The Aldermen’s Zoning & Planning Committee will meet to consider Mayor Warren’s proposed reappointment of Brooke Lipsitt to the Zoning Board of Appeals Monday night at 7:45.
The group Newton Villages Alliance has been organizing a letter writing campaign to block the appointment. The Engine 6 group is countering with an effort in response in support of Lipsitt.
What do you think?
UPDATE: Thanks to the person who forwarded me the email from Newton Villages Alliance regarding its opposition to Lipsitt’s reappointment. Here’s most of it…
The Mayor has just re-appointed Lipsitt to another two-year term on the ZBA, and the Board of Alderman (BOA) must vote soon on whether to approve her appointment. The first step is an appearance by, and possible vote on, Lipsitt at the BOA’s Zoning and Planning Committee (ZAP) this Monday, February 23.
As the chairperson of the ZBA, Lipsitt has:
• consistently privileged developers over residents, allowing developers and their attorneys to speak first, as long as they like, and as often as they like throughout the proceedings at public hearings, even though she has the authority to allocate speaking time more equitably between supporters and opponents of a project;
• controlled when, how long, and what topics residents were allowed to address in their comments, interrupted, scolded and used a gavel to intimidate some into silence, and failed to ask follow up questions of opponents to explore the details of their concerns;
• made residents wait so late into the evening before being allowed to speak that many with children at home or work to go to the next morning had no choice but to leave without ever being heard;
• joked that she would allow the Board to listen to only as many public comments “as we can stand”;
• presided over ZBA hearings in an arbitrary and capricious manner;
• inappropriately asked the members of the public in the audience to raise their hands to indicate whether they supported or opposed proposed 40B projects;
• repeatedly asked her colleagues to participate in straw votes, enabling her to continue a hearing whenever a straw vote revealed there weren’t yet enough votes to approve a 40B permit, and thus keep the hearing open until enough votes for a 40B permit could be negotiated;
• refused to recognize a distinguished former State Representative, acting as pro bono attorney on behalf of residents, while this elderly gentleman had his hand raised for recognition for more than 30 minutes;
• ignored Planning Department recommendations and unilaterally cut inflow and infiltration rates and mitigation payments developers would have to pay for project impacts, potentially costing the City hundreds of thousands of dollars on proposed 40B projects;
• insisted that the Court Street 40B proposal could not be reduced in size, ignoring her ZBA colleagues’ requests to reduce the project’s size;
• refused her ZBA colleagues’ calls for an independent financial review of the Court Street developer’s claims that reducing the project’s size would make the project “uneconomic”;
• stated that the low-income residents displaced by the Court Street 40B project were not the concern of the ZBA;
• waited until close to midnight and an almost empty chamber to push her exhausted colleagues for the 3-2 vote to award a 40B permit to the Court Street developer;
• exposed the City to costly legal action because of her actions leading to the Court Street decision;
• refused to allow residents to mention the 1.5% land area standard or ask questions about it in relation to the Rowe Street 40B proposal at the December 4, 2014 ZBA hearing;
• stated on February 12, 2014, incorrectly, that the Open Meeting Law’s notification procedures didn’t apply to an executive session she had called, again exposing the City to potential legal action.
SECOND UPDATE:
And here’s an excerpt from Engine 6 group to its supporters…
Aldermen are getting letters opposing Mrs. Lipsitt’s appointment, saying that in her capacity as ZBA Chair she (e.g.) is partial and favors developers, doesn’t act in the best interests of the City, doesn’t give residents adequate opportunity to voice their concerns, isn’t “responsive” to them.
This is crazy talk. It seems to be yet another swipe at Chapter 40B, the state law that allows residential developments to bypass certain local zoning rules if at least 20% of the units are affordable (and the only way affordable housing has been created in Newton), which the ZBA adjudicates.It also demonstrates a misunderstanding of the role of the ZBA, which is determined by state law. Massachusetts, not Newton, stipulates the conditions under which zoning variances are to be allowed or denied. The ZBA must follow state guidelines to the best of its ability, and issue decisions that will withstand appeals from both developers and aggrieved community members. It’s not about taking sides.
If you’ve ever attended a ZBA hearing you’ll know that Brooke Lipsitt does her job with extreme patience, respect, fair-mindedness, humor, and grace, not to mention a deep and subtle understanding of the law. Her leadership is absolutely deliberate and impartial, and her replacement could well result in a body that is much less so.
THAT would not be in Newton’s best interests. We cannot allow ZBA appointments to become politicized. We cannot allow citizens with an axe to grind to take control of our democratic processes.
For the more clueless among us, can anyone propose any Cliff’s Notes as to why her reappointment has polarized these two groups? The little that I’ve heard about Newton Villages Alliance (mostly through V14) is that they espouse some sort of Mayberry ideals, so I’m presuming that they must consider Ms. Lipsitt to have allowed developers to run wild.
Am I warm or cold? Anyone, anyone, Bueller, anyone?
@Michael: Obviously it would be ideal if NVA spoke for itself. But as you may know, the NVA keeps its membership secret and has declined to divulge the members of its steering committee.
Michael,
Given what I see on the Villages Alliance website and tweets, I would guess your presumption is not just warm but red hot !
If Lipsitt is re-appointed, would she be able to serve on ZBA and be an Alderman from Ward 2?
I’ve never worked on anything with Brooke, but what I’ve heard about her is that she is a leader and that she has a ton of institutional knowledge. For most of us that were active 10-15 years ago, she was the President of the BOA during the early to mid Cohen years. These qualities are difficult to come by and would be handy if the ZBA doesn’t have anyone with those qualities to replace her.
I’ve had one serious issue with the way these meeting are run. I’ve attended many meetings over the years and have been saying this out loud since 2002.
This problem predates Brooke or anyone else in recent charge since it ALWAYS seems to happen:
The public being given very little time to speak and always very late into the proceedings.
Five of us would show up to speak to a committee in room 202 about an issue. I understand that there is such a thing as procedure. But the chairperson knew we were there for a reason, knew that there wasn’t anything or anyone else waiting or more pressing and would still go all around the mulberry bush on a parking ticket, a claim about a pothole, etc. There was NO reason our issue could not have been dealt with first and we couldn’t have spoken first. There was no line of more important things. It clearly was a way to try to wear us down as the hours ticked by, hopefully make us leave and just an arbitrary show of some sort of power.
It is unfair and undemocratic to let developers, their lawyers or WHOMEVER talk on and ON, giving their endless presentations and slide shows and push the people living in this city to midnight.
I fully understand the time limit per person and the presentations should come first to allow for better knowledge, but this has become a brutal slog through the mud now.
So where is Engine 6 ?
Where there is smoke there is fire !
I’m sure the mayor wants to hear from you.
After sitting through some of the ZBA meetings, I would say Ms Lipsitt suffers from battle fatigue and behaves as if she has been through it all before, and she probably has. Slickly polished from all her years on the BOA and committees, she has all the right moves and manipulates the ZBA members to votes without information, negotiates deals for developers like lowering I & I ratios, and rather transparently holds a pro-build stance. She shows a “tolerance” for public input and “manages” us as well as her ZBA colleagues – she is impressive. But when any public official gets to this point, it’s time for them to step down.
Seems to me, NVA supporters are just looking to shoot the messenger.
Like it or not, 40B is state law. Lipsitt and the ZBA can’t just reject a development (or deny a developer their rights to fully present their proposal) just because somebody — or even everybody — thinks its a bad development.
Don’t like the law, change the law, not the people required to follow it.
40b has been satisfied ! I.88%
We don’t need to change the law, just adjudicate it fairly .
See ” Update ” above.
Say what you will about Mrs. Lipsitt – she doesn’t read blogs and does things her way.
As someone without any stake in the game, I say that if even half of what NVA says about Ms. Lipsitt’s behavior is true, then she has most definitely got to go.
She sounds like an incredibly obnoxious and despotic individual – that is to say, if even half of the allegations are true. It would be nice to hear a response from Ms. Lipsitt, but I suspect that would never happen.
That’s right Michael. Brooke Lipsitt displays the condescending arrogance that one can expect from a left-wing Democrat One-Percenter. When Obama rants about how millionaires and billionaires need to pay more in taxes, I wonder why she has to say about that? It seems to me that Greg Reibman continues to serve as a cheerleader for those who are part of Newton’s Political Insider Group.
As for 40B being a state law, I would like to remind people that when Greg and Gail ran the Newton TAB, they were enthusiastic promoters of the 40B housing law and they editorialized against its repeal in 2010. So yes, part of the reason why 40B has been a disaster for Newton can be laid at their doorstep. Greg Reibman doesn’t like it when I remind people of his support for the Newton PIG’s agenda because he doesn’t want people to realize his left-wing bias, nor does he want people to realize that he is partly to blame for Newton’s problems, due to his enthusiastic support for the big government, more taxes, more spending, more borrowing, more left-wing social engineering agenda of the Newton PIG.
Mike Striar has shown us that just because 40B is a state law, a town doesn’t have to bend over backward for the rapacious, politically connected, crony capitalist real estate developers who privatize profits for themselves while socializing costs to taxpayers. Unfortunately, Mayor Warren is an enthusiastic promoter of 40B, his entire administration has been based on regurgitating left-wing Kennedy School of Government pabulum, and the Kennedy School has bought into the UN Agenda 21 social engineering program of high density 40B housing projects. They call it “smart growth”, but I don’t think its smart to build gaudy, high density monstrosities that privatize profits for politically connected developers like Scott Oran or Bob Engler while socializing costs to taxpayers. I certainly don’t think that would lead to growth in people’s bank accounts for that matter either.
Brooke is a gracious woman who is a master at running efficient meetings that never get out of hand. She follows procedures, laws, ordinances, and leads public hearings at which everyone gets to have their say. She should be re-appointed.
“Everyone gets to have his/her say.”
Just read this and am headed over to City Hall ASAP.
OK well after reading Joshua Norman’s excessively partisan post, I wonder if NVA’s list of alleged misdeeds really is true, or whether this is all just a standard political witch-hunt.
Are there any neutral parties out there who don’t view this through the prism of 40B and teardowns? Does Ms. Lipsitt really behave the way that NVA is alleging, or is the letter an exaggeration designed to get rid of someone to whom the organization is politically opposed?
If this is just a debate about 40B that’s turned personal, then that’s absolutely disgusting. But I still say that if even half of the items on the NVA list are true, then she shouldn’t be on the board.
Who knew that local zoning could be so vitriolic? As far as I’m concerned it’s a topic that I do my utmost to avoid, for fear of boring myself to death.
Michael – This has been my experience with Brooke. She was president of the BOA and ran fair and efficient meetings with good humor. I once was at a ZBA hearing about a business that opened in a house that was zoned for single family residences. The business owner packed the hearing with about 50 of her customers who extolled her great talents, which of course, was beside the point. I’m sure this individual was wonderful at what she did, but she was running a business in an area that was out of compliance with the zoning restrictions. Every person who wanted to speak was given the opportunity to do so, but in the end, the law prevailed and the business owner had to move. I felt confident that the decision was based on the city zoning ordinances and I had no horse in the race.
As for the length of the meetings, that’s par for the course. I’ve had my complaints about the negativity of the Alders in the last year, but there’s no denying that they often work late into the night.
If it’s true that this letter-writing campaign to besmirch Ms. Lipsitt’s reputation is another anonymous move by the NVA steering committee, that’s not just misinformed, that’s cowardice.
Well, Joshua is hardly being anonymous about it (don’t know if he’s part of the NVA to be clear, just that he is on that side of the issue, clearly) – but yes, I would listen harder to an organization like the NVA if I knew more about it. There’s a time and place for anonymity, and that’s not it.
Adam,
Maybe the Newton Villages Alliance’s penchant for remaining anonymous is to avoid just the sort of bullying name calling you seem to want to vent. They might be anonymous but they do have quite a website that lays down a powerful agenda. I think they would say it’s about ideas not personalities. A lesson you seem not to have learned.
The NVA’s list of issues seems pretty concerning.
Can I assume that people agree that if those issues are in fact true, that she shouldn’t be chair of ZBA?
I’ve never been to these meetings, but seems like many people here have. Can anyone vouch for or against these issues as being accurate?
It’d be great to see the discussion focused on the facts instead of character labels (pro or con), side issues (who is in the NVA) and the merits of 40B.
The title of the post is a pretty straightforward question, and the NVA has brought a very specific set of issues against Lipsett’s reappointment.
Michael, my post was anything but partisan. It was 100% factual. I’m not part of the NVA, but I can agree with their assessment
Doug, I can understand why the NVA has remained anonymous.
They’ve seen how Greg Reibman, Gail Spector and the Newton Political Insider Group smeared and harassed reform-oriented activists who opposed the PIG’s agenda and they didn’t want to subject themselves to any of that.
This from someone who believes…
Blueprintbill – Adam wrote a single sentence, in which he described a behavior as misinformed and termed an action as cowardice. No name calling at all.
Ya, not partisan at all…
Adam described a ‘misinformed behavior and a cowardly action’, and you Tricia, seemed to impute a partisan act, in an attempt to shine a light on a pressing issue.
Would that more saw the NVA as partisan. Like the partisans of France and Italy during the Second World War, operating in ‘secrecy’ to protect themselves, I suspect members of that group are only trying to protect themselves from personal attacks like this blog engenders, while trying to effect outcomes and ideas they believe in.
I have attended a good number of ZBA meetings.
I find the ZBA a little dysfunctional in that it has Brooke as chair, 2 members pro development, and 2 against. Therefore it is Brooke who defines the outcome. She is always keen to draw matters to a close, but from what I have seen it appears to be a forgone conclusion on the pro development side.
Brooke is a formidable character – I certainly wouldn’t want to want her as an adversary. By the very nature of her demeanor she can make the ZBA somewhat intimidating, and she can sometimes come off a little haughty.
Now that Newton has met one of the 40B exclusion Criteria, and if Brooke is re-appointed, then I can only hope her decisions will be guided by the people who turn up and have to endure many hours waiting to have their say. If she can do that, then I feel the ZBA will be in good hands!
And I have to say – I do find some of Brookes commentary entertaining!
Blueprintbill, I hesitate to respond to your own ad hominem attack, but I will anyway. I chose my words carefully. Not only was my comment not directed at any individual (it would be directed at the actions of an organization even if the individuals were so named), but I think any rational person would see that the NVA attack on Ms. Lipsitt was very personal and not about ideas at all. So much for ideas over personalities. You can’t have it both ways. Should I take it from your defensive note that you’re part of the NVA secret society?
The ideas posted on the NVA site certainly fall under freedom of speech. Many of them are still misguided, and without names to attach to them, there’s no real possibility of constructive dialogue. As a political force, NVA is nothing more than a propaganda machine. I happen to share many of the concerns of the group over teardowns, village character and loss of trees, but I cannot support distortions of the facts, intentional or not, and I am deeply offended any time the group claims to speak for me as a resident, as it often does.
Greg, I’m trying to figure out why you believe in the global warming cult when even the U.N.’s Climate Chief herself admitted that the goal of environmental activists is to destroy capitalism.
There are a host of other problems for the global warming crowd are emerging, such as . . .
Leaked emails from global warming scientists state that the Earth is not warming, such as this one from Kevin Trenberth that states, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty we can’t.”
Claude Allegre, the founding father of the man-made global warming ethos, recently renounced his position that man has caused warming.
Proof is emerging that Al Gore and even President Obama have financially benefited from fueling the global warming hysteria.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/MKTNews/global-warming-hoax-facts/2014/10/17/id/601458/#ixzz3SgpviAui
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!
Tricia, regarding your post, I missed your snarky, caustic commentary.
I’m trying to figure out why the Newton Taxpayers Association would think a climate change denier is qualified to be its “research director.”
@Simon – you are right on target!
The fact that the Engine 6 people have gone Code Red to have her reappointed should be an indicator that Brooke is pro build. The fact that the NVA put out a detailed list verifiable from taped ZBA meetings only proves Engine 6’s assertion. There is a long list of distinguished politicians including Churchill and DeGaulle who were dismissed once they started crossing lines and based on the evidence presented, seems Brooke should be joining them.
@Greg what does climate change have to do with the NVA’s agenda?
@Jerry: I’m not talking about the NVA. I’m talking about the fellow the Newton Taxpayers Association have appointed to be its “research director.”
If your organizational mission is to use “research” to convince Newton citizens and our municipal leaders about the benefits of being fiscally responsible based on your analysis of our spending/expenses/obligations, you might want your “research” coming from someone who is grounded in, well, reality.
Years ago, the Newton Taxpayers Association suffered the same fate at the hands of then-president Brian Camenker. In addition to his fiscal conservatism and his warnings about Newton’s spending problem, Brian Camenker was an outspoken opponent of gay marriage and “the gay agenda” in Newton Schools. Most Newton residents, of course, did not share Camenker’s homophobia, which I’m sure undercut his ability to sway folks on say opposing an override. In fact I’m guessing a Camemker endorsement earned his opponents more than a few extra votes.
I suspect the same will be true among Newton citizens in 2015 if they knew Norman was a climate change denier.
@Greg – you may be right …. but I think trying to discredit someone’s research on fiscal matters based on their beliefs on climate change (Even if it is ridiculous) is,a,cheap shot.
There’s plenty of factual financial critiques that you can make (and I have) on Joshua’s sometimes one-sided, exagerated, or misleading, numbers. I’D stick to critiquing those. In other cases though, Joshua does dig up accurate, disturbing, and under reported financial facts Worth noting and talking about.
So let’s return to the original question: should Brooke Lipsitt be reappointed to the ZBA? Somehow the conversation meandered even more than the usual collective ADD blog mind. Here’s a recap: posters have
-Posed the question: What does Brooke Lipsett have to say about the fact that President Obama thinks millionaires and billionaires need to pay more in taxes?
-Equated a group of people who oppose teardowns and development in the city to partisans of France and Italy during the World War II who needed to remain anonymous to protect their lives.
– Stated that the Mayor has based his entire administration on the Kennedy School of Government which has bought into the UN Agenda 21 social engineering program.
-Questioned global warming.
-Referred to Winston Churchill and Charles DeGaulle as ones who were dismissed “once they started crossing lines based on the evidence presented” to Brooke Lipsett as head of the Newton ZBA.
You gotta love the blog. I hear there are listservs and Google groups all over the city. How do I sign up?
Back to the topic. Regardless of who is a member of the NVA, I’m not, I would like to know if some of their claims are true or not and tbe same for Engine 6. I know more about and agree with Engine 6’s objectives, but just because I don’t agree with some of NVA’s objectives doesn’t mean the things they point out are not true. It’s their position and the questions they raise as a group that matters not who they are individually. The same with Engine 6 even though they do share their members names.
I don’t think that just because Engine 6 supports her that she is pro build, but I also think that anyone who has held this position a while and was the Chair of the BOA has probably developed a noticeable patern of behavior so the questions raised should be verifiable.
I’m not concerned with their first 5 bullet points but if the sixth one is true, there is a problem.
So what happened at the meeting?
I think there is no question that Brooke Lipsitt is more than qualified to serve on the Zoning Board of Appeals. That being said, I think most of the correspondence I received were critiques of her demeanor and performance as Chair of the ZBA. Questions were asked and suggestions made to her at last night’s meeting and I think she heard loud and clear – some of the concerns that were raised. She had not received nor read the emails or correspondence that was sent to the Board, but was willing to take a look.
Sometimes, public officials who have served a long time forget that many are not familiar with our humor, our demeanor, the rapport we have with applicants, their attorneys, rhe general public and with our colleagues, and we need to be reminded that those interactions can be misinterpreted by the general public.
Amy, regarding your post where you said “public officials who have served a long time forget that many are not familiar with our humor, our demeanor, the rapport we have with applicants, their attorneys, rhe general public and with our colleagues, and we need to be reminded that those interactions can be misinterpreted by the general public.”
You just made the best argument against the entire Newton Political Insider Group, as well as inadvertantly making an argument against reappointing Brooke Lipsitt to the ZBA.
Greg, I’m not a climate change denier, I’m a climate realist. Considering that I had to shovel piles of global warming and settled science off my sidewalk in order to comply with Vicki Danberg’s pet cause, I think I know what I’m talking about.
http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/205_156257.jpg
Considering that the earth has been cooling for nearly two decades, if anything, you’re the climate denier.
Who gave you the right to institute litmus tests for who can serve as an officer of the NTA considering your record as the Baghdad Bob of the Newton Political Insider Group? Considering that you and Gail enthusiastically supported an unqualified jacklegged, fiscally irresponsible creature of government and politics like Setti Warren for Mayor in 2009 against a reform-oriented businessman like Bill Heck, me taking your advice would be like a chicken taking advice from a fox on hen-house security.
Right, because snow totals in metropolitan Boston are a leading indicator of the overall warming of the planet.
When I was a kid, somebody had me convinced that Lake Quinsigamond was the Pacific Ocean. Apparently I wasn’t the only one so snookered.
Back to the topic at hand, on Monday night, the Zoning and Planning Committee recommended that Brooke Lipsitt be reappointed to the Zoning Board of Appeals, by a vote of 5-0 with two abstentions. Last night, Ms. Lipsitt was unanimously re-elected by her colleagues to another term as chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Brooke was President of the Board of Aldermen when I was first elected, and has served with distinction on both the BOA and the ZBA for many years. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that she is more than qualified and has given exemplary service, and her unanimous endorsement by her colleagues on the ZBA only strengthens my faith in her ability and integrity.
I wasted four hours of my life at an NVA meeting that I can never get back. I did like a few if the members there though. It felt a little like a high school clique. I guess that I am not cool enough to be a part of their group because I was never invited back for a second meeting if they in fact had one?
Our elected officials all need to remember that they are ‘elected’ and the responsibilities that go with confirming appointments and re-appointments. Fairness, civility and ensuring citizen input should never be forgotten in any public discourse; whether that is by Ms. Lipsett, our alders, city staff or the various groups that represent different citizen interests and viewpoints. It seems ridiculous to have to remind adults of this, but it seems we’ve had to do so.
Greg, you may be interested in this article about environmentalist alarmism that David Spier shared with me.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/24/seven-big-failed-environmentalist-predictions/