Coming up for this Wednesday’s Zoning and Planning Committee meeting:
#214-12 ALD. DANBERG, BLAZAR, SCHWARTZ proposing an ordinance which would enable the city to respond to properties which are so inadequately cared for, often by absentee owners, as to constitute a nuisance, not only to properties nearby but also to the public at large, with the understanding that timely intervention may help prevent the loss of such properties to severe neglect, excess accumulation of trash or unsightly collectables, inside or out, or even eventual abandonment. [07-09-12]
Sometimes it’s negligence, sometimes inability to keep up. What’s the city’s role in dictating how properties are to be kept? Should this be limited to public health issues or extended to nuisance issues? Where does one draw the line?
Various details of that quote make be uneasy. The two phrases in there that particularly rang my alarm bell was “unsightly” and “inside or out”. My concerns with these kinds of ordinances are that they set the stage and give legal tools and powers to neighbors to meddle with each other in places where they shouldn’t.
Legitimate public safety issues – sure, but “I don’t like the look of your yard, or what you keep in it” – no, I don’t think that should not be given legal standing.
From a personal point of view, I do have a nearby neighbor that such a law could definitely be applied to. I’d love to see them clean up their property or sell it to a more responsible homeowner. That being said, I still don’t think I or any other neighbor should be given the power to dictate how they look after their house and property … other than safety issues.
Here is what happens when government attempts to legislate taste. Follow the link at the bottom of the article to the real story (not the internet urban legend).
I remember in the 80’s, there was a house in Newtonville that was set onto girders of some
sort that left about 5 feet between it and the ground. The owner’s intent was to rebuild the foundation, but he ran
out of money, then out of town, leaving a very unsafe situation for a neighborhood full
of children. The house remained in this condition for years while the city tried to deal with it.
As I recall it was eventually condemned and removed, but the process took much too long.
Maybe the word “nuisance” should be replaced by a phrase that refers to public safety.
I have to wonder if the city already has the right to act in cases of public safety.
Adam-I’m sure that the city has the right to act, but I’m not sure if it has the right to act in a timely manner to a safety concern. The situation I described occurred 30 years ago and the ordinances may have been updated. However, if there hasn’t been an update, then I can assure you that the process is lengthy and frustrating. Given that it’s the Ward 6 Aldermen proposing this ordinance, I suspect the issue is a troubling level of neglect of a property that has developed into a safety issue.
Jane
I’d guess not, since safety isn’t even mentioned and as Adam suggested, the city almost certainly already has the power to act on safety issues – even if maybe they have been very slow in the past as you described.
This looks more like an attempt to legislate some level of aesthetic maintenance (“nuisance” … “trash” … “upkeep” … “unsightly”) rather than public health/safety issues.
I’d love to hear more details from one of the sponsoring aldermen.
We keep our yard relatively clean. However a few of my neighbors have nice flowers and gardens….I don’t want to be outed by my neighbors just because I don’t garden. My grass is cut every two weeks, but I don’t sweep my front walk and sidewalk neatly. I would be concerned that one specific neighbor would report me should she have the ability ….because I don’t garden and sweep. In no way do I have junk….but I would want very specific details in the rule. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
I thought it might be helpful to this discussion to use the actual language of the proposed amendment (starts on page 17) as a jumping off point. Here it is. Discuss.
Thanks Ted. Now that I read the details, I’m even more concerned.
That introduction totally contradicts itself. It says first that the purpose is “health and safety” but then reveals that it is really about “property values and neighborhood integrity”.
The details really don’t deal with health or safety at all (unkempt vegetation, broken machinery, etc), its all about enforcing aesthetics.
I think its a very bad idea … and this is from a guy who’s looking out his window at the moment at a neighbor’s “inoperable machinery … decayed furniture unusable for its intended purpose … and shrubbery which is unkempt”.
Much as I’d love for a neighbor to clean up their property to my standards, this is a bad idea.
Jerry, I’m with you bro. One person’s “junk” is another person’s “found art.”
I’ll give up my pink flamingos only when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.
I remember a house that was being built on West Newton Hill maybe 10-12 years ago. The gentleman who was building it ran into some tough financial times, and was not able to complete it fast enough. The City had him prosecuted and [if memory serves me correctly] he actually went to jail over the situation. Anyone who thinks this proposed ordinance is a good idea, would do well to remember that story. Good neighbors talk to each other about any problems. We don’t need the BOA to legislate neighborly relations. Public safety issues are one thing, but this ordinance is entirely unnecessary.
hoo boy, way too broad in scope.
I once had neighbor here in the Garden City that was upset that people weren’t raking the leaves off their lawns in the Fall to his satisfaction and they weren’t raking them quick enough. He was also upset because this meant some were blowing into his “pristine” yard. So he went into other people’s yards and, using different color magic markers, branded which leaves were coming from which house. He even “branded” leaves that were still on people’s trees. I guess he proved his point when some of these ended up in his yard…but nothing changed.
Mark Marderosian – too funny! I guess I’ll have to put magic markers on my autumn shopping list.
My recollection is that the WNH owner got his act together once the city got involved and completed a half-built house he’d let fall into serious disrepair for about 10 years. His neighbors and the city made serious efforts to talk to him, but he refused to deal with the situation. He has every right to build a house that others consider an eyesore. However, leaving a property unattended for years is a different matter. If he couldn’t afford to live on WNH (and who among us can?), then he should have sold the property.
Without question the language in this proposal could be amended, but I feel confident that at least one of the 3 Alderman would not cast aspersions on her constituents by trying to comment on/legislate taste.
Mike, Jane is correct about the West Newton house. The house was not completed and was an “attractive nuisance.” There was an in ground pool in the backyard with no fence around it and a noncompliant staircase from the second floor to the sidewalk which was plainly in violation of the code and zoning. Once the city prosecuted, the zoning and building code violations were remedied. But if the city had not done so, the situation would have probably continued, presenting safety concerns both for the public and the homeowner.
IMHO, the proposed ordinance runs afoul of certain constitutional law precepts like “void for vagueness.” That is, terms like a “substantial” amount of junk or “overgrown vegetation,” left for more than a “reasonable amount of time” is simply too ambiguous to enforce fairly within the due process guarantees of the state and federal constitutions. Unfortunately, the proposed ordinance is a dog’s dinner as drafted and will need “substantial” revision before it passes constitutional muster.
@Ted. Just interested. How does a “dog’s dinner” fit into this discussion. Is this a canine version of a blivet? I agree the wording here is quite vague. Two houses on either side of ours have been completely renovated and enlarged in recent years. Almost all of the original shrubs and trees were removed as well and beautifully landscaped lawns with sprinklers have been put in place. We have kept our ancient oak trees and totally untreated lawn in our large back yard, along with a rotting ancient wild cherry tree. It’s kind of bedraggled, but we want to keep it up as long as possible because it is a great nesting place for all kinds of woodpeckers and sap suckers. Some might consider all this an eyesore while we regard it as a natural wonder in the heart of Newton Highlands.
Ald. Hess-Mahan,
And you’re seriously considering not running for re-election? Please at least continue to be a voice of reason and sanity for long enough to put this nonsense to bed.
Signed,
Ward 3 Constituent
{Groan}
For the record, this has been an agonizing decision making process for me. I looked after my dad for almost twenty years and when he passed away this January, it left an awful gap in my life. But it also gave me some freedom to spend more time with my wife and kids and do some things I hadn’t done in years, like go away for a weekend without worrying about getting a call that would require me to return to Newton to tend to some medical issue or other.
I have loved serving the people of Newton, I love chairing Land Use, and I love communicating with y’all through the blogs, in person and by email. It gives some shape and meaning to my life in so many ways, and I would love to continue serving. My family has let me know in so many ways that they will support whatever decision I make and I have never felt any pressure from any of them to leave public service. It is all on me and I promise I will come to a decision by the end of May so that anyone who want to run has a clear path.
Thank you all for understanding.
First, I’ll second Doug’s appeal. I’m having a hard time coming to grips with Ted’s retirement from the BOA. Back to my point… I don’t believe any homeowner should ever go to prison over a zoning violation. Nevertheless, the current ordinances seem to have rectified even the extreme situation I was referring to. So why do we need this proposed ordinance?
This legislation is brought to you from the 3 Aldermen in Ward 6. Another reason why Ward 1 must secede from the City of Newton. Is there nothing better to talk about at City Hall? With proposed legislation such as this, I am thrilled I do not have to get involved in a public discussion (except for adding my 2 cents in this blog) at in the Aldermanic chambers on such dreck.
If the city’s legislature can mandate that private citizens maintain their private property, can the private citizens mandate that the city government maintain the public property? Or are we going to spend $1B on capital assets every 20 years that we just don’t bother to maintain.
Good point, Josh. Touche’!
Out of date point, Josh.
It’s unfair to suggest that our current administration is guilty of making the same deferred maintenance mistakes that were made in the past. The question now is, how do we make up for those old mistakes now without investing capital?
Greg, I found that if compensation growth was 1.5% below revenue growth from 2015-2033, it would cover all of the Capital Improvement Program projects in the year plan from 2019-2033 without the need for a Proposition 2.5 override during this time period.
The override is ostensibly going to cover the 2014-2018 projects. I am concerned that BNF neglected to inform us that compensation spending would increase by $11.4M in 2014 versus 2013. Janet and I were under the impression that the override was about new buildings.
The CAG said that Newton underspent on maintenance and infrastructure by $30M/year. It stands to reason that compensation was overfunded by $30M/year. As compensation spending has increased by another $30M/year under Mayor Warren’s watch, it’s obvious why our infrastructure is in such disrepair.
Janet, if Mayor Warren saved $178M, then why has compensation spending increased by $30M/year under his watch? Why did we even have an override?
@Josh: Why are you opposed to the concept of fairly compensating the men and woman who work so hard running our city and educating our children?
Josh may be missing the target by aiming at compensation, but in the context of this article he’s hit the bullseye with his comments about the City’s historical failure to maintain public property. That shot appeared targeted at those in City Hall who haven’t done their own jobs, trying to legislate the appearance of privately owned, tax paying properties. Not sure why Greg thinks that’s an “out of date point” when we continue to find the wrong solutions to repairing and upgrading infrastructure. Modulars??? Hahaha, give me a break!
I went to the alderman’s committee meeting last night, firmly against the idea. I came home with a slightly different attitude.
I think the current, very preliminary, wording of the proposed ordinance is full of things that I would object to. At the meeting though, a group of 8 or so neighbors came and told about a problem in their neighborhood. A homeowner has filled his entire property from end to end with random junk, effectively turning the property into a junkyard. It sounds like the root problem may be a mental health issue. In any case, a large group of neighbors has spent a few years wrestling with it but the city says that they have no authority to intervene.
It may be possible to draft a very narrow ordinance, with clear objective standards, that only targets these sort of very extreme cases. The current preliminary draft of the ordinance isn’t that though.
The biggest problems I see is that the section on “unkempt vegetation” is a
subjective cudgel that could be used by any cranky neighbor in the city. Also, the reference to property values as the ordinance’s rationale is worrisome. Once that’s an acceptable reason for regulation, pretty much anything from clotheslines to shaggy bushes can then become the subject of regulation.
I definitely have some sympathy for the neighbors dealing with this particular issue. If the aldermen are determined to proceed, I hope that they can come up with a much more narrowly drawn ordinance that objectively targets just these really extreme sort of cases.
Mike, Emily Norton said it best when she said City leaders have allowed school-related costs to rise at nearly 6% a year, double the rate of increase in our revenues. They have covered the gap by underinvesting in building maintenance.
http://www.greatnewtonschools.org/needs-improvement.html
I would also add that Newton also sold off schools at dirt cheap prices (Carr was sold off in the 1980s for $350K, Newton bought it back in 2000 for $2.1M and is spending $12.7M to reconfigure it back into an elementary school. The city of Newton closed Murray Road and Davis and now we have those modulars on Burr, Franklin and Horace-Mann.
Greg, Bill Heck said it best when he said that Newton is a City, not a school district. Yet school related spending is approaching 65% of Newton’s budget. During the override, I pointed out how Hingham Public Schools has had comparable performance to Newton Public Schools even though they spend less per student and offered lower compensation packages. Compared to Hingham, Newton taxpayers pay more for less. And we pay enough.
I could discuss at least a dozen more districts that spend less but get a comparable or better result than Newton but as I told Jerry on another thread, I’ll include that in my research that I’ll publish on or before October.
@Josh: I like to think I said it best (but you ignored me) when I asked why you are so opposed to properly compensating the men and women who work hard on our behalf for the city and educating our children? No offense to Hingham but we’re a city with different challenges, a more complex infrastructure, more sprawl, more roads, more sidewalks, more crime and a more diverse population to serve. Why should we expect compensation or anything else to be the same?
Also, we can certainly learn from mistakes of the past when shortsighted leaders sold/closed schools in the 80s but you do realize that none of those folks are in charge now right?
Greg, I’m not opposed to properly compensating the men and women who work hard on our behalf for the city and educating our children. If we didn’t overcompensate them to the extent that we do, we wouldn’t have had quinquennial overrides since 2002.
http://village14.com/netwon-ma/2013/05/legislating-maintenance-of-private-property/#ixzz2UoR4KfQs
School spending drives the city’s budget. Ever since members of the Newton Democrat City Committee have had an iron group on Newton’s government (since 1994), school spending has tripled. I think Bill Heck said it best when he said taxpayers could tolerate this spending surge if the School Committee used these dollars to maintain and improve buildings, but they didn’t. The School Committee didn’t use the dollars to institute foreign languages in our elementary schools, either. And, the School Committee didn’t use the dollars to institute tuition-free full-day kindergarten or to create cutting edge 21st century technology programs that improve education and reduce costs.
The School Committee did, however, spend the money “elsewhere” to feed the status quo. Compensation costs within Newton Public Schools now represent 84.3 percent of its $187.7 million budget (up from 83% in 1995), and that is too much.
And I think I’ll say it best when I ask you why does Newton have to pay nearly 50% more than Hingham on a per capita basis for schools and school buildings yet Hingham does a better job with the resources it has. I have a strong thesis as to why Newton pays ~50% more per student and for comparably sized buildings but I can’t justify Newton’s current status quo.
Josh, Josh, Josh. There you go again. And again. And again. You keep citing mistakes from years past to support your 2013 criticisms. And you keep talking about compensation like it’s entirely frivolous. Teachers are not frivolous to education , they’re central.
Could our schools do better? You betcha. Are there things to criticize right now? Yes.
The part I don’t get is you’re a young guy but you carry-on like some bitter old fogy.
Anyway, I’ll leave you to enjoy your journey in the way back machine without me. Keep Newton Safe & Strong, will ya?
Looks like this thread has been definitively hijacked. Now lets move that “is Newton spending to much on schools” discussion over to the “Mayor Basbas died this weekend” thread 😉
Greg, there you go again with your “it’s all in the past mantra”.
Unfortunately, Setti Warren’s annual spending growth from 2010-2018 is projected to exceed David Cohen’s annual spending growth from 2002-2010.
We were sold a tax increase on the basis of initial steps towards reform and future reforms. I’m here to make sure that Newton taxpayers are getting those future reforms.
The members who made up Moving Newton Forward With Fiscal Responsibility had a series of concerns about Newton’s fiscal that led them to oppose the override. Mayor Warren’s Five Year Financial Forecast is one of our concerns. And please don’t get me started on OPEB and pensions.
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/47016
As for Keeping Newton Safe & Strong, didn’t you and Gail support the 2002 override as well? It appears that you and Gail never met a tax increase you didn’t support.
Joshua –
I never expressed a public opinion on the 2002 override. You have no idea what I supported or how I voted.
I can’t figure out if Josh wants to be Joe McCarthy or Grover Norquist when he grows up.
Gail, because you supported Newton North and because you and Greg supported the 2008 override when you were running the TAB, the likelihood that you and Greg opposed David Cohen’s first override is very small.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/opinion/opinion_columnists/x1007222125/Globe-writer-responds-to-three-year-vendetta?zc_p=0#axzz2NiVvITdb
Is that right, Joshua? Perhaps then you can tell me this then: I supported Clinton and Obama for president, O’Brien (albeit reluctantly) and Patrick for governor. Do you also know how I’ve voted for every president and governor?
Greg, there are two things you need to consider:
1. With regards to your attempt to compare me to Joe McCarthy, I’ll defer to Senator Ted Cruz on that one.
2. The only interest that I have in whether people supported David Cohen, Newton North, the 2002 override or the 2008 override is because we were sold a 2013 tax increase based on “reform from reformers”. And yet so many of the people who were selling the “reform from reformers” override were the same people who supported David Cohen, Newton North, the 2002 override and or the 2008 override.
Such people and organizations include Rob Gifford, Sarah Ecker, Chris Hill, Gail Spector, Ted Hess-Mahan, Greg Reibman, the Newton TAB & Marcia Tabenken for starters.
When Citizens for Building Newton’s Future in order to Keep Newton Safe and Strong and to Move Newton Forward push their 2018 override based on “reform from reformers”, I would prefer to see real reforms from real reformers.
I don’t want to see people who supported the override in 2008 turn around and push an override in 2013 demanding $11.4M in new annual taxes for a laundry list of spending projects when the city increased compensation spending by $30M/year during that time period.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/opinions/letters/x1308514674/Letters-The-Override?zc_p=5#axzz2TmyzeJEG
When annual spending increases by $66M/year under an administration run by reformers, I don’t want to hear about how someone saved $178M.
I don’t want to hear about how 1% annual enrollment growth represents a “surge of enrollment”.
I don’t want to hear about how we need an operating override to accommodate a couple hundred more SPED and ELL kids when we have a couple hundred SPED and ELL kids in our school system who don’t even live in Newton.
Furthermore, I don’t want to hear that 500+ non-resident kids don’t represent a material cost yet a similar number of Newton kids requires over $500M in new spending for buildings according to the CIP.
With regards to compensation, I believe that spending on maintenance and improvement of capital assets should come first. If proper funding of capital assets means that teachers have to make due with a 1.5% raise instead of a 2.5% raise, then that is what needs to happen. Besides, I remember Dan Fahey opposing the 2009 wage freeze because he felt it didn’t go far enough.
If you can explain to me why it is wrong for me to expect truth in advertising, I’m willing to listen.
Gail, I’m not taking issue with you for supporting Democrat politicians and left-wing political causes.
What I don’t find helpful is someone who publicly supported Newton North and the 2008 override telling Newton residents that “It’s time to get over Newton North”.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1781247560/Gail-Spector-Its-time-to-get-over-Newton-North#axzz2UqM26EUH
I don’t support paying higher taxes to bail out the messes that came about due to the causes you supported.
Another thing I don’t find helpful is that same person telling Newton residents to forget about NNHS getting out of control when the cost of Angier has increased by 25% in the last twelve months. How come BNF did not publicize that? How come BNF overlooked the fact that Hingham did their elementary school for $27M, versus $37.5M-$45M for Newton?
Finally, I don’t like being sold an $11.4M/year override for infrastructure only to turn around and see compensation spending increase by $11.4M/year because the override passed.
Yes, that’s exactly how I remember it – Dan, Jeff, and Emily were ardent supporters of the previous overrides and Site Plan 5a and Mayor Cohen. And here they were singing the same tired song in 2013. Some things never change.
…and when Mayor Cohen retired he gave the TAB a special award for being 100 percent in support of his every initiative and never once scrutinizing his handling of city finances or the high school. I’ll never forget how proud I was to stand with Gail on the podium that day with the Newton Firefighters, who also supported the override so therefore will forever be on Josh
MaCarthy’sNorman’s enemy list.Tricia, from the rhetoric that BNF was peddling, I was under the impression that there were more people who genuinely opposed David Cohen, Site Plan 5a and the 2008 override but willing to vote for the 2013 override.
From what I remembered, Rob Gifford was a Co-Chairman behind the 2008 override and an Honorary Co-Chairman for the 2013 override.
From what I recalled, it was No Show Joe DeNucci’s daughter-in-law demanding Site Plan 5a as well as the 2013 override. No Show Joe himself was a long time supporter of David Cohen and supported Cohen’s 2008 override.
Last I checked, Sarah Ecker and Chris Hill played a major role in the 2008 override campaign and endorsed the 2013 campaign.
Last I checked, Emily Prenner and Marcia Tabenken were public supporters of the 2008 override campaign and were the Co-Chairpersons of the 2013 override.
And I do recall that the Newton TAB endorsed the 2008 override while the leadership of the TAB during that time period (Greg and Gail) also supported
Joshua – You completely avoided my question. But you know that.
Greg, I asked you a simple question as to why it is wrong for me to expect truth in advertising and either you are unable or unwilling to answer it.
I asked you for a simple answer to a simple question, not snide sarcasm.
I’ll ask you another question. Why exactly does expecting accountability in government as well as political campaigns give you the justification to engage in smear tactics?
Joshua – There’s no question that there were a substantial number of people who opposed the 2008 override and supported the 2013 override. The first one failed at the polls and the 2nd one passed.
Joshua Norman, I don’t usually address bloggers this way unless they really deserve it, but you are acting like a real horse’s ass. Why don’t you dial it back a few and make your points without the nastiness? Just my $0.02.
Ted, the only ones making nasty remarks are you and Greg.
Please don’t engage in defensive-deflective projectionism with me.
Jerry, it would be interesting to see who genuinely opposed 2008 but supported 2013.
The amount of yes votes in 2013 declined by nearly 13% relative to 2008
But the amount of no votes in 2008 declined by over 40% relative to 2008
I suspect that the biggest group swing voters from 2008 to 2013 will be those that went from voting in 2008 to not voting in 2013.
I have to agree with Charlie Shapiro when he said that “This was not a landslide, this was not a mandate. The NO side has a chance right now to act as a credible, forward thinking watchdog.” I believe that the research that my group and I will conduct on pensions, OPEB, school buildings and union contracts over the next ~5 months will solidify that.
Yes, Joshua, as Jerry points out there were a substantial number of people who opposed the 2008 override and supported the 2013 override, as evidenced by the failure of the former and the passage of the latter. I was one of them. I also opposed 5a and was no fan of the former mayor, if you’re keeping track. At the same time, I know for a fact that none of the folks you mention above “demanded” anything – they worked hard to pass something they believed was the right thing to do in 2008, but the majority of voters disagreed. Whether I agreed with them or not I never doubted their motives. Now you, on the other hand… these ridiculous Howie Carr-like smears really have no place in local discussions. Newton may be a city, but in many ways it’s a small town, and we all live here. In real life.
Tricia, Howie Carr doesn’t engage in smears.
Ted and Greg were unable to respond to facts that I presented to them so they resorted to smears.
Unfortunately, it appears that you are joining them.
With regards to your whole “I opposed 5a, the 2008 override and was no fan of the former mayor”, A lot of people have made that claim. How would I be able to verify yours?
Ha ha ha ha
How about all agree that both the 2008 and 2013 overrides are all over. By all means, lets talk about fiscal and budget issues going forward, and certainly use historic data when necessary. There’s nothing to be gained though in making anyone’s case based on details of who supported which override and what their imagined motives were.
The precipitous drop in No votes from 2008 to 2013 should clue you in that the argument against the override in 2008 was more compelling (for a variety of reasons), and so more folks were motivated to get out and vote No to try to stop it. The fact that folks didn’t come out in the same numbers to stop the override in 2013 implies their consent.
OK Jerry.
As I said before, my fellow alumni from Moving Newton Forward With Fiscal Responsibility and I are concerned about Newton’s financial projections from 2014 to 2018. And please don’t get me started on OPEB and pensions.
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/47016
I’m a little confused as to how the rating agencies have given the City of Newton a AAA credit rating. Newton’s balance sheet has too much resemblance to the McClatchy newspaper company as far as I’m concerned due to the underfunded Pension/OPEB issues plaguing both companies. At least Newton’s balance sheet isn’t as bad as Gatehouse Media’s though.
Tricia, I thought that the precipitous drop in No votes from 2008 to 2013 was due to the fact that there wasn’t even a NO campaign until six weeks before the election.
Although my group made comparable voter outreach in those last six weeks as the YES group, we started too late and were not able to make up the 14 week deficit we gave ourselves.
Fortunately, my fellow compatriots had a long and productive strategic discussion pertaining to those issues. I will ensure that the opposition to the 2018 override will start around the same time as the pro-override crowd launch their efforts.
It’s no skin off my nose, Joshua Norman, but you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
Ted, thanks for the advice. I recommend you follow it first, show me how its done.
As for honey and vinegar, if you look at the City of Newton’s financial forecast from 2014 to 2018 and its actuarial studies for its pension plans and OPEB plans, I don’t think all the bees throughout the world could create enough honey to sweeten the bitter financial picture that the City of Newton is facing.
Okay, Joshua Norman. But, at some point, when it seems that everyone is against you, it’s probably you.
Ted, with regards to “it seems that everyone is against you”, I beg to differ. At least 8,000 people were with me in March. Not bad for six weeks of organized activity.
I have four years and 10 months to figure out how to please more people as possible if I want to engage in a successful defense of a future override or to prevent one from occurring.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1433796593/The-day-after-the-override-vote-Newton-officials-promise-work-will-continue?zc_p=1
Meanwhile, as I’m strengthening my communications message and approach, Newton will still have to deal with over $500M in unfunded OPEB/Pension liabilities and over $300M of outstanding debt primarily relating to school buildings over the next five years. And I’m being generous with OPEB by using the 7.75% funded discount rate ($601M for OPEB alone if I use the unfunded 2% discount rate that Newton has to use in the audited financial statements).
OK, this is getting ridiculous. No, check that, this is getting more and more ridiculous every moment.
8,000 people were not with you and your politics of division. These 8,000 Newton voters do not judge their neighbors and fellow residents harshly because they may have held a non-Josh Norman approved political litmus test based on views held five or ten years ago.
The overwhelming majority of the 8,000 or so folks who decided they were against a tax hike for (no doubt a wide variety of reasons) have NEVER HEARD OF JOSH NORMAN.
And if Josh Norman had never entered the scene, the override would have still attracted 8,000 or at least 7,999 no votes.
Greg, with regards to this is getting more and more ridiculous, you’re wrong. You’re the only one getting more and more ridiculous every moment.
I do not judge my neighbors and fellow residents harshly because they may have held a non-Greg Reibman approved political litmus test based on views currently held.
I disagree that my presence had no impact. I believe that without my presence, the NO campaign would have been lucky to get the 26% that Mitt Romney got in Newton and he had more resources at his disposal than I did.
If anyone is engaging in politics of division, it is you, not me.
I see myself as a taxpayer who is funding and purchasing services as well as potentially purchasing ideas from political campaigns. I merely expect accountability in government as well as political campaigns. I can understand why you have taken issue with my expectations.
I think Sam Robbins said it best when he said “Don’t care what they call you just as long as you’re right”. Since I know that I’m right and you are wrong, I don’t care what you say.
Gail, I thought I made it clear that I didn’t have any interest in how you voted for President and Governor. If not, here’s my answer “I don’t care how you voted for President and Governor”.
And if you didn’t write any opinion pieces telling Newton residents to “get over Newton North” in order to help push a recent override, I wouldn’t have cared how you voted for Newton North. Nor would I have cared that the Newton TAB endorsed the 2008 override while you were serving in your capacity as Editor of the TAB and while Greg was serving as editor in chief and publisher of the TAB.
Or are these litmus tests as well?
Does he know any other tricks aside from this override thing. Something like: http://tinyurl.com/overide-ride
Joshua Norman says:
I don’ know who Sam Robbins is, but the quote itself reminds me of the Dunning Kruger Effect.
@Hoss, that video offered some much needed comic relief. Thanks, dude.
@Hoss – Loved it!
… and now back to our normally scheduled thread…
At the aldermen’s Zoning and Planning Committee Meeting on Wednesday, it sounded like they’re not planning on rushing a new ordinance through. I think they were planning on bringing in some city staff (Inspectional Services?) for the next meeting, to find out more about what the issues are, how they handle them now, and what limits they have with the current ordinances.
Ted, if you are running this year, you should get to know Sam Robbins. He lives in your Ward.
As for Dunning & Kruger, I don’t have to worry about that.
If anything, I shouldn’t have relied on 32 members of the Newton Democratic City Committee to engage in simple tasks such as balancing the budget of the city/school department without having to draw down prior year’s free cash reserve (Hat Tip Newton CFO Maureen Lemieux).
I shouldn’t have relied on other people to evaluate Newton’s financial balance sheet (or at least before 2013).
I shouldn’t have relied on Ted Hess-Mahan’s rhetoric in which he expressed concerns about ensuring accountability in Newton on his website only to support tax increases which .
I shouldn’t have relied on Ted Hess-Mahan’s rhetoric in which he expressed concerns about affordable housing in Newton on his website only to support tax increases which has put $23M into the pot in order to continue the status quo.
I shouldn’t have relied on people’s claims that “Newton was a built out city” while we were restricting building height to 2.5 stories and 20% of our land is open space. While I can agree that Newton is a highly populated mature market, I draw the line at “Newton’s built out” when we’re restricting building height to 2.5 stores historically and 5 stories as of recently.
And I shouldn’t have relied on people’s rhetoric on the campaign trail would correspond with the results that they would achieve once elected.
So we’ve now officially entered the theatre of the absurd so it was just too hard to ignore this JN quote:
“I have four years and 10 months to figure out how to please more people as possible…”
Wow.
Although you may not like Joshua Norman’s approach (or mine) to the subject of city finances in Newton, there is no question in my mind he understands the number better than anyone I have seen comment on this blog. (Greg, I am wearing purple today, BTW.) If you knowledgeably and intelligently disagree with Joshua’s reading of Newton’s dire financial position, then argue with him on these facts and let the rest go by the wayside.
Thank you Janet!
It is absolutely refreshing to see such perspicacious insight on this thread from someone other than myself.
Janet – My comment, as well as the comments of others, relate to the tone of Josh Norman’s posts. If he thinks he can convince anyone of anything, he first needs to figure out how to communicate effectively.
Jane, I beg to differ. The only people with a negative tone were Greg, Gail, Ted and Hoss.
Janet Sterman, I’m trying to figure out Newton Politics in general and Greg Reibman in particular. It’s most definitely a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. So far I can see that key isn’t consistency in rhetoric and results of governance or editing and publishing a newspaper.
Greg Reibman writes this article asking about the next generation of Newton’s leaders.
http://village14.com/netwon-ma/2013/01/wheres-the-next-generation-of-newtons-leaders/#axzz2UuoQ8lbb
Yet while he and Gail were running the Newton TAB, they endorsed Carleton Merrill over you.
They endorsed Rob Gifford’s wife against Olivia Mathews
They endorsed the 2008 override
They endorsed Newton North “Stop Talking and Start Building: Vote Yes”
They endorsed Setti & Ruth against Bill Heck
They endorsed Martha Coakley for re-election in 2010
They endorsed Verne & Sydra Schnipper (Twofer for Sydra) against Jeff Seideman
They endorsed Ruthanne Fuller against Jeff Seideman
They endorsed Barney Frank against Sean Bielat
They endorsed Deval Patrick for election even though he’s 100% Dunning-Kruger
They endorsed John Rice over Anil Adyanthaya
They endorsed Reenie Murphy against Margaret Albright
They endorsed Jonathan Yeo against Margaret Albright
Maybe you can tell what exactly do they have against Margaret?
Maybe you can explain to me how they can position themselves as expressing concern over Newton’s civic leadership yet continue to support the same old crowd that is devoted to more taxes, more spending and more borrowing?
Greg and Gail call this a political litmus test. I can conclude with all candor that your cousin-in-law Gail and the Connecticut born Greg are a cornucopian cacophony of inconsistency.
Except for that time they did endorse Janet… http://blogs.wickedlocal.com/newton/2007/09/12/tabs-ward-1-endorsement/
And at other times, Swiston, Brandel, and Epstein. Not exactly same old same.
Joshua Norman — You realize that what you write is sometimes uncomfortable to read? Not the numbers; your focus on yourself for example. How can someone complement themselves so easily? There’s more that’s uncomfortable. You badger teachers w no shame, but we haven’t heard such bitter rhetoric about cops, firefighters or DPW workers. What’s up w dat? The Newton override was the 2nd week of March and here we are entering June and you’re fixating on override issues. Why? I noticed when Greg tried to ask who you’re trying to be – he left out another conservative that focused intensively with taxes. Her name is Barbara Anderson, who was VERY popular 30 years ago. Her fixation was both on taxes and the cost of waste, fraud, abuse and outright criminal behavior. She was dead one right about very important topics. If you think Newton City Hall under Setti Warren needs to do something around the topics of criminal use of power, then THAT would be an interesting focus.
Josh is lighting up the blog! It’s June, dead time in the Newton blogosphere, and this is the 75th response.
“…cornucopian cacophony of inconsistency.”
We’ve got ourselves the reincarnation of Spiro T. Agnew. Not a great career path.
But when you don’t pay real estate taxes, don’t have kids in the schools- in other words, no skin in the game- you’ve got no perspective…. and don’t know it.
Earth to Josh, these votes are always approximately 55-45, win or lose. With or without you. Seideman thought that he had the support of the NO voters.That 55% of the electorate voted for HIM, so he ran for alderman and found out otherwise.( Is that the Dunning-Kruger effect?)
You really think that on any given day Moe, Larry or Curly can’t convince 45% of the voters NOT TO INCREASE THEIR OWN TAXES?
ONLY 45% voted against raising their taxes? Not something you should put on your resume dude.
Tricia, are we talking about the same Bill Brandel that is so far to the left, he opposed naming rights ($2.1M/year)? Are we talking about the same Bill Brandel who sponsored the Brangiolo override compromise with Amy Sangiolo?
With the exception of Greer, The TAB’s policy has basically gone on to support their favorite Newton Democrat. I’ve shown 13 instances of the TAB supporting the same old crowd while you’ve shown maybe four examples of the TAB bucking the establishment.
Hoss, How can I complement myself so easily? Because I know the numbers better than at least 95% of Newton’s “inside baseball crowd” even though I’ve only been actively involved in civic affairs for 5 months. Because I know what to look for. Because even well-known Newton Democrats like Kenny Parker were shocked as to how close this past election was. He didn’t think it should have been close at all! Because I’m able to find ways to reinforce my group’s arguments each and every day. Because I was able to identify and recruit talented people to my team. And because I saw the need and opportunity for our group to be able to reform ourselves into a new organization that will serve as a permanent fiscal watchdog.
I don’t recall saying much about municipal-side workers, let alone badgering them. I haven’t even said that much about teachers per se. However I have to draw the line at taxpayers paying nearly half of the salary of the Teachers Union president. How exactly is that for the children again?
If you can find a way to say that Newton taxpayers pay 48% per student than Hingham on a general fund basis yet Hingham gets better test scores that isn’t uncomfortable to read, feel free to share it with me, ok? OK! We all know that the reason is compensation. I told Jerry that I’ll be comparing the school systems on or before October. My thesis is Newton Public Schools cost more than Hingham Public Schools for the following reasons:
Newton teachers have a lower student workload than Hingham teachers
Newton teachers have a higher average salary than Hingham
Newton teachers have a higher health insurance benefit package than Hingham
Feel free to second guess me if you’d like.
I’m not fixated on override issues but I am rightfully concerned about that ghastly Five Year Forecast. I’m even more concerned that if Newton continues on its current trend of financial trajectory, its balance sheet will be comparable to Gatehouse Media. Newton’s unfunded Pension/OPEB reminds me too much of the McClatchy newspaper company (MNI has over $700M in unfunded retirement benefits and I’ve already discussed Newton’s intractable OPEB/Pension problem).
JHolden, we renters pay plenty of real estate taxes. Only we can’t write it off on our income taxes because its embedded in our rent.
None of the elected School Committee members have ever attended Newton Public Schools whereas I have. So that’s another area in which you demonstrated that you have no idea what you’re talking about.
As for taking issue with me getting 45% against the override, if you’re so impressed with BNF’s 55-45 victory, why exactly did Hingham passed their last two operating overrides by a 63-37 margin (2004) and a 67-33 margin (2011). Last I checked, Hingham Democrats are less than 26% of Hingham’s registered voters whereas Newton Democrats are nearly half of Newton’s registered voters. Hingham got higher margins than Newton for their overrides even though Hingham doesn’t have as many voters who are naturally disposed to more taxes, spending and borrowings.
Who cares about these ridiculous endorsements – it only makes local politics like a high school popularity contest. The nasty things that Greg said about folks like Charlie Shapiro and Tom Sheff were totally the wrong way to go about endorsing their opponents. Like him or not, Shapiro actually got something DONE while he sat on the Board of Aldermen.
Similarly, Brooke Lipsitt and Jonathan Yeo (with all of their persuasive ‘former this-and that’ titles) are running the campaign for Eve Tapper who is running for Ward 2 Alderman. Who is impressed? Are endorsements an effective way of choosing for whom to vote? I don’t think so… case in point – most MA Democratic candidates look to be ‘endorsed’ by the unions (MA AFL-CIO, firefighters, etc.). However most blue collar workers are either Republican or un-enrolled and tend to vote against legislators who are likely to raise taxes. So the endorsement of the unions means bupkis as it doesn’t necessarily equate to votes.
If you don’t know who to vote for, show up, leave your ballot blank, and vote. The blank ballot says you cared enough to vote but didn’t feel any candidate had something interesting enough to stand out and convince you to vote for one cream puff over the other. In the same vein, I really believe voting for any candidate running unopposed is really foolish. How else are we to know the unopposed candidate is smart enough to cast the one vote needed to the election?! 😉
Janet, you know better than that. Everyone knows that local politics is an extension of high school popularity contests.
@JHolden
FYI, of an estimated 46,000 registered voters in Newton, 17,882 showed up and voted (including absentee voters) on March 12, 2013. I am not a giant in the world of Mathematics, but I do own a calculator and know that only 38% of the electorate in Newton even bothered to vote yea or nay on the three override questions. Thusly, Q1 had 9,649 yes votes (20.9% of the electorate), Q2 had 9,904 yes votes (21.5% of the electorate) and Q3 had 9,879 yes votes (21.5% of the electorate). Percentage of the electorate that voted no was Q1, 17.8%; Q2, 17.2%; and Q3, 17.2%. Considering we all pay real estate taxes – renters, homeowners, and business owners alike, it’s an extremely sad state of affairs more Newtonians didn’t come out and claim their right to say whether or not they wanted an increase in their tax dollars.
Joshua Norman — As a landlord I can tell you quite frankly that no matter how much my taxes, mortgages, roof repairs or lengths of vacancies are — unfortunately, none of it is passed on to a renter. None. You pay precisely what others would pay for the same apartment. There’s really no math in rental rates — you look at what the market bears. If an apartment needed deleading and there was a 5 month vacancy (tens of thousands spent), would you have that understanding and pay a make-up rental rate? No way. Same w local taxes.
Since we know you’ll need to respond, my final question is who are these people that you suggest that you are leading, post-override? You keep referring to “my group” but where are these individuals? I don’t see anyone identifying with you openly supporting you w your blog comments
@Joshua Norman
I have met Sam Robbins from Ward 3. Thanks for the clarification.
If you are not deducting your rent on your state income tax, you need a new tax preparer. Here is what the DOR tax guide says:
Anti-override efforts in Newton have, shall we say, a colorful history. After the successful 2002 override, the Newton Taxpayers Association, led by Len Mead, Brian Camenker and Tom Mountain, hired a private investigator to retrieve a paper cup from the trash at a public event at the Library so they could send my saliva off to Toronto for DNA testing. They were really hoping that I had licked the envelopes containing the notorious “hate letter” that went out the weekend before the election, which they blamed for the override passing. I had worked as a volunteer on the campaign and apparently I was the leading “suspect.” I will let Jay Groob, the private investigator, and Len Mead take up the story from there:
When the author, Doug Most, called me to confirm the facts regarding the event at the Library for his story in Boston Magazine, I was kind of suspicious because he didn’t really seem interested in the event itself. Eventually, after a vigorous cross examination, he got around to telling me that the NTA had hired a PI to follow “suspects” and collect DNA samples which they hoped would link one of them to saliva on the flaps of the envelopes containing copies of the so-called “hate letter.” I was shocked to say the least. Then I recalled that a week or so earlier there was a car idling across the street from my house on trash day at 5AM when I brought out the trash and recycling. I thought he might have been lost or was having trouble finding a particular address. So, being the friendly and helpful person I am, I walked across the street to see if he needed help. Before I got to the car, he peeled out and headed towards Watertown at high speed.
I saw Tom Mountain at City Hall after the Boston Magazine article came out and went to shake his hand. Tom started sweating and asked me if I was mad. I told him I wasn’t. I even joked with him that the next time he wanted a DNA sample from me he should hold out his hands and I would be happy to spit in them. No hard feelings, Tom.
While I can laugh about these Keystone Kops antics now, I thought it was all pretty damned creepy at the time. I used to walk my three kids to school every day, and it was unnerving to think that this PI might have been following us or taking pictures of me and my kids as part of his “hunt” for the author of the “hate letter.” The only satisfaction I got out of that whole episode was that the NTA had actually flushed a couple thousand dollars down the loo to FedEx my spit to Canada for DNA testing. Talk about wasteful spending!
A few years later, a still unidentified person was caught rifling through my desk in the Aldermanic Chamber at City Hall, looking for a sample of my handwriting. He told one of my c0lleagues he was looking for “proof” I had written the hate letter. At the suggestion of the law department, I contacted the police, who interviewed my colleagues that had seen and talked to this person. The police were unable to identify my “stalker” but it hasn’t happened since, so I don’t worry about it anymore. But I don’t mind telling you that it caused me a few sleepless nights back then.
What can I say? I lead an interesting life. 😉
So, short story long, I take it kind of personally when someone like you, Joshua Norman, starts getting personal with your harsh rhetoric. All that said, come down to City Hall and introduce yourself to me anytime. No hard feelings.
I found the link to the Boston Magazine article. Enjoy responsibly.
Ted Hess Mahan – WOW !!!!!!! What a fabulous, freaky, insane story.
@Ted: Thanks for taking the time to share that.
@Ted: And you still ran for office. Thanks for that.
Ted, I was referring to the Federal Return.
As for deducting rent on the state return, that deduction was enacted because of Proposition 2.5. However it wasn’t indexed for inflation and the $2,500 deduction enacted in the 1980s ($3,000 since ~2000) doesn’t have the same purchasing power now as it did then.
I was surprised the old Newton Taxpayers Association would have suspected you as the HateGate guy. If anything, I’d see you more as the guy, behind the guy, behind the HateGate guy.
http://edprisby.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/
Based on this thread, I have not made any harsh rhetoric, but you have. My initial comment about you was referring to the fact that you voted to put the 2013 override on the ballot, you voted for the 2008 override and you were an enthusiastic volunteer on the 2002 override. If the 2013 override wasn’t sold as “reform by reformers”, it wouldn’t have mattered to me if you (and the other people I listed) had supported Site Plan 5a, Newton North, the 2002 override or the 2008 override. Just my $0.02.
Hoss, commercial tenants are on a triple-net basis and have to pay property tax increases. Fortunately, Newton has done such a terrific job in screwing the business community in the 20 years of unchecked control by members of the Newton Democrat City Committee. I believe that in the next 20 years, if we keep up the more taxes, more spending on lavish compensation packages and more borrowing model that members of the NDCC have bestowed upon us, we’ll have less commercial activity than Sharon.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x784972242/Now-what
It wasn’t the Newton Taxpayers Association who insisted on limiting properties to 2.5 stories.
As for residential landlords in general and Massachusetts residential landlords in particular, you charge what the market will bear. Maybe landlords of larger properties are in a better position to pass on property tax increases to their tenants, maybe not. I know landlords who pass on property tax increases and those who don’t.
Hoss, WRT My group, I have been in discussions with the people from the override campaign, I’ve been reaching out to Newton citizens that voted no and I’ve had discussions with the Newton Taxpayers Association about efforts in moving Newton forward in a fiscally responsible manner. We even had a high level strategy session to discuss issues of mutual concern.
And let me ask you, why is my reference to “my group” such a concern to you that you and Jane have insisted on asking me about it. Most of the alumni from MNF as well as past and present members of the Newton Taxpayers Association haven’t heard about the Village 14 blog and most of the ones who have wouldn’t be caught dead on this blog.
Joshua Norman – You asked why is my reference to “my group” such a concern to you”
It’s part of the uncomfortableness of what you’re doing, the insertion of “my” instead of “our” along w the lack of a show of support w your non-stop rants about what teachers make, etc. You asked.
BTW — it’s the BoA’s job (and our comptroller’s job) to play nice w commercial tenants who have no vote here. Voting no or yes does not effect that, and I don’t suspect that too many Newton voters would take sacrifices because a business might take a margin hit if the BoA plays with their tax allocation.
Hoss, well I’m uncomfortable with the fact that I don’t know your real name. Who are you exactly? And why don’t you use your real name.
As for business tax allocation, the business tax allocation is 1% away from being at the maximum already.
Good luck, Joshua. I suspect you are going to need it. I will pray for you.
Gail and Greg, I’ve shared that story with you before (indeed, the Newton TAB published part of it the first time I ran for office). If anything, it strengthened my resolve.
@Ted: I know you have. Nothing wrong with thanking you more than once.
Thank you Ted. I think if I follow through on my research concerning school building costs, OPEB, Pensions and Union Contracts, I believe that my group and I will make our own luck.
I found at least 35 different topics that I want to research and evaluate and publish concerning Newton Finances. You all saw Bill Heck’s recent Letter to the Newton TAB Editor in response to Geoff Epstein. Another fellow in my group is following up on Epstein’s recent opinion pieces and I’m chipping in a response as well.
Joshua- the question of real names versus pseudonyms has come in the past here and at the Tab, and for the most part it’s been pretty much a non-issue – with the exception of occasional sock puppetry. There are many very honorable reasons why people prefer not to use their real names, and there is a great history of anonymous political and social speech: recall that the Federalist Papers were published under the pseudonym “Publius”. Moreover, people do establish an online persona and over time and in a community this size, one often does eventually learn the full name behind the post. I don’t know whether I’ve ever met Hoss in person, but we’ve had plenty of wonderful exchanges and not knowing the name behind the posts has never been an impediment to the exchange of ideas. 🙂
Lisap, You are actually the reason I started reading these blogs. One day I was searching for more details on what appeared to be an outrageous situation where a Waban kid escaped police interrogation after being involved in a fatal accident. I wondered how that was possible and you gave some legal background, outlining the limits of gov’t questioning. Fast forward to this week, I thought of exactly what you said again. Why? It was in the context of the incident with the friend of the Boston bombing suspects where the FBI (et al) entered his home and apparently was doing an interrogation (which ended with a dead suspect). We got a complicated legal system, don’t we?
Hoss – I am really very honored by your comment. Thank you. And yes, we do have a very complicated legal system. I will be closely following any and all developments regarding Attorney General Holder’s view of the public safety exception and Miranda warnings. Should be interesting!