Thanks to the 22 Newton residents are candidates for Charter Commission. Now comes the hard part for the rest of us choosing nine of you on Nov. 3: Tell us who you are and why you’re running in the comments section below. And if you have a campaign website share that too please.
UPDATE: Candidates in blue have commented below. Still hope to hear from those listed in red.
Jane O’Connor Frantz
Bryan P. Barash
Brooke K. Lipsitt
Howard M. Haywood
G. Groot Gregory
Thomas Andrew Sheff
Christopher Steele
Joshua Krintzman
Rhanna Kidwell
Miles R. Fidelman
Anne M. Larner
Karen Manning
Lisa R. Teuscher Gordon
Peter F. Harrington
Charles N. Shapiro
Linda Jordan Kraus
Megan Risen Meirav
Kathryn K. Winters
Wenhua Zhang
George E. Mansfield
Kenneth R.L. Parker
Peter Bruce
Thanks, as always, to Greg and Village 14 for providing a forum for our ideas, and for generally giving us interesting local reading. It is greatly appreciated.
My name is Bryan Barash and I am a candidate for Newton Charter Commission. I am running because I love Newton and want to ensure that our government and community are prepared to take on the challenges of today as well as the challenges our children and future generations will face. The Charter Commission is an important opportunity to re-examine our city’s governing document for the first time in decades, continuing a proud tradition hearkening back three centuries to the founding of modern American democracy. I will approach this opportunity with the mindset that Newton is a wonderful place to live and will continue to be so long as we take the time to carefully consider opportunities to modernize our governmental structure in a way that is as efficient and responsive to the people as possible.
I hope to meet as many of you as possible and hear from you about your ideas and concerns. While the Commission looks at a larger picture and longer time frame than many of the current issues of the day, whether that be a particular development project or personal feelings about a particular official, my hope is that the proposed charter will improve the government’s ability to effectively respond to those concerns.
Thanks for reading and please feel free to reach out to me directly to continue the conversation either by email or phone, both of which can be found on my website.
I’m supporting Bryan Barash for many of the reasons he described above. I want a government that functions clearly and efficiently, so that when people express their “popular will,” things don’t get tied up in endless confusing loops and loopholes, which just makes everyone frustrated or apathetic. Bryan said to me that he wants a government that lets voters choose the city’s future, regardless of whether it’s the particular choice he personally would vote for. That even-handedness is ideal for this particular position, perhaps more so than any other. I also think it’s vitally important that we have younger people on the panel that will recommend changes to the city’s future governance structures — or else we risk getting stuck in the same patterns as before.
And I’m supporting Chris Steele. He’s my neighbor (and, disclosure, my former employer) and I worked on his campaign for alderman-at-large, when he ran on a platform of trying to bring a more strategic vision to Newton’s legislative governance and decision-making, based on his experience helping communities all over North America attract new businesses that fit their overall goals. That strategic consideration is something I think has been surprisingly lacking for a body that has so many people ostensibly elected by the entire city, rather than by district alone. I suppose that raises some questions about the composition of the Board, which the Commission will have to answer. So it seems like a great idea to elect Chris to try to come up with some better ways of governing.
I’m sure I’ll get to know the other folks on this list better in the coming weeks as they campaign for the post. These are just the two people I know well already.
Thanks for this opportunity. Full disclosure…both of Newton’s major news blogs have open threads for charter commission candidates right now, and I am posting the same thing to both.
I became interested in charter reform the first time I voted in a Newton city-wide election back in the 1990s. I was overwhelmed and discouraged by the 25 contests on the ballot. While I wanted to be an informed, engaged citizen, I doubted I would ever have time to get up to speed.
My interest in charter reform led me to get involved in the League of Women Voters of Newton’s charter study that launched in 2009. In fact, I co-chaired the study (more like I was the assistant to the true chair, Sandy Butzel) and I discovered that I found the subject matter fascinating. Are term limits a good idea? What is the best mix of ward representation and district representation? What is the ideal size for a city council? What is the ideal term length?
The biggest impression that the League study made on me is that nothing should go 40 years without being formally reviewed and updated. Our charter is long overdue.
I felt so strongly about this that I took on leading the League’s signature collection effort to get a charter review commission on the ballot. The signature drive was initiated by Tom Sheff, Miles Fidelman, and others and picked up by the LWVN in 2012.
In addition to enthusiasm for the subject matter of the commission, I bring years of professional experience as a project manager, so I can help to ensure that the charter commission process is disciplined and transparent. I love team work, and I’m very committed to this community. I really enjoy engaging with my fellow Newtonites and trying to get them excited about this incredible opportunity that we have.
I strongly encourage Newton voters to learn about the candidates and make an informed choice on November 3rd. This is a historic opportunity with potential to make significant improvements to our governance. We really need nine strong, qualified leaders to guide our city through this process. There will be public forums, coverage in the Tab, and an online voters guide sponsored by the LWVN. Make a commitment to get informed and make this process successful for our city.
My name is Wenhua Zhang and I am a 7-year Newton resident and a parent of Newton Public School student. It would be my honor to serve on the Newton Charter Commission.
I came to the United States from China at the age of 23. I had no money, but this nation gave me a chance to prove myself, and I have had a fulfilling career in finance that includes service as Senior Vice President and portfolio manager at Harvard Management Company and Director at Brookside Capital. Now I want to give back to the city that has been so good to me and to my children.
I will approach the Charter Commission as I have approached every project in finance: with close scrutiny to facts and to data and with limited regard for pre-conceived notions. I will be as studious and analytical as I was when investing on behalf of pension funds and university.
Some of the issues that I believe deserve rigorous research and deliberation include:
1) Whether to downsize the Board from 24 members to between 9 to 15 members. There is evidence to suggest that downsizing may increase the efficiency of government, but we need to examine second-order effects carefully.
2) Whether to term-limit aldermen in accordance with the School Committee’s policy of eight-year terms.
3) Whether to lengthen aldermanic terms and stagger their elections so that Newton voters are not asked to remember dozens of candidates every two years.
4) Whether to professionalize the zoning and land use functions so that technocrats, not politicians, are making expert assessments.
I will analyze these issues methodically and debate them collegially. I am proud to offer my time and expertise to the Garden City and I ask for your vote on November 3rd.
I am Groot Gregory and a resident of Newton for a little over 20 years. I have been an advocate and active participant promoting STEM education since moving to Massachusetts in 1987 and more recently extending my activities to City affairs through the Newton Highlands Area Council.
I am running for the Charter Review Commission to investigate and suggest ways to improve how our City is structured so its residents have a greater voice in the policy process and so we can reduce the politics in making small local decisions. I feel residents are able to affect changes on a block by block basis but feel left out when envisioning what we all want Newton to be and become in the future. I believe the Charter offers this opportunity and I believe that I can play a positive role evaluating potential changes, evaluating the benefits and consequences, and presenting a plan to the whole community.
I have stated that I like the idea and the role that Neighborhood Area Councils can play, providing community engagement and a focused forum for our diverse villages. I am not a fan of term limits but can see staggered terms as a way of promoting more competitive electoral races. And the question of City Council (BOA) size must be coupled with the roles and responsibility we, as residents, bestow upon our elected officials.
I have limited experience in the public domain spending most of my career in the private technology sector. In industry, my job is comprised of listening to the market, proposing product changes, and building consensus within my organization to improve what we can offer. In my mind, those skills are not too far from what will be needed on the Charter Commission.
I look forward to hearing from you and ask for your vote on November 3rd.
Groot Gregory
296 Lake Ave
http://www.grootgregory.com
Note: This statement is posted to Village 14 and the Newton Tab Blog.
So far Groot and Wenhua are the only candidates who have stated specifics as to why they are running.
Wenhua: term limits for elected representative, management of our zoning codes, defining the size and roles of our legislative body.
Groot: the role of Neighborhood Area Councils in Newton, defining the size and roles of our legislative body.
More substance from candidates, please! Thank you. 😀
Janet, I see a distinction there. The thread asks “Why are you running?” It does not ask “What are your priorities for changes to Newton’s charter?” A candidate’s motivations for running might stem from wanting to see specific changes, but the primary motivation might be something else.
To put it another way…I do have priorities for changes that the commission should consider. They are on my website, and you could infer a couple of them from my anecdote about voting in a Newton election (4-year, staggered terms, and a smaller BoA).
But the reason I’m running is that I believe I have the right skills and experience to help make the commission a success. Otherwise, I would just plan on being a citizen advocate during the process.
Interesting that I have a very different take on this than Janet. I do not want to know the specific priorities and prejudices of a candidate. I want to know that they are able to jump into this process with an open mind, strong analytical skills, and the objectivity to keep their “pet peeves” in check while examining what processes might work best in our City. I think Rhanna and Bryan have answered effectively, as have the other two. Thank you all for entering into this process.
NN, I want to know the same things as you do but I think a good tool to help determine who those might be is knowing what perspective they are bringing to the commission. I want to know what specific reasons s/he wants to look at the charter rather than vague explanations.
Rhanna, in a campaign I want candidates to say what they mean and not expect voters to try to determine what they are inferring. Different voters will infer different things which is usually why that technique is used, although I don’t think you were trying to confuse things but defend your statement to Janet. The reason given about being asked “why you are running” works on this blog, but not on the Tab blog which asked “why should we vote for you?”
On Rhanna’s first post she mentions that Miles Fidelman collected signatures as a member of the little group that collected before Rhanna and the League took over the project. If this is true, I owe Miles a big apology. It is totally plausible that Miles collected signatures and gave his signatures to someone like Anatol Zukerman to hand in. When I received the signatures, I may have assumed all the signatures were collected by Anatol. That being said, I’m sorry, Miles.
I want to also thank the League of Women Voters for taking over the signature drive from us. Without the League taking over, we certainly wouldn’t be where we are in our charter review and I’d like to thank them for the months of work and research they put in studying the charter.
My name is Tom Sheff and I am a lifelong resident of Newton. Like everyone who runs for office, I too, love Newton and what it has done for me over the years. It’s a wonderful city and it provided me with terrific family, friends and a wonderful education. Now, I hope the voters support me and allow me to payback the city I adore.
My background is that I graduated from Clark University and attended Law School at Thomas Cooley School of Law (Lansing, Mi), where I did not graduate. I came back to Boston where I worked for my father’s law firm as a researcher/office manager. I have a curious/analytical mind who always questions the Status Quo. I believe I am also a forward thinker. All I want is to improve our city and bring it up to date.
I am trying to go into this process with an open mind. There are many areas I’d like to have researched, but I want to stay away from stating a position.
The areas I’d lie to see researched are:
1. size of the board
2.getting rid of some of the boards responsibilities to lighten their load
3. Term limits
4. finding ways to make city Hall more efficient
5. recall provision
6. possibility of city manager
7. minimum amounts for school maintenance
8. I want to look at ways to avoid situations like Jonathan Yeo’s
9. I want to look at ways to avoid situations like Susan Basham’s.
10.If possible, require the city to update technology.
ETC.
Thanks to the V-14 for getting the discussion started.
In the interest of disclosure I’m serving as Bryan Barash’s campaign treasurer. I’m a semi-regular reader of this forum but haven’t commented before.
When Bryan asked me to help his campaign, I didn’t hesitate because I believe he’d be an excellent charter commissioner. He’s smart, hard-working, committed to Newton, and knowledgeable and thoughtful about government. I know he’ll defend his own views when necessary but always will listen to others’ ideas for making Newton’s government more effective and responsive. I hope you’ll make him one of your nine picks on November 3.
Should the voters elect to review the charter, the commission’s work will be very important but it’s just arcane enough to stay off many voters’ radar. I’d encourage everyone reading V14 to spread the word about the charter commission and to learn what you can about all the candidates. Newton is fortunate to have so many talented and dedicated people willing to take on this job.
My name is Howard Haywood a fifth generation resident of Newton. I am a candidate for the Charter Commission because I love our city and believe that my experience of serving on many boards and commissions over the years makes me well qualified to serve.
I have served on the Planning and Development Board, Human Rights Commission and currently on the Council on Aging and the Newton Housing Authority. My non-profit organization activities include serving on the Boards of Newton Community Service Center, Newton Boys and Girls Club, YMCA, Newton Community Development Foundation, Hsrmony and others.
As former Pastor of Myrtle Baptist Church I helped initiate the city wide celebration of MLK’s birthday as a member of the Newton Clergy Association. As well as planning for the annual Mayors Prayer Breakfast.
As an observer of the governmental process over the years I believe that it is an obligation of the citizens to engage in making sure that our charter provides the tools and regulations that generates a efficient and productive government for current and future needs of our City. There are the obvious issues such as the size of the BOA, term limits, election cycles and the work load of the BOA. Although I agree with the importance of these major considerations I believe that every item in the charter needs careful and deliberate consideration. As often quoted “the devil is in the details”.
As I reviewed the candidates that are seeking to serve on the Commission I feel honored to be among them and have great faith that whether I am elected or not the City will be well served.
Every person that I have talked to in other Cities that have gone through the charter review process has expressed the importance of public participation in the deliberations, so I urge our residents to join in creating a charter that is representative of the thoughts and ideas of our residents.
Thank you for your consideration of my support and be assured if elected I will serve you well.
Thanks to Village 14 for providing this opportunity to charter commission candidates! I’m a 34 year resident of the city, a teacher of 28 years in the Newton Public Schools, and a longtime community and political activist. My family has lived in three villages (Newtonville, Auburndale, and Waban) and I have a strong connection to various parts of the community through my work at Burr, Countryside, Williams, and Franklin Schools and Newton North High School.
I’d approach the work on the charter review commission as I do any endeavor that requires a significant time commitment. I have a strong work ethic, listen well to diverse perspectives, and a proven commitment to the city in many capacities.
I believe the city charter needs updating. It was written 45 years ago before the age of the Internet, the passage of the Special Education Law in 1972, and the widespread inclusion of nondiscrimination statements in the public and private arena. In part, it reflects the era in which it was written.
As just one obvious example of its limitations, our charter requires the absolute minimum in terms of communication to the public regarding hearings and meetings – the publication of meeting dates, times, and location in the local paper. In this day and age, the charter should require the city government to publicize important meetings and hearings through as many electronic and traditional means as possible in order to inform and engage the citizenry about the important issues of the day.
I also want to think carefully about the language in the charter. My hope is that the commission will revise the charter so that it is a document that’s applicable in a future we can’t anticipate or imagine. This is a difficult task at best, but one we must commit to if we have charter reviews come along once every 40 to 50 years.
Probably the single most important issue the commission will examine is the size and responsibilities of the Newton City Council. A Council that functions efficiently in its decision making is a high priority. It’s essential that the Council be responsible for the large issues that affect significant segments of the population and citywide policy, and that residents should have ample opportunities for input on those issues. But issues that relate to specific neighborhood concerns may be handled more efficiently outside of the Council. I remain open to examining new possibilities for assigning responsibilities and authority over such concerns.
People often ask me what I think the “right” number of Councilors is. In my opinion, it’s way too soon to ask that specific question. The commission first needs to examine the responsibilities of the Council as it stands and consider possibilities for best practices that may provide for efficiencies in the future. Only then can the commission make an informed recommendation about the specific number of Councilors.
Many residents have told me that they appreciate having a Councilor who has first hand knowledge of the issues facing their area of the city. With Newton’s unique village orientation, as opposed to a central business district, the commission needs to consider the size of the Council with a discerning eye. Studies exist that provide data and metrics to assist the commission in making a recommendation. However, the commission should also consider Newton’s culture in determining what residents want and expect in terms of representation on the Council.
After careful study with excellent data, information gathered from comparable communities, and thoughtful discourse about Newton’s unique culture, the commission ultimately will recommend a number that is not known to us today. That being said, I believe that each ward should be guaranteed representation on the Council and each ward should receive equal representation on the City Council.
These are just a few of my thoughts about charter reform. I look forward to a robust discussion of the issues in the coming weeks!
Thanks very much to Village 14 for the opportunity to post here, give my reasons for running and why people should consider voting for me.
I see the Charter Commission as a once in a generation chance to update our government. The City’s residents last did so 40 years ago, and much has changed since then. Now is our chance to update government to make it more responsive to the needs we have now and in the near future.
I am – by profession – a community and economic development consultant. I help groups identify their problems, figure out where they want to go next, and then come up with solutions to fix them. These same skills and background will be needed on the Commission to get its work done. On top of this, I have served on Newton’s Economic Development Commission, the Urban Tree Commission, and the League of Women Voters of Newton (where I ran the Municipal Finance Committee and co-chaired the Topic Meeting Committee). I also serve as the current co-chair of the Newton South HS School Council and in the past helped establish the Waban Neighborhood Area Council. As a result, I have a fairly broad exposure to the questions and concerns of a wide variety of our residents.
I think it’s important to not have a specific agenda of outcomes for my time on the Charter Commission. However, my own time as a community volunteer and engaged citizen has given me some ideas of topics we should look into. These ideas come from my own experience as well as witnessing events in the city and from conversations with people around the city.
For example, there have also been questions and debate on the topic of how we elect our government. There is discrepancy in our City charter regarding term limits; some positions in the City have term limits while others do not. We have seen significant problems in how the City defines candidate residency and on when and how we run special elections for open positions. Our City is unusual in the number and type of tasks given to a part-time board. It is possible that we may wish to examine either the task load or whether future City Council members should be full-time.
On a related matter, I ran for Alderman two years ago, and I was often asked then – and now – how many aldermen I think we should have. In other words, how large our Board (soon to be the City Council) should be to get its work done and also be responsive to constituents. To me, that is a question that comes ONLY after we figure out what we want from government. It is too early to be delving into questions of whether and how we should be changing the current structure. There will be recommendations, but we must actually do the background work first before we come to an answer, or even a recommendation.
Newton’s current charter has been in place for over 40 years. In that time, communities across the country have experimented with ways of making government more responsive, responsible, and efficient. They have lessons we can learn from and perhaps implement ourselves. My own background provides a very strong set of tools to accomplish this. My involvement in the city of Newton gives me insight into how to reach the people that need to be part of that. I hope you will considering voting for me on November 3rd
Thanks Robert and Bill! Appreciate that you both took the time to explain why you’re supporting me.
And thanks to all the rest of the candidates for sharing your thoughtful views, it sounds like the voters will have many fantastic options.
I just wanted to take a moment to address Janet’s question as to why I’m running. Kind of thought that would be clear by the statement that started with “I am running because…” but if you’re searching for more specificity, here it is.
– I think it is important that we have voices from around the city, and I am the only candidate (I believe) living in Ward 1, and more specifically Nonantum.
– I think the commission would be well served by including a commissioner with a statewide as well as a national perspective, which I believe I can bring having worked with municipal officials in New York, Chicago, and New Mexico, as well as cities and towns across Massachusetts.
– I feel a strong pull towards public service. It was what drove me to pack my belongs in a van and move to Chicago to work for Barack Obama in 2007, to law school to learn how to use the law to help the less fortunate, and to working in the State Senate Majority Leader’s office, where just today a bill she sponsored was passed that would remove barriers to reentry for people exiting incarceration.
– I am excited at the prospect of helping our community choose how we govern ourselves. Self governance is the rock upon which we have built this great society and to participate in the reformation of our society, even at this smaller scale, is an awesome responsibility which as an enthusiast of political philosophy and constitutional law I could not pass up.
Thank you, Village 14, for the opportunity for introductions.
My name is Karen Manning and I am running for the Newton Charter Commission because I believe that my professional experience, background working in groups, and commitment to the community would make me an effective member of the commission.
My professional background includes years in the banking industry at the Bank of Montreal and Deutsche Bank, but I have also worked in smaller firms and at one point, a technology startup. I am currently serving in my second year as Newton Public Schools PTO Council Co-President, which has given me the opportunity to work productively with members of our Board, Mayor Warren’s Office, The Superintendent’s Office and School Department, and the School Committee. I have also been PTO Co-President and VP of Communications at the Underwood School. These roles require teamwork and communication skills, diplomacy, and flexible thinking; they have also help me gain valuable insights as to how our city operates.
I would approach the charter review with respect for the process and without a preset agenda. Systematic research and analysis, review of best practices, and thorough community dialogue have not taken place since the last charter review in 1969-71. Ideally this election will bring the opportunity for Newton residents and their carefully elected Charter Commission to study the current charter (and possible changes) as part of a cooperative and productive community endeavor.
Please visit karennmanningfornewtonchartercommission.com to learn more about me. I would be grateful for your vote on November 3.
I forgot to ask for your vote on November 3rd, so there it is!
Jane
What an excellent idea, Greg! Thank you for starting this thread and providing us with an opportunity to give your readers a glimpse into who each of us is. So, here is a bit about me, who I am and why I’m interested in serving on the Charter Commission.
My wife and I grew up in Newton where we attended Countryside and Zervas elementary school, respectively, before graduating together from Brown junior high and Newton South High School. From there, I went on to the School of Management at UMass-Amherst followed by law school at American University’s Washington College of Law in Washington, D.C. My wife and I returned to Newton where we wanted to raise our children and give them the same excellent educational opportunities that we had enjoyed.
For the past 11 years I have worked in the Massachusetts Senate, currently as the Deputy Senate Counsel in the office of the Senate Counsel. Our office reviews every piece of legislation to be taken up by the Massachusetts Senate and advises Senators on various questions of law. This means that every change or rewrite of a municipal charter that goes through the Legislature comes across my desk. I have reviewed many charter amendments and many completely new charters.
In addition to my professional experience that would directly assist my ability to effectively serve on the Charter Commission, my volunteer activities over the past 10 years demonstrate my complete commitment to Newton. This past spring, I was elected to serve for my fourth term as President of the Lower Falls Improvement Association, I am a co-President of the Williams PTO, I am a member of the Community Education Commission and I co-founded the Riverside Station Neighborhood Coalition.
My approach to the Charter Commission is, first and foremost, to listen to the residents of Newton. I think that Lincoln had it abosolutely correct at Gettysburg when he said, “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” The legal process for the Charter Commission to conduct its work embodies that sentiment by requiring a thorough process based on public input. As I see it – the commission members should find out what the people want and draft a charter that reflects the will of the people, while also looking to other cities and towns to gain the knowledge of what has worked and what hasn’t.
I have seen enough charters to know which sections are often rewritten, what language is often omitted and some changes that are often made. I feel confident that my knowledge and experience would be of great value to the commission. Please visit my website for more info: http://www.joshkrintzman.com follow me on facebook at http://www.facebook.com/krintzmanforchartercommission
And most importantly, please vote in favor of establishing a Charter Commission and vote for me on November 3rd.
First, thanks to all of the candidates for stepping up. Impressive resumes.
That said, I’m having a little cognitive dissonance with this blog thread. If you do not think that anything is wrong with this Charter, then why bother to convene a commission and review it? This isn’t a 10,000 mile maintenance check-up. Anyone familiar with City government knows that it is not a question of whether the Charter has its flaws. It’s a question of which elements most merit change?
I understand that many here are new to being candidates, but taking and defending positions is part of the price of admission. What this Commission does could have a profound impact on City government for years to come. This is a big role. And considering the timeline, you may as well start explaining your potential involvement here and now.
So, candidates, can you articulate which elements of the Charter you think are the highest priority? What potential solutions do you have in mind?
Best of luck to you all, and thank you again for stepping up!
@Bill, I understand your point but I’m not sure I agree with your premise. Presumably, candidates are running because they want to be on the Charter Commission, if voters elect to form said commission. But that doesn’t mean that the candidates support change in the charter. They might actually oppose charter reform. I do not think it’s a far-fetched scenario that one could vote against charter reform and still be a candidate for the commission. Lisle Baker pulled out because of his schedule but I wouldn’t be surprised if he opposes charter reform.
Candidates who think of themselves as open-minded could also run because they like the idea of contributing to the process and they are concerned about too many agenda-driven people dominating the commission.
First of all, I just received a call from a friend who read a section of my statement through a different lens than I had intended, so I plan to write a clarification later in the day.
Bill – Greg shares your concern and I do think it’s valid and something for candidates to consider. But we haven’t even defined terms yet, so it’s difficult to write with clarity about specific issues. For example, I used the term “specific neighborhood concerns” to describe issues that might be handled by an entity other than the Council. As it turns out, a friend interpreted that as meaning “village concerns”. In my mind, issues that affect a village affect the whole city and ultimately, we are one city. I had meant to convey the idea that very specific issues that affect one or two streets, for example, might be handled by another entity.
This is just an example of the murkiness of the discussion of charter revision at this point in time. Not only are many candidates open in their approach, but the discussion itself is wide open, without parameters, definition of terms, or focus. I am confident that with time, we’ll get there but it’s still early.
I just wanted to circle back to provide the correct URL (lengthy, I know) to my campaign website, which is:
karenmanningfornewtonchartercommission.com.
Apologies, and thank you!
Thank you for the opportunity to tell a bit about myself and why I am running for the Charter Review Commission.
I’ve lived in Newton for more than 40 years and have spent most of those years actively engaged in community life. I am running for the Commission because this is a once in a generation opportunity to review how our governing bodies are structured and to propose appropriate changes to make our systems more efficient, more accessible to city residents, and more transparent regarding how various bodies make decisions.
What do I bring to the table? I have experience in elected office in Newton (16 years on the School Committee – eight years as Chair), I have decades of experience as an advocate on projects or issues before the Board of Aldermen, the Newton School Committee, and a number of Committees, Commissions or Taskforces in Newton, and I have professional experience in the public sector working with numerous Mayors, Town Managers, and Selectman that combine to give me a broad view of how different structures of government can affect how communities operate and how local decisions are made. I also have experience helping to lead constructive change in tough situations, including changing entrenched traditions (e.g. eliminating Thursday early release day for elementary school, bringing “Getting to Yes” negotiations to school union-management contract issues, finding a solution to a fourth middle school when no solution appeared viable). But maybe more importantly I bring the knowledge from having made mistakes that no charter, or contract, or strategic plan will be without flaws or without unintended consequences. A Charter Review Commission needs to ask tough questions, do research and listen carefully to local citizens, professional staff, and elected officials in the process of evaluating whether proposed changes will be better for our community than current practice. And because communities change and no process is perfect the Commission should discuss and assess whether a prescribed process for periodic review of the Charter (e.g. every 10 or 15 years) might prove a very useful tool to keep our government responsive.
I advocate that the Charter Commission engage the community in a discussion of the values and standards by which we ought to evaluate both current practice and proposed alternatives. Some of the values and standards I would advocate for include: transparency, easy accessibility (to information, to processes, and to key staff and elected officials), clear lines of accountability, clear standards or criteria to ensure equal treatment of all petitioners, processes that are easy to understand and not unduly lengthy, and processes that encourage broad input into decision making and greater participation in local elections (more citizens voting – more seeking office).
Do I advocate specific changes? I do not have a list of proposed changes I’m supporting. I come to the process with an open mind. I do believe there are issues with some of the current structures of government, but believe it is premature to be pushing solutions before there is thoughtful discussion and analysis of what are the real frustrations behind the current structures and processes and what other options appear to work in other communities of our size and complexity. Commissioners need to do much listening, research, and discussion before advocating strongly for specific changes.
My website where you will find more detailed information on my background and ideas will be active shortly.
Thanks Greg, and Village 14, for providing this forum.
My name is Miles Fidelman, and I’m running for Charter Commission. My wife and I have lived in Newton for 16 years; four of our kids have gone through Newton’s schools, and we’ve been active on community issues. (Many of you know Karla from her Tab column).
I’m an MIT-trained engineer, entrepreneur, and policy wonk – and spent much of my career working on public sector systems and infrastructure. Along the way, I founded and ran the Center for Civic Networking – a non-profit focused on citizen engagement in government. I’ve consulted to local governments on infrastructure planning, and written a couple of books on service planning. I currently design Intelligent Transportation Systems (software) for transit agencies.
I’ve lived through multiple administrations, back to Teddy Mann’s, and served on several City and School advisory boards – giving me an inside look at how our City Government functions – as well as some frustration with how hidebound we’ve become; hence my interest in Charter Reform.
Several issues strike me as important for a Charter Commission to consider:
1. The balance of representation on our Board of Aldermen – between ward and at-large members. Recurring fights over development issues lead me to believe that village concerns are under-represented by our current system. In this regard, I believe we should also examine the roles and powers of Neighborhood Area Councils – currently powerless and bordering on extraneous.
2. The respective roles, powers, and responsibilities of the Board, Mayor, and Staff. It appears that our Board performs a number of functions that are more commonly delegated to staff – particularly in the area of special permits. The current system seems to overly politicize issues, create unpredictability and instability, and generally frustrate all concerned.
3. Whether we might be better served by a City Manager type of government. I’ve seen wide discrepancies in our City Government’s performance, over the course of different Mayoral administrations – leading me to wonder if drawing from a national talent pool, retaining a manager for an extended period, and reserving the ability to fire quickly might provide us with more stable and professional governance.
4. Our City government is far from transparent, and our processes for citizen engagement in policy and planning are ancient and frustrating. It seems that the information age has passed by Newton when it comes to open governance. There are plenty of models for doing better.
We have a rare opportunity to improve how we run our City. I believe that I can bring a strong mix of perspective, skills, experience, and commitment to the process; and I ask for your vote on November 3rd.
Miles Fidelman
Hi All – My website is now live at http://www.janefrantz.org. I hope you all give it a visit!
Thanks for the opportunity to explain why I am running for Charter Commission. By way of introduction, I have lived in Newton for the past 15 years with my husband Paul. I am an attorney who is currently a stay-at-home mom raising our four children, all of whom have attended the Newton schools. Over the years I have been engaged in a variety of community work, and for the past two years I have served as an elected member of the Waban Area Council.
Why am I running? It’s an important role, I think I will be good at it, and I think I will enjoy it.
I concur with what others have said here about why charter reform is an important undertaking. This is a unique opportunity to examine the charter and determine whether we can do better.
As for why I think I will be a good at this: I am a diligent worker who looks forward to digging in to this process. I am level-headed and pragmatic, and I am adept at bringing divergent, sometimes highly-charged, views to consensus. Case in point — I took the lead on the Waban Area Council’s comment letter regarding the St. Philip Neri developer’s 40B project eligibility petition (see http://www.wabanareacouncil.com/issue/1521-beacon-st-development-st-philip-neri-site). The nine members of the Council had differing views about the proposed development, yet I was able to lead a process that resulted in unanimous agreement on a well-reasoned comment letter that raised concerns about the project design while recognizing the site’s appeal as a spot for a rental development. That took patience, understanding and an ability to bring opposing views to common ground, skills that I believe would be valuable to the charter reform process.
I know some would like to hear specific thoughts on what reforms are necessary. Like others here, I plan to come at this with an open mind and the view that commitment to the process will yield the best result. To me, any changes to the current charter should be those that result in significant improvements to our local government structure. The charter should provide a framework for a government that is representative, efficient and responsive, and that provides for appropriate checks and balances. Ideally, meaningful participation in the democratic process should be easily accessible to the average voter (our current Board of Aldermen structure deserves careful study with respect to that goal). Finally, while this is an exciting and unique opportunity to improve our system of local government, I am a careful person and will approach changing our current charter with an appropriate measure of caution.
Thanks for reading. I look forward to discussing my candidacy at the Tri-Council Charter Review Commission Candidate’s Event on Sunday 2pm at the Hyde Center. If you would like to contact me, please email [email protected].
I’m running for the Newton Charter Commission because we have an exciting opportunity to modernize our City Charter. During my eighteen years of service on the Newton Board of Aldermen, I learned the ins and outs of our current Charter. As a lawyer, my legal writing skills will also be helpful in the drafting process.
.
Part of the Charter Commission’s challenge will be to involve the public in its deliberations. Newton residents are smart and innovative and can contribute a great deal to the process. My experience with community outreach during my time as an Aldermen will be helpful in getting people involved.
.
Topics I hope the Charter Commission considers include: (1) transparency and accountability, (2) operational efficiency, and (3) fiscal infrastructure and planning. I’ll address each of these areas briefly:
.
First, Transparency and Accountability— Newton has made great strides in this area, but we still have a great deal more work to do. The Board of Aldermen used to elect its President in a secret caucus open only to Aldermen, but now these decisions are made at public meetings. But we can do better in areas such as the School Committee’s handling of Superintendent David Fleishman’s plagiarism and our process for selling public land. The Charter Commission should examine all aspects of city government to see if there are ways to make it more transparent and accountable.
.
Second, Operational Efficiency — Great strides have been made in recent years in both the public and private sectors in making organizations run more smoothly. David Osborne’s groundbreaking work for Vice President Gore’s Reinventing Government Initiative opened the door to municipal reform efforts around the country. Newton’s Charter Commission should examine these reform efforts to see what strategies worked best – and which might be right for Newton.
.
Third, Fiscal and Infrastructure Planning — Newton currently has over a billion dollars in liabilities for post-retirement benefits for our current and past employees. We have a five-year fiscal forecast that shows deficits going forward, but no five-year fiscal plan for balanced budgets. We do far too little to maintain our aging infrastructure. While the current Charter includes requirements for a Capital Improvement Program and a school building maintenance fund, there is tremendous opportunity for the Charter Commission to revisit these programs to make them work better.
.
The Charter Commission has the potential to make real innovations to Newton government that will benefit Newton residents for generations to come. On November 3, please join me in voting YES for the formation of a Charter Commission and please vote for me, so that I may have the opportunity to be a part of this exciting effort. For more information, please email me at [email protected] or visit http://www.kenparker.org. Thanks very much for your consideration!