Newton Mayor Setti Warren has decided to withhold support of federal funds for Enigne 6, an affordable housing project for chronically homeless people in Waban, saying he felt more time was needed to consider the issue. His move led to the cancellation of a public meeting on the issue tonight.
Here’s articles on this from Boston.com and WickedLocal
Do you agree with the mayor’s decision? Explain why in comments.
[polldaddy poll=”7210157″]
I thought fellow citizens of Village 14 might be interested in this post by Joe Finn, President & Executive Director of the Massachusetts Housing and Shelter Alliance on the MHSA Blog:
I consider myself up to date on current events. I have known about the desire to build on Austin Street, however Engine 6 was not as publicized as Austin Street was. Maybe if the city had time to give public opinion prior to the deadline (not three weeks before) it would have been different. However, if we want neighborhoods to be accepting of projects our leaders need to keep us up to date, including having information on the development easily available months before a deadline. This could have been a different outcome.
I’m with Newton Mom. A. I don’t think we had enough time and B. How does Joe Finn Know it’s a “very vocal minority”. Last weeks meeting the nays were definitely the majority. I feel bad for Deb Crossley, her intentions were good and she worked hard, but the problem is there were a lot of unanswered questions. I know I was warming up to the project and if I was, then there were other people doing the same. There needs a change in the process.
@Tom and NewtonMom, the Mayor has known about Engine 6 for quite some time, but never chose to engage the community in a discussion about it even after the Newton Housing Partnership and the Planning & Development Board gave their approval. So the task fell to Ald. Crossley and her fellow aldermen from Ward 5, which includes Waban, to arrange a series of community meetings to share information and allow residents to express their views and ask questions in a very short period of time. There are a lot of Waban residents and community-based organizations who wanted to show their support at the meeting that was supposed to happen tonight at City Hall, which has been cancelled because the Mayor pulled the plug on both the project and the discussion.
If there has been a lack of leadership on this, it rests with the administration not the aldermen from the ward.
Ted, I’m not denying that. This process should have started a lot earlier and it should be on the backs of the administration to educate the public, not Deb Crossley. But we are where we are. We have a flawed process and I would rather take a step back, work with the neighbors than to cram this project down their throats. Let’s admit there’s a mistake and go back to the drawing board. Next time there won’t be as many hostile people at this point of the process. You’ll never get everyone’s acceptance, but the project should get more than it did. People are commenting without being at that meeting and the neighbors had a point.
OK, Tom. And stopping the process dead in its tracks by pulling the plug on it without ever engaging the community directly helps how?
It helps future projects. We can comeback to this project in a few months. I keep going back and forth from village 14 to wickedlocal talking to Ted:).
Tom, how does it help, when pulling the plug right before a community meeting that was scheduled for tonight to share information and express views about the proposal brings the process to a halt? It is hard enough to create affordable housing, and the Mayor’s decision just sends a message to non-profits and the public that the leadership of the city is not going to make it any easier.
Joe Finn also says: “To end homelessness we need the leadership of public officials like Mayor Menino of Boston, who advocated for supportive housing and homeless resources unequivocally, even in the face of organized opposition.” Ironically, Mayor Menino will be at the Mayor’s summer campaign kick-off tonight. I wonder what Mayor Menino would have done if he were in Mayor Warren’s place. I think I know, too.
The first mayoral debate! Tom Sheff and Ted Hess-Mahan, almost live on Village14- What a coup for Reibman.
This is not my blog. It’s the peoples’ blog. Carry on Tom and Ted. Mayor Warren, you’re always welcome too.
Ted, you are making accusations that show that you don’t understand the process. The proposal went before the Planning and Development Board. Per Newton’s rules, notice was posted in Town Hall. Proposals involving the distribution of HOME funds do not require actual notice to the project abutters. Thus, unless they stumbled across the notice posted at City Hall, no one in the neighborhood would have had notice of the proposal or the hearing. That is borne out by the fact that no written or oral comments were received by the P&D Board. The P&D Board made their recommendation based upon the information supplied to it by the developer, Metro West Collaborative Development. Metro West was purposefully vague in the documentation that it submitted to the Board, particularly regarding the selection criteria for prospective residents, and the potential criminal history of those individuals. The first notice that the public was given about the project was in an email sent out giving notice of a public meeting on June 10 to discuss “the proposed redevelopment” of the former Engine 6 property. No mention was made of Pine Street Inn or of the true intent of the redevelopment. That notice included a reference to the Metro West website, which included not one word about the project or what was intended for that property. It was not until the June 10 meeting that any real notice was given to the community regarding the proposal. By that time, it was too late for the public to engage in any debate or submit any comments before the P&D Board. Metro West intentionally waited until the process was well down the road before “engaging the community.” Furthermore, it was acknowledged by the Aldermen present at the June 20 meeting with the community that the developer had done a poor job in addressing the concerns of the community, and the Aldermen were going to ask the developer to address those concerns by the June 27 meeting. So June 27 was the first time that the public was purportedly going to get any substantive answers from the developer regarding the serious safety concerns that the community had raised. Whether or not those answers were satisfactory to the public, the comment period was set to expire on July 2, a mere 5 days after the developer was going to inform the public about the selection criteria and other major issues with the project. You are accusing the Mayor’s office of failure to engage the community, when in fact that failure falls squarely on Metro West. The P&D Board and the Mayor’s office followed the protocol that has been in place in Newton for decades. They were not even aware of the potential safety issues surrounding the project because the developer intentionally hid or downplayed them. Whether or not the June 27 meeting went forward, the developer’s proposal was critically flawed, and was not going to be fixed in the five days between the meeting and the July 2 deadline. Rather than waste additional time and energy holding public meetings about an inherently flawed proposal, and causing a potential flare-up of hostility between community members on either side of the issue, the Mayor did the right thing by announcing that he wasn’t going to approve the funding for the project, and putting it off until a full and fair public discussion could be had, without the unnecessary stress of looming deadlines. Your criticism of the Mayor is not justified. Moreover, the fact that you are running as an opponent to the Mayor in the upcoming mayoral election casts suspicion on your motives. Finally, I note that you are an Alderman for Ward 3 and live on Watertown Street, a long distance from the Engine 6 site, so the project was obviously not something that raised concerns for your own family’s safety. But if you were so concerned about engaging MY community in discussion about the proposal, as an Alderman YOU could have sent notice to neighbors and residents of Waban. You only chose to address this issue AFTER it was too late for the community to have their comments considered by the P&D Board, and AFTER the Board recommended the project for funding. If you feel compelled to dole out blame for the project’s failure to get funding, you should start with yourself.
Ted, personally I would have kept the meeting tonight. The timing was off. I think, as you previously pointed out, had to do with Mayor Warren’s choice to have his kickoff event tonight. Let people vent and speak their mind on both sides, then if it was as divisive as I think it is, cancel the process.
The people’s blog? Hmm, with a whole lot of Gail and Greg moderating it… I beg to differ! In the same vein, is Doug H the only person in Newton Corner (W1 ) who is invited to post entries on this blog?
Meanwhile, remember not to miss a NewTV Board Meeting, you may be elected to a subcommittee (and you were)!
I have a question for the thread. Obviously communication is a problem in dealing with this type of situation. Getting ahold of neighbors around a development is time consuming. Here’s an idea to shoot around: How about getting a 311 phone call to everyone in the ward thats being affected? Would people consider this an acceptable use of the 311 system? Also start the process a lot earlier and get neighbors concerns out of the way while the developers draft the proposal.
While I don’t agree with much of what Concerned Neighbor said, this question for Ted remains out there without an answer:
“You only chose to address this issue AFTER it was too late for the community to have their comments considered by the P&D Board, and AFTER the Board recommended the project for funding.” Why? I just don’t get it.
Jane,
I totally agree. . . . . there were many parties, who did not release this information until right before the deadline. . . . . June 20, 2013 is NOT the time to discuss a project with a funding deadline of July 6. This should have been brought up months and months ago . . . . and to me it looked like a “hide job” because I am in the loop of Newton things (not everything). I knew about the Wegmans deal . . . I knew about Austin Street. . . . I was surprised at the Engine six.
I think that with planning, meetings and discussion affordable housing can happen at Engine 6, but you need the neighborhood to support it. You can’t surprise the neighbors in the weeks before the deadline and say this is the project. However, I can see that the company wants to be part of the community and changed their status about potential residents (no sex offenders and no one with a history of violence). However, there are people within the community (single parents, elderly and people with intellectual disabilities) that could benefit from affordable housing in the area.
I hope that whatever the future of Engine six is . . . that the neighborhood is more involved from the beginning.
I’m not sure but perhaps “Concerned neighbor” just beat Ted H-M for the longest blog post.
But, he/she at least makes sense and reflects the sensitivities of people in the area. Ted, who hopefully doesn’t become mayor, is motivated by knee-jerk reactions to far left politically correct stances. One of those is finding what is called “affordable housing” anywhere, regardless of the backgrounds of the potential residents or the impact on the surrounding neighborhood of such projects.
Ted, correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t you one of the aldermen who wanted to re-locate that terrorist from Guantanamo to Newton? Sob, sob. No-one else wanted him, not even his country of origin.
Jane, it seems like you are trying to pin the blame on me for this mess, and I think that is unfair. This proposal was part of the administration’s housing plan, and the Mayor certainly knew about it long before I did. He should have been out there engaging the community, since he has the sole authority to authorize the expenditure of CDBG funds for affordable housing in Newton. The fact that he has never engaged the community directly speaks volumes.
I would also add that I personally lobbied the Mayor to support affordable housing for homeless people literally around the corner from my house and was willing to say “Yes In My Back Yard” when some of the Mayor’s top people advised against allocating CDBG funds for that project. I continued to advocate for this project and persuaded my colleagues to support granting CPA funds to make that project possible. Likewise, Ald. Deb Crossley, another affordable housing champion on the Board of Aldermen, has been out there trying to engage the community, share information and allow residents to express their views and ask questions about a project in her back yard. She deserves praise, not to have her legs cut out from under her.
I guess I’ll preface my comment by saying that I am very disappointed that the mayor killed the Engine 6 proposal. I am even more disappointed that it was killed in the name of “process.”
I both agree and disagree with Ted. On the one hand, I agree that it was the Mayor’s responsibility to engage the community in a discussion on the Engine 6 proposal. According to Alderwomen Crossley, the Mayor knew about it as early as February or March! (“Concerned neighbor”: you mention a lot about MetroWest and Pine Streets “purposeful” vagueness in their proposal. While I respectfully disagree with you – if you read through the actual developer’s proposal, you’ll see that Metro West was more than clear – I also find it irrelevant. “Vagueness” is not a justification for why the Mayor did not introduce the project to the community early on; if anything, that should have been an *impetus* for the Mayor to start conversation with the public!)
On the other hand, I disagree with the implication that the proposal was doomed because we had a short period of time during which to comment upon it. Discourse was very encouraging even the very day that the Mayor decided to prematurely end the public comment period! The petitioners – that is, MetroWest and Pine Street – had received a list of questions and concerns from Waban residents whose opinions had been recorded at the previous community meeting, and they were prepared to address those questions at a June 27 community meeting (which the Mayor also killed). Pine Street had proven commendably responsive to public concerns, tightening their selection criteria in response to specific concerns from residents. Frankly, I was very happy with the way discussion was going – until the Mayor ended things before they had run their course.
I find it very difficult to understand claims that “You can’t surprise the neighbors in the weeks before the deadline and say this is the project.” What, do we have some sort of innate block that says that we can’t do research and form an opinion in 30 days? I personally found that to be more than enough time.
Even if you disagree with me, though – if you think things *were* too sudden – I think we can all agree that public opinion was evolving day by day. I think that is the primary reason why the Mayor was wrong to shut things down prematurely – he cut off a process that *embodied* democracy. Thoughts? As a student, I guess the question of whether or not the Mayor’s actions were truly democratic, or (as I believe) autocratic is interesting to me both because I am passionate about this issue and because I think it is an interesting intellectual question.
Ted, it was you on the Guantamo thing.
Excerpted from a WickedLocal article on it.
“But while the resolution’s sponsors, Aldermen Stephen Linsky and Ted Hess-Mahan,…………..”
You didn’t own up to it. Are you embarrassed?
Barry, nope. Steve Linsky, who is Jewish, got called anti-Semitic, as did I. But that is not true of either of us. I just happen to believe that a nation that wrongfully detains a man for 8 years ought to do something to make it up to him.
Go Newton Mom!!!
It’s too bad this discussion didn’t occur before the override. I guess people knew all this time that there are people struggling in our community and instead of making tough decisions, their solution was to increase their taxes.
Tom Scheff says: “It helps future projects. We can comeback to this project in a few months.”
For a slightly different perspective on this debacle, I would just like to point out that coming back to this proposal in a few months may be dandy but the fact is that the current owner of the property, a nonprofit, needs to sell this property soon. If you were trying to sell your home and had already purchased another, would you want to be told that the potential buyer needs a few months to regroup. Nah. It would be fiscally imprudent for the Hospice to wait around while the City of Newton debates….find another buyer and move on!
Agreed, Native Newtonian – plus, in order to receive the federal funding, the Mayor would have to decide before July 14, which is when the city submits the annual Consolidated Housing Plan to HUD. If we “come back to this project in a few months” it would be too late. I find it very interesting that Mr. Scheff, who clearly has strong opinions about the this project’s “process,” didn’t know that.
Native Newtonian- I don’t know if you were at the meeting as I don’t know who you are. One of the neighbors asked what would happen if the city missed the deadline and the city’s response was that Metro/PSI can comeback and rewrite a new proposal.
Ted,
It doesn’t make me feel any better that you say you’re not anti-Semitic. See, that’s not the issue. It’s a distraction. The issue is, in the whole world, or US, why does a terrorist have to be invited here? Not just allowed if he chooses, which I question. But, INVITED, like he’s an asset to the community. Or, as I see it, he assuages some bleeding-heart liberal feelings of guilt that you have, and you want all of Newton to bear the burden of that, of another Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
Maybe you want to put him in that affordable housing?
Ted, people who think like you seem to think really scare me.
Barry Cohen: you accuse Ted of basically straying from the “issue” but you are the one who is bringing up terrorism when we’re trying to talk about housing for the homeless. I think that the issues that you bring up are interesting and debatable but irrelevant in this forum, and they detract from the issues at hand.
Barry, you called him a terrorist, not I. He was determined to have been unlawfully detained, which was why he needed a place to go. Many of the detainees at Gitmo were wrongfully detained, which I think was just, well, wrong. But we digress.
Have a good weekend, all. I truly enjoyed our discussion.
Ted,
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. The guy may or may not have been adequately guilty to be detained at Gitmo, but my guess is that he’s was taken somewhere in a war situation where he represented the other side. Consequently, he’s not our friend, and holds a grudge against us Americans, particularly after spending years in Gitmo.
So, perhaps he should have been released and sent to a country friendly to him, but to bring him to Newton to me reflects poor judgement. That’s something I really don’t want in our mayor.
Think Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and his brother, guys who had reason to thank the US for taking them in, giving the mother and brother citizenship, giving them welfare, and educating them. Yet, look what happened. Yeah, Ted, VERY poor judgement.
Have a good weekend.