastic bags and a fee for paper bags, which has not yet been adopted:
#254-12(2) THE PROGRAMS & SERVICES COMMITTEE recommending an ordinance to ban single-use plastic bags at certain retail establishments in the City of Newton. [01/10/14 @ 3:36 PM]
#254-12(3) THE PROGRAMS & SERVICES COMMITTEE proposing an ordinance to require a fee, charged to consumers, for the use of paper bags at certain retail establishments in the City of Newton. [01/10/14 @ 3:36 PM]
I wonder where the Globe reporter got her (mis)information.
Blueprintbill,
The ASP project is going to save the world- haven’t you been keeping up?
What is the environment impact of constructing the building? All those trucks hauling building materials, the dust, the pollution. If it’s so transit-oriented, why all the parking?
If we are only focusing on the environment here, if people need to travel to get to work from Newton, wouldn’t it be better for the environment for them to live closer to their jobs?
Even though NYC has the lowest use of energy per person, the city has one of the highest rates of cancer and asthma in the world from air pollution. If a portion of the Austin St parking lot was used as a park to sit outside and eat, good bike racks, and to plant trees (which help clean the air) and provide a motivation to walk or bike to Newtonville. would that reduce *local* car traffic and help save the environment?
If Newton was really concerned about the environment both inside its city and outside, why hasn’t bike safety been improved? Crosswalks are a nightmare. I’ve seen two people hit by cars since I’ve move to Newton. Why is it so unsafe to cross the street? Why are all the trees being cut down? Why did it take so long to get recycling barrels in the parks? Why do people still throw recyclables in the blue barrels? Why doesn’t Newton have a trash barrel for food waste? Why does Newton think its OK to put food waste in plastic bags that end up in landfills? Where are the recycling barrels along its busy village centers? Why doesn’t the city mandate recycling by businesses? I see piles and piles of plastic bottles at the soccer club, math school, Starbucks. Where are the safe bike paths?
Oh I know! ASP is going to save the environment!
Would it be fair for folks to label Greg a hypocrite or label him “anti-affordable housing” for objecting to a proposal to put in an accessory apartment in his neighborhood without attempting to understand or listen to the reasons underlying his objection? There have been very reasonable concerns raised which Board members may or may not agree with and which may or may not be mitigated or resolved that could still result in his continued objection to the proposal. In my opinion, a continued objection on this particular project in his neighborhood should not be construed as his being against affordable housing.
The Mayor shut down the Engine 6 proposal. Does that mean he is against housing the homeless? Clearly not. He and his administration articulated reasons why they believed the site and the location were not appropriate. We may agree or disagree with the reasons but obviously that does not mean he is against housing the homeless here in Newton. The Mayor has unveiled an aggressive intent to create 800 units of affordable housing here in the City. Clearly he believes there is a need for affordable housing – yet his administration is fighting application of Chapter 40B (which has so far been the biggest generator of affordable units) for certain projects because they believe the City has met the 1.5% land area requirement.
The Board of Aldermen voted against(or walked outside the rail and didn’t cast a vote) lifting the deed restriction on the Wells Avenue project that would have created 334 units of workforce housing and 84 affordable housing units. Many of them are affordable housing and smart growth advocates and expressed their reasons for objecting to the proposal. Again, we may agree or not agree with their reasons but clearly that does not necessarily mean they are “anti-affordable” housing or “anti-smart growth”.
There are several programs in the Newton Public Schools to take note of- Understanding our Differences and the Anti-Bullying Program – both programs focus on teaching respect, reduce name-calling, bullying and intolerance. Both the vociferous proponents and vociferous opponents of this project might want to take a look at what we are teaching our kids and really think about the level the debate about the Austin Street project has become.
@Alderman Sangiolo and Tom: I don’t see anyone bullying Alderman Norton in the comments on village 14; in the TAB editorial; or in my blog post so I’m a little confused by your point(s).
Public officials (that includes elected and appointed officials, candidates, chamber of commerce presidents, citizen group officials, newspaper editors, etc.) are and should be subject to more scrutiny than private citizens, including when there are questions about potential conflicts of interest, conflicting view points etc.
Sean Roche and I started this blog because we wanted there to be a public forum where Newton residents could share ideas, express their positions and — most importantly — learn from each other.
Sometimes it works better than other times.
But overall this is better than the post-blog era where the only time citizens could be heard on an issue before the city was at a public hearing, a letter to the editor, or one-on-one conversations with those electeds who were willing to answer the phone.
I do agree that the Austin Street project has been deeply divisive and has probably harmed our city more than the results either side thinks the project will yield.
But I think the TAB was right to criticize the clearly noticeable contradictions surrounding Alderman Norton’s green views and opposition to this smart growth project.
And I’m glad Village 14 exists as a forum for the rest of us to discuss this and other issues and for Norton to clarify her position.
Coming back to the issue at hand, let’s drop the hyperbole about what this particular project can do. Not it’s not going to save the world or the planet. But a series of projects like this one, that focus on increased density, an increase of apartment supply to the market and an increase in walking culture all have positive impacts.
That’s why green organizations tend to support this kind of development. The Sierra Club itself talks extensively about smart planning and transit oriented development. People are free to complain about traffic in Newtonville (and it can be slow) but if you look at it objectively it has the makings of a transit hub. Several bus lines and the commuter rail all meet right there. This isn’t new, the streetcar ran down Walnut Street, connecting Newtonville to Waltham, 100 years ago. The village developed around that transit.
A development like Avalon Bay does not accomplish the same idea. It’s built on a single road with a single access point and doesn’t have easy access to the nearby green line. It doesn’t interact with the street at all and doesn’t encourage walking. The same is true of the Mews in Watertown, they’re car-based, not transit based.
If we encourage an increase in the type of building we see with Austin Street and discourage what we see with the Mews, we will be in a better place.
That bigger story and that bigger change is what the various environmental organizations want to encourage. We won’t change how we live with one building, but we can try to encourage each new development to think in the right way.
Well said, Amy. At a minimum, we should all treat each other how we expect to be treated. Needless to say, it’s been a disappointment to witness the behavior of many throughout this process as it’s certainly not illustrative of the values and lessons that we teach our kids in Newton schools.
And as for Emily, anyone who pays attention knows that she’s the real deal. Any insinuation that she’s not doing her best to honestly and effectively represent her constituents is wrong.
@Greg: I apologize if I missed the blog posts and negative comments you must have made about other Aldermen who did not support the Wells Avenue project compared to the numerous posts you’ve made regarding Emily.
@Alderman Sangiolo: Children have been born and gone on to enroll and then attend kindergarten over the time period we’ve been pondering Austin Street. That’s opened up a lot of time to discuss and debate every aspect of the project.
Comparatively, the Wells Ave. debate was over quicker than a preschooler’s nap. I wish it had received more scrutiny and I suspect others will too if the city loses in court and is forced to accept the project without the millions of dollars the developer was willing to contribute for infrastructure.
@Greg. The photo of Emily is ineffective. Can you use the one of her beating a baby seal with a golf club?
I gotta say, Amy, that I think all of the posts here regarding Emily have been polite. you may not like the challenge to your position and her position, but no one has been rude or bullying. It is a tried and true strategy of politicians to paint opponents as “going negative” or “going personal”. Criticizing an aldercritter’s position on an issue of importance to the community is not only completely fair game, you should welcome it . We all should welcome it.
As far as I know, no one has questioned Emily’s integrity, or claimed that she is taking kickbacks from the parking lobby (that’s a joke), or implied that she isn’t doing what she feels is best for Newtonville. We are questioning her judgement and your judgement on a particular vote.
Tom Davis: I’m glad you feel that Emily is the real deal. I know you are passionate about the folks you support and I respect that and admire that. Passion is a great thing in our politicical process. But you say “Any insinuation that she’s not doing her best to honestly and effectively represent her constituents is wrong.” Can you point to an instance where anyone made such insinuation? Because she can be honestly representing her constituents to the best of her abilities and beliefs, and any criticism of her role in Austin Street’s redevelopment would still be valid. Just because you support Emily doesn’t mean I can’t criticize the stands she takes.
Amy, I don’t have the time to address your points individually, but I note that many of us actually have been intense critics of the mayor after Engine 6. I certainly have. I’ve been public about how he lost my vote after that debacle. So why I would never say that he is against homelessness, I would certainly say that when faced with a challenge he backed down, and that I haven’t seen the proof of his support when it really matters. When I criticized Setti, when many of us were downright furious with him on this blog, no one said that we were bullying him, or being mean, or that we needed to take into account the lessons taught to our kids in Newton schools. We all just debated the issue. And lord knows I’ve criticized Setti. I tend to do that when I’m disappointed with someone who I think could do more, or do better.
I will note that I’ve had multiple opponents tell me that I’m somehow in the developer’s pocket, that I’m a paid shrill, and that I’m a bully, or mean, or nasty. I hear the same thing being said about Greg and others. I’ve always tried to respond with facts, not complaints that I’m being treated unfairly or maligned. Because facts in the end are more powerful. But it is the height of irony that the folks opposing Austin Street constantly claim injury and bullying, when a few folks on their side have trolled pretty heavily those of us who have supported the project.
I really love posting on this blog, and for me this is one of the best forms of community in Newton. It is open, it is raw at times, but it is the best way to get a give and take. I respect you and Emily and Ted and others for posting here as public officials. I wish the mayor did that as well. But it is hard to have an open community and not be free to express our opinions. You may not like being criticized Amy, you may not like it when Emily gets criticized, but this blog gives you the opportunity to respond in many different ways.
Personally I think folks should spend less time alleging “bullying” and more time responding with facts. Folks like Jeffrey and Steven have been far more persuasive to me than the drive-by postings you tend to favor (like the one on the new article Bob Burke commented on).
I will give credit to Emily for responding in full on the next post. If I have time, I will respond to that as well. I encourage others to do the same, and move the conversation make to constructive criticism.
Dammit Jeffrey, I just said you only posted fact filled posts…
And I think the photo is lovely. Very green. 😉
And Amy, I don’t think Wells got nearly the same amount of heat and discussion as Austin Street. I know nothing about that project, and the local community surrounding it wasn’t nearly as divided about the project, no. Apples and oranges.
The better comparison is Engine 6. Go back and review the emails of folks blasting the mayor. Lots of us called him out directly. Why should his role in that be fair game, but your role and Emily’s role in Austin Street somehow not be? And BOTH sides criticized the mayor for Engine 6….
Frankly, once the vote actually occurs, we’ll know who supported the permit and who didn’t. I’m sure the criticism will be widely shared at that point. Emily is getting focused on because she is the ward aldercritter, and the Tab called her out directly. It has also been a sharp comparison from her to her predecessor as ward aldermcritter in Ward 2, no?
Again, I do need to say I give you and Emily credit for being on the blog. So while I criticize, I admire you for staying engaged. Really, thank you for that.
Ald. Norton has commented periodically on this blog around Austin Street, but her comments tended to be short and focused on a single data point. I would love a comprehensive understanding of her opposition. I know that one key issue she has in the number of affordable units. It’s a fair question. Though, that gets into a deeper discussion about how to build affordable units in a way that still encourages a developer to make money.
I can imagine that others on the board will follow her leadership on this issue, as she’s the person most tied to the Newtonville area. Given that the vote is close, I think it’s fair that we hear her specific opposition points, especially as it relates to the broader agenda she has established on the side of a greener community. The environmental advocates believe that this is net positive for the city, but she does not. The question worth answering is: why?
This isn’t an attack, it’s an honest question.
But it’s also an important question since it will come up again when the process starts on the Orr Block. What will make that development palatable to Ald. Norton and the constituents who elected her?
After posting the comment above I saw that Ald. Norton’s comments are in a new thread.
Chuck: And I just saw this thread…
Circling back to what Bruce said (above), the question seems to be what does “environmental” mean, and to what extent is it relevant to this project? Ripping up a parking lot and constructing a new building is not “environmental.” That energy will almost never be recovered. The same is true with a high school. Solar panels do not recover the energy lost. This is not the most compelling criteria for policy decisions, or we would never fill potholes. And if it is a factor, then there seems to be a need for some valid, science-based standard for doing so.
Bill:
I think it depends on how you are looking at the issue. In a vacuum, any project that disturbs the status quo is a net negative environmentally. Construction is always going to be carbon heavy.
But we don’t live in a vacuum. If new housing is going to be built, transit oriented development has been proven to be much more energy efficient. Even if the residents own cars, isn’t it logical that they would use the commuter rail to commute downtown, the express bus right outside their door? That they won’t need a car to get coffee, shop for groceries, drop off dry-cleaning, etc. If the alternative to meeting housing demand is more single families or 2 or 3 family homes away from the village hub, the additional car trips, the lack of direct access to transportation, and the lack of density all make the apartment building near a transit hub a more environmentally friendly option, no?
I’ll also note that ASP has agreed to make this building LEED qualified, meaning that it is being built in a way that minimizes its overall environmental impact. Those single family homes are rarely if ever built to the same standard.
All that said, as I said above, the environmental aspects were never the driving force for me, and I can respect your position that they don’t move the needle for you.
I’ll also note that for everyone’s complaints about the commuter rail, hundreds of us use it everyday. I rely on it. On of the main reasons I moved to this area was commuter rail access. I may not love it, but it does make a huge difference. And the city could definitely help make it better if it so chose. Handicapped access can be built. Improved staircases can built. The Indigo line might one day be built. But right now, the commuter rail is public transport right in our village. Perfect? No. But no public transport is perfect in MA.
I’ll comment on Emily’s post tonight when I have more time. I’d be interested in other folks take on it who know more about her views than I do, especially the project opponents.
Amy,
Is this a hypothetical or is Greg actually fighting an accessory apartment in his neighborhood?
“Would it be fair for folks to label Greg a hypocrite or label him “anti-affordable housing” for objecting to a proposal to put in an accessory apartment in his neighborhood without attempting to understand or listen to the reasons underlying his objection?”
We could label anyone fighting these accessory apartments as anti-environment as well. But it really isn’t nice to label people, even hypocrites.
Fignewtonville,
Let’s start two blog threads with your full name and photo and see how you might like it.
There is indeed a proposal in my neighborhood to build an accessory apartment and I spoke twice in front of Land Use in favor of wanting to see that accessory apartment built, while also expressing concerns about the proposed location of a driveway for this apartment. I have suggested two specific alternatives for the driveway, as have others. My understanding is that the petitioner met with the Planning Department this week is considering those suggestions.
SoccerMom, I’m not a public figure. I’m a private citizen, and I’ve chosen to remain anonymous. Emily ran for office and won. Why is it ok for dozens of threads about Setti’s actions, multiple angry comment threads about Ted and the project in his ward, and not have threads about the ward aldercritter for Austin Street? Are you objecting to Emily getting attention? Or getting criticized? I really don’t understand the objection here. She ran for office. She has a duty to be public about her thinking and her votes. This is her job, the one she chose. The fact that she is the focus of two blog threads is the most mild of public exposure. The Tab made an independent decision to feature her in her editorial, so it isn’t just this blog. Her opinion matters.
Look, I want ALL the aldercritters to explain their views here. Many of the others who support the project have over the years have done just that. Linsky would talk to a freaking blank wall about it. Susan talked at a lot of the meetings. I’m sure Emily has communicated with her supporters. But until the post she sent to Greg, I don’t think she ever articulated her views in a public forum. Perhaps I missed it.
Perhaps my view of what an Aldercritter actually should be is inaccurate or archaic. But I’d like my local politicians to do more than just vote, I want them to lead the discussion. Emily has every right to oppose the project. Half of her constituents do. But if she is going to lead the opposition to the project, I’d like my aldercritters to explain clearly why. Perhaps we can use that information for the Orr building, or for the next RFP for the parking lot.
For the record, this isn’t just an Austin Street issue. I hate the idea of Aldercritters or committee members voting “present” so they can deny they took a difficult vote. I’d love the aldercritters to be more vocal, to have more debate, publicly. I don’t know how that looks with the sunshine laws and such, but I love it when they all post on this site.
And for the record, I’m a support of accessory apartments. Many of my elderly neighbor would like them, and I think there is limited downside. Again, I’ve got no idea of the environmental aspects, that isn’t really my thing.
Amy”s right. This discussion has become too personal and out of hand. I’ve been a guest speaker with 4th and 5th grade kids at “Understanding Our Differences” school events. These kids are often light years ahead of where we are in terms of empathy, give and take and the willingness to compromise and search for common ground.
@Bob: I disagree. Emily is being singled out because, as the ward alderman, she’s the alderman most closely associated with this project. It is not disrespectful to ask a public official to clarify her position. I can’t recall any posts where she was bullied or called names.
If you’re referring to the entire Austin Street discussion being out of hand for the past several months, however, I’ll give you that. This has been a very divisive issue. I hope the board votes next week so we can move on to the next conversation.
Bob, just out of curiousity, what aspect of the discussion makes you uncomfortable? You’ve raised this concern before, and I realize it is likely uncomfortable for Amy and Emily to be challenged on their vote, but why exactly is this too personal and out of hand? Has anyone been disrespectful to Emily?
She definitely is in the hot seat on the blog and in the Tab. But do you consider Emily and Amy to have compromised and searched for common ground?
I’m not being a troll here, I’m really curious as to how you would have wanted this conversation to go. The last 8 years of work on redoing the parking lot eventually comes down to a vote. Effectively you are saying that the non Aldercritter folks shouldn’t challenge or question their elected officials by name as to why they are voting a certain way because it makes you uncomfortable to see them challenged in such a manner. Did you feel the same way when Setti was being challenged on Engine 6? Is it ever appropriate to call out an aldercritter individually in your mind?
I sympathize with Emily (and Amy to some smaller extent). It is hard to be questioned on a decision that you feel you made in the best interests of the community. But without a conversation, there can be no common ground or compromise. And I’ll note that common ground and compromise were definitely possible throughout the process, but at this point it is (a) a new building, or (b) a parking lot. I haven’t seen Emily or Amy make too many attempts (or any) to improve the building or the ASP proposal. Perhaps I am incorrect in that. Mostly I’ve heard them say no. And it sounds like they are going to say no in their special permit capacity. A conversation and compromise takes two voices Bob.
In an effort to bridge the gap here, encourage conversation, and improve community relations in Newtonville, I really would like the folks who feel these conversations are over the top and too personal to tell us what they would have preferred? Wouldn’t the Tab editorial calling out Emily have spurred that conversation independently? It was the Tab, not this blog, that called attention to the Sierra club connection (I didn’t know of the connection, nor to be honest do I find it to be more than a curiousity at this point).
If I was in Emily’s shoes or in Amy’s shoes, I’d have written an open letter to the Newtonville community, spelling out in great detail why I don’t like the ASP proposal. Why I thought something could be better. Or why I thought the parking lot was so important that it couldn’t change. Emily doesn’t just represent her supporters, she represents me and the 50% of the village that would support the change.
We all agree that our aldercritters are nice people individually. They all have families and loved ones, and they all care about Newton. That is true for everyone from Setti on down. That shouldn’t stop these conversations, it should be the underlying basis of respect that allow us to HAVE them. And I feel it is very important to have them. Austin Street probably isn’t going to be approved. But over the next 20 years, there will be other Austin Streets. I firmly believe that it is vital for our elected officials to know that they don’t vote in a vacuum, that these decisions have consequences, and that they can’t only address the cocoon of their own supporters, but the entire community.
Just my 2 cents.
I rarely disagree with Bob so here’s a first. Emily ran her first campaign on opposition to this project. She took it on from day 1 and has periodically responded with isolated facts to back up her opposition. However, she hasn’t articulated her reasoning, other than yet another set of isolated facts (rickety steps to the commuter rail, we’ll all still have cars, late trains, etc.) and she has yet to articulate a vision for this property other than “I liked another project more”.
When an Alderman runs a campaign with a major focus on an issue and it’s 5 days before the vote on that issue, it’s reasonable and appropriate to question closely the whys and wherefores of her/his position.
Jane,
If Emily has Responded with Isolated Facts from Day One, on Austin Street How is it that she could not have Articulated her reasoning ? Another bogus argument to tear down resistance to a major mistake in city planning.
Austin Street project is a confused mess , a pile of mobile homes, cobbled together, with a bunch of liberal verbiage in an attempt to assuage political insiders guilt for living in an upper middle class community. Get over it, we are privilidged to be able to live here, not everybody is able to afford to, and we should not feel like we should throw out some crumbs in the form of a few rickety apartments to make us feel better.
Blueprint Bill has just summed up his no argument with his usual dignity. If that doesn’t convince aldermen to vote yes, I don’t know what will.
If we have learned something from this past winter every business should have AT LEAST a core group of workers that live close by. Having an entire workforce coming from far away because they can’t afford to live close not only adds to climate change, but reduces the ability of companies to be resilient when issues occur.
Greg
And Thank you for your usual personal slander. You true colors.
‘Your’ true colors, once again flying.
Ho ho ho Blueprintbill.
You think creating a transit oriented project by an award winning developer where one-out-of-every-three apartments meets the state standard as affordable is throwing “out some crumbs”?
Man you are such a grinch!
Merry Christmas!
Yes,.. Crumbs in the form of a mobile home ,.. Is like Santa leaving coal in our stockings.
See http://www.cm-h.com
Blue, I clicked on the link, I’m not really sure I get the comparison. Is this a comment on the Green Staxs thing? If so, perhaps I’m being a bit obtuse, but I really don’t get it.