Blogger, Newton resident, former Newton Times political editor (who, by the way, had a large staff!), but best known as the former WCVB-TV editorial director Marjorie Arons-Barron writes that Newton liberals unfairly criticized Mayor Setti Warren over the recent affordable housing discussions around Engine 6. She was one of the affordable housing activists in the 60’s and recalls the importance of public dialogue during those days. This is worth the read.
The problem is that the Mayor ” Time Out ” was not done to revisit this project but to Kill it.
I think it would be important to know if Arons- Barron who is a Waban resident would be willing to accept this project for the homeless in Waban if the discussion had been allowed to continue.
I would highly doubt that the Mayor is going to revisit this specific project in the fall.
Joanne, I understand 100% where you’re coming from.
At the same time, speaking for myself I live in Auburndale and I wasn’t a supporter of the Engine 6 project either. I wouldn’t want that specific project in my neighborhood either. Now if they redeveloped the Auburndale Star Market and those 2 story office buildings on Comm Ave into suitable locations to attract innovative industry employers that offer high paying jobs that would be super.
The line “…bringing to the residential neighborhood individuals with a history of drug addiction, mental illness and, according to the original proposal, level one sex offenses” leaped out at me.
This makes it sound like the nine homeless people to be housed in the former firehouse would necessarily have had all these attributes. Is this fearmongering or accurate? No, I’m honestly asking…
Robert Welbourn says: “Is this fearmongering or accurate? No, I’m honestly asking…”
I would say it is playing into the fearmongering of others and tacitly relies on stereotypes about formerly homeless people, people who are mentally ill, and people who are recovering from substance and alcohol abuse. There are already a number of people like this living in Newton, including in Waban, but they are mostly invisible to the vast majority of us who never have to worry about having a roof over our heads. For another perspective, read this letter to the TAB from Andrea Kelley, who like me was an early supporter of the Mayor in his first campaign.
I am reminded that around the time the author says she was going door to door to educate people about affordable housing, a family tried to buy a house a few doors down from our house in West Newton. I was told by a relative that when some of the neighbors found out an African-American family was trying to buy the house they got together to try to buy it from the previous owner. The African-American family eventually found a white ally who was willing to act as a “straw man” to help them buy the house, where they lived there for many years in relative peace. I sometimes wonder what would have happened if that family had waited until some of their neighbors finally came around to the idea that having an African-American family move into their neighborhood would be “acceptable.”
The Mayor cut off the discussion Ms. Arons-Barron said would be productive to have before the proponents had an opportunity to answer questions and respond to legitimate concerns. Progress was being made and the proposal was modified to address neighborhood concerns, but now that conversation is on hold indefinitely, and it is not clear when it will resume. The Mayor has made vague promises about holding “educational forums” but at every such event in Newton that I have been to over the past 17 years, I have seen the same small group of committed affordable housing supporters and advocates, so it will basically be about preaching to the choir. It is not an honest effort to engage the entire community as the Mayor should have done from the beginning.
Ted Hess-Mahan continues his campaign of blatant demagoguing.
Marjorie Aarons Barron was not fearmongering. Her comments were an accurate representation of what the Pine Street Inn representative said when asked to describe the tenants of Engine 6. In fact, he was more graphic. As I’ve said before, you’d be better informed if you had attended any meetings and it doesn’t serve your campaigns or you to make assumptions about Newton families concerned about development in their neighborhoods.
And, to compare any of this with racism is outrageous, even for you.
@Terry: We would all be better informed, if that meeting wasn’t cancelled.
Robert Welbourn – The proposal was housing EXCLUSIVELY for “chronically homeless”. By federal gov’t definition, those are individuals with a “disabling condition” principally mental illness and substance abusive. This is not a home for the down and out that with a little help can apply for traditional gov’t assistance and live independently. In terms of criminal offenses, chronically homeless as a group have many run-ins with police and focus on low level sex offenses is frankly an unfair focus
I have tried to find another example of a monitored group home for chronically homeless men in Newton and the only one I’ve found is a number served at the YMCA. Most situations serving formerly homeless in the area are either a transitional home for battered women or permanent independent living for formerly homeless, the key being independent.
This presentation is for your background: http://www.newtonma.gov/documents/residentsguide.pdf
Sorry Terry but THM is right.
This concern didn’t seem to occur with the homeless shelters in Nonantum?
The problem is that the Liberals in Waban are OK with helping the less fortunate just as long as it is not on Beacon Street, Waban, MA.
Money talked in this case and the Mayor made sure that the project was killed.
Unless of course the 60+ supporters can raise the funds for the project to move ahead and then we will see how the Mayor will handle that!
Calling people bigots by drawing analogies to idiots in West Newton blocking out a a black family is utterly offensive. Governing from (touchy-feely) emotion without regard for collateral consequences WILL eventually result in a situation we cannot recover. There really is no clearer example than this Waban proposal which if allowed to fail would risk billions in residential investment.
Greg,-Ted HM characterized Margorie Aarons Barron’s comment as fear-mongering. In fact, it was a statement by the Pine street inn.
Joanne, for what its worth, I agree with you about your concerns about having this kind of project in Nonantum.
I also agree with you that the leftists in Waban are OK with helping the less fortunate just as long as it is not on Beacon Street, Waban, MA.
Attending meetings about affordable housing is just one way to be an advocate. The people who feel they preach to the choir at these meetings may want to consider that others in the community are doing their part in ways that are better suited to their particular style.
Greg – Were we more informed after the first meeting? Other than the fact that more people in the city knew about the project, the meeting shed more heat than light.
The real problem with engine 6 was the presentation. It was poorly presented and thrown at people in the last minute. The people from city hall couldn’t accurately answer people’s questions. When a serious question came up like whether level 1 sex offenders would live there, the staff didn’t know,so they played it safe and told people yes. (later we found out level 1’s were taken off the table, too). It was a horror show,
If I recall correctly the First and ONLY meeting was WITHOUT anyone from Metrowest. Maybe if they had been included they would have answered alot of questions. And the second meeting that was supposed to include them to answer the communitys concern was cancelled by the Mayor.
So maybe if the Mayor had at least let the process go forward he would have had some questions answered about “What Type of People” were going to be living there.
And as I have said – if they get private funding this project is going forward and the Mayor and the community lost their chair at the table by virtue of the Mayor KILLING the discussion.
Hoss dont quite understand what the difference is between Idiots in the West Newton and the Idiots in Waban?
Before the Benghazi-ing of this issue goes much further, I wonder just how then-mayoral candidate Ken Parker would have been treated if he had made remotely similar comments as those now emerging from candidate THM.
To wit: A “relative” told me a story about a racial incident in West Newton? The story is equated with a community’s reluctance to embrace a specific plan (that has no racial component)? Not to mention that there are “hundreds” of people waiting to tell the Mayor “yes in my backyard?” Or, the crisis of homelessness is equated to young people who can’t afford to buy a home in Newton?
We’re about to have an election for Mayor. What standards will be applied to these comments? Can the candidate just say anything?
Ted H-M is a far-left radical in his thinking. This is why he conflated a racial housing issue with this housing issue for problem people. He sees all this issues as the same. Rich white American heterosexual people are oppressing poor, minority, foreign, and GLBT people. He is the “champion of the oppressed”. He wants housing even if it houses dangerous people. He wants Guantanamo prisoners here in Newton in spite of what brought them to Guantanamo and how dangerous it would be.
Ted’s extremist agenda would be extremely dangerous for Newton residents. There are many ways to solve the kinds of problems he sees, but his solution is always to get the people he sees as guilty, and make them pay.
I hope he isn’t elected mayor. Unfortunately, most voters have no idea about who is running.
Bill – Instead of worrying about THM you should get your Best Friend the Mayor to come out and tell us the TRUTH as to why he cancelled the meeting and the discussion. Wouldnt it have looked better if he had allowed an open discussion? So if he doesnt like the issue he will just kill it? Is that how he runs the city? Maybe that is why there are so many unhappy people over at City Hall?
And just an FYI – Many people I know that may not have supported THM before this issue came out – will now be voting for him just because of what your Best Friend did in this issue.
You cant just STOP the discussion- call it whatever your want – how is not wanting homeless people in your neighborhood any different from not wanting African – Americans, Muslims, Transgender, etc living next door – it is a form of racism and discrimination anyway you look at.
Joanne said: “Hoss dont quite understand what the difference is between Idiots in the West Newton and the Idiots in Waban?”
Joanne, With all respect for your stance here, you’re asking a very sensitive question. Very sensitive. If a neighborhood is asking about the collateral impact of any development in their neighborhood — a liquor store, a McDonalds, a body shop, a pot pharmacy, a massage parlor, a college dorm, etc, etc, — I would appreciate respect for impact questions and not grandstanding by what are supposed to be our advocates in gov’t. The race bigot remark was not respectful in the least and shows an inability to try to understand the full picture.
Joanne is the same kind of extremist radical as Ted, which is why see can’t see the distinctions between any issues, all of which she sees as indications of the oppression of the elite over those not empowered. It clouds her thinking and it clouds Ted’s thinking.
Barry – OMG – if you only knew how extremely radical I am not.
And Hoss the only person that did any grandstanding here was our Mayor when he killed the discussion.
I asked this on another thread and it was never answered, so I’ll try again: are there any existing developments in Newton like the one proposed for Engine 6? By that I mean supportive housing – small units geared toward single adult residents, with live-in residential support, supervision and programming? If yes, we should be able to point to those successful examples. If no, then maybe this project is materially different enough to require a longer timeline to get the project right and to gain the necessary neighborhood support.
Tricia — Some “chronically homeless” are living at the YMCA. If you’re looking for a dedicated housing situation similar to this, none are in Newton. There’s one in Jamacia Plain. It’s an old convent on a huge, lovely, plot — obviously a more attractive living situation that a small fire station. That is what I found — not sure if I covered all the bases though.
Joanne,
I simply meant that you seem to have, especially by your last comments, the tinted glasses that stereotype certain people as inherently bad, and in need of straightening out, and certain people, by virtue of their skin color, economic level, sexual orientation, or religion, as inherently good, and in need of community assistance and sympathy. It’s the Elizabeth Warren 1% attitude that says that if you’re wealthy, no matter how you earned your wealth, it should be the property of the poor, no matter what causes them to become or remain poor. It’s stereotyping in a far more egregious way than whatever caused the downfall of Paula Deen, because it affects entire segments of society.
Barry – I voted for Scott Brown.
Joanne,
I guess no-one is all bad. What you were saying sounds like the likes of Ted and Liz Warren. I’m sure Ted didn’t vote for Scott Brown.
Not wanting homeless people is not a form of racism. There’s a stream of thinking now that was reflected in your statement that says that any time you have an opinion about some group that is different, even if the difference is behavior and not race, you must be a bigot. I had a bad interaction near a mosque close by because I looked Jewish. Since you chose to bring in Islam, here’s an interesting video
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=07b_1368058553
there are many more like it from all over the world, including from events in the US.
Joanne – Having concerns about housing chronically homeless people in your neighborhood is not the same as not wanting African-Americans or Muslims to move in next door. Chronically homeless people need all sorts of support services. Your next door neighbors, most likely, can fend for themselves. At the very least, they don’t need 24/y support. I don’t doubt that there is some aspect of NIMBY-ism for some Waban residents here, but labeling it racism is simply inaccurate.
Thanks, Hoss, for the link to that presentation. It was at least somewhat informative.
So, if I understand correctly, labeling the prospective residents as being potential sex offenders is inaccurate, but they would largely be *former* substance abusers or those who had *previously* been mentally ill.
I see that Metro West were offering to give tours of similar facilities in the area — presumably places like 1754 Beacon Street, Brookline, or 35 Creighton Street, Jamaica Plain — is there anyone reading this thread who has taken them up on it? Perhaps someone from the Tab might like to do so, and perhaps ask the neighbors what the impact actually was?
We need more light and less heat in this discussion.
Gail – you call it concerns – I call it discrimination – – whether you discriminate against someone’s race, creed, sexual background, mental capacity or homelessness – it is all the same in my book. Discrimination is Discrimination.
What we should be really UPSET about is that the Mayor Silenced the community’s right to Freedom of Discussion. That is what you should be upset about. Everyone did have concerns – did he allow those concerns to be answered? And as I said – if they get the funding and go ahead with it anyway – did the Mayor get all those concerns answered for the Waban neighbors? He may think he killed the project but I have a feeling that he just made those 60+ supporters angry enough to pull the funding together and put this group on Beacon Street.
Robert Welbourn — On the sex offender part, I’m only saying it’s not particularly important to me. Pine St Inn has since suggested they would try to weed out sex offenders — but the problem with level 1 is there is no central database with names for out-of-state situations.
On the addiction/mental health part, that’s what this situation is designed to handle. This is not a cheap social service endeavor– it’s much cheaper to hand out typical rental assistance. job training and health insurance. The purpose here is very noble– get individuals away from the cycle of shelter/street life and into a more comfortable life where they can get personal attention from a housemaster. Very noble indeed.
The largest aspect causing concern is that there was practically no introduction of this group home to the neighborhood. There were eventually meetings scheduled one week before key decisions needed to be made. The key meeting was on THE NIGHT that the mayor scheduled his campaign kickoff with supporters. Poor scheduling or damned intentional? The mayor seemed trapped and forced to cause a time out – which he did.
If McDonalds wanted to open in Waban square, our BoA would be extremely careful not to upset the integrity of the existing neighborhood. This one represents terrible execution all around
Joanne,
Having concerns about people who have a history of mental illness, substance abuse, criminal behavior and level one sex offenses isn’t the same as having concerns with someone with a history of being black.
I was looking forward to the open meeting as well, but lets not dwell on the past. Whats in the future for engine 6?
Tom – it is not dwelling in the past – IMHO – it shows a Bad precedent by our Mayor.
Maybe his BF Bill Brandel can tell you when exactly in the Fall the discussions will resume about Engine 6????
And Kim – some of the people in the Shelters in Nonantum have many of the issues you list. Not so much of a concern on the North side of the city now is it?
Joanne, you keep referencing “shelters” in Nonantum. Are you saying that there is a supportive housing development for the chronically homeless in Nonantum?
Is this the elderly housing project on Watertown St or something else?
Tricia- To hopefully answer your question – There is quite a bit of supportive housing/group homes for developmentally disabled in Newton – California Street, Watertown Street, Washington Street near Warren House, etc
There are also Family Shelters in the Nonantum area – in some cases these people are from Homeless situations and some are from Abusive relationships. Families are homeless for a variety of reasons. These shelters are staffed and have supportive services.
If the people on the North side objected to something in their neighborhood I would support that as a fellow Newton resident. I wouldn’t call them names blindly and make assumptions about them.
The difference is we accepted them without objection.
It is hard to be supportive of objections to Engine 6 project when the Mayor killed any discussion and answers about it from Metro West Collaborative and the Pine Street Inn. Only then could ALL of us have made an honest and objective decision of this project in our city.
From the City’s website, available to all:
” What differentiates the supportive housing model representative of Engine 6 is that to be eligible for this housing, applicants must demonstrate that they are in recovery or treatment and capable of independent iving with some support, as well as a commitment to engaging in supportive servies prior to moving into housing and a willingness to continue these or other supports once in housing. Engine 6 will not be what is known as ‘housing first’, a housing model where individuals are taken directly off the street and into housing before addressing any service needs of the individual. While ‘housing first’ has proven very successful, it will not be utilized in any manner at Engone 6.”
http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/planning/hcd/housingdev/projects.asp
So does this mean that the Mayor has opened up the discussion or is this link from prior to him killing the discussion about Engine 6?
The Mayor may have killed the public discussion but that doesn’t mean it is a dead deal. The property is still scheduled to close. And the legalities of denying housing to a protected class (mentally ill) is a question that the Mayor perhaps hasn’t considered. Just sayin’….
Off topic: What if I were to set up a meeting like the SPED issue at newtv, where people can get up and voice their opinions on affordable housing, in particular engine 6. Just because the Mayor killed the open meeting, doesn’t mean we can’t have one of our own. If I put together, in early September, an opportunity where people can voice their opinions on both sides, unedited, but it will be aired on newtv…would you show up and speak out?
Just my opinion, but the use of the word “kill” is off-putting to some people who may be supportive of the project. I remember the phrase being used excessively in a discussion of another controversy a few years ago, and it was not well received in the larger community. Factual, well researched, thoughtful statements are more likely to sway opinion.
OK Jane, I’ll rephrase….Just because the Mayor (cancelled) the open meeting, doesn’t mean…..
Tom-sounds good.
Ted H-M:
I’m quite disappointed that you are trying to defeat the Mayor, i.e. score a win for yourself and your own candidacy, by juxtaposing the Mayor’s cancelling the planned open discussion on the Engine-6 issue with an alleged instance of racism. How transparent do you want to be? And it’s an utterly weak – if not false – argument. I suppose that’s politics, and why should we expect you to be above it?
Furthermore, if you are correct that it’s always the same gung-ho group at the pro-affordable housing meetings, then why do you see any issue with his cancelling one more such one-sided meeting until various aspects of this complex issue can be dealt with, which I understand is happening?
Usually when you cancel a meeting you reschedule it – So WHEN has the Mayor rescheduled the meeting? Because if the Mayor does not have any plans of ever rescheduling this meeting than maybe we need to find another word that will not be as offensive as Kill but means the same thing – so would the Mayor “suppressed the discussion” or the Mayor “prohibited further discussion” sound more PC???
Joanne,
In any one year since January 1, 2010, there has been more public discussion in the Mayor’s tenure than I’ve ever before seen in Newton, and this has given rise to new neighborhood groups springing up, and so on and on. Before his tenure, there were two neighborhood groups; now there are four, all springing from his many neighborhood meetings.
Almost all of the negative arguments in these blog posts (i.e. accusing the Mayor of “killing” debate, etc.) are highly emotional and purely speculative and without any evidence as to support real support. For example, just because he hasn’t yet rescheduled the meeting somehow means that he is “killing” public debate, that he’s never going to reschedule public discussion and that he’s going to drop the issue entirely. All of this is purely speculative and without support. This is exactly the type of disastrous public debate that we DON’T want to have.
Jane H, if you’re directing that comment to me then I never said he is killing debate, I said he killed the open meeting. There’s a huge difference and if you want to nitpick, so can I. We can always keep the debate open without him, he cancelled the open meeting thats just a fact…whether he reschedules another open meeting still doesn’t excuse him for cancelling the first open meeting.
Plus, I’m not the first to use this terminology and if you’re directing you’re comments at me then I would argue that this is politically motivated (not that there’s anything wrong with that).
People-if I put that forum together at newtv, do I get commitments from both sides to be prepared and voice you’re opinions? Otherwise, I won’t bother.
Jane H – Did you read his press release when “cancelled” the meeting? Didn’t sound like he has any intention of EVER rescheduling it.
Maybe you can find out and let us all know when he will be discussing the Engine 6 project in the Fall and then post it here. I am sure the opponents and the Supporters of this project would love to know.
Seems that if the Mayor had not “stopped” the “discussion” we would not be having any disastrous public debate.
Tom-I’m quite certain that Jane H> did not direct her comment at you. You just happened to be the third post in a row that used a highly emotional term rather than a word that described what actually happened. Then you rewrote your comment so that it more accurately reflected the situation.
An open meeting is just one means of communication and discussion, and may not always be the most effective. Newton has a local newspaper that publishes every submitted letter and columns from proponents/opponents about many issues as well as two local quite lively blogs. Residents from both sides of this issue have used all three forums to express their opinions.
Looks like the inmates are running the asylum again! 😀
Tom,
Here’s a good example of upping the emotional tenor of this discussion – and making it personal – beyond what is productive – which is exactly my point. I neither had you in mind nor anybody else specifically in mind. So please.
Joanne,
To supplement Jane’s list of ways in which the public can express their views, which supplemented my comment, there are EVEN open one-on-one meetings with the Mayor and anybody can call the Mayor’s office and make an appointment for one of those. My point is that there are more ways of providing citizen input in this Mayor’s administration than I can recall in any recent administration. I don’t need to or care to find out “when” he is going to have the type of open meetings you’d like to see. There is no legal deadline on this matter. Rushing this would invite reckless decisions and I believe that as a City we are way past that point and I hope that you would agree that that would be counter-productive.
Jane H- the Mayor STOPPED the open discussion. We can agree to disagree. Not allowing all sides to express their views was wrong on his part.
But I am glad that the 60 supporters of this project are keeping the pressure on and if they are able to find funding than this will be a non issue for the people that support this project.
Then the Mayor and the people that are non supportive of Engine 6 – well they will just have to learn to live with it.
@Jane H
I am confident I saw a few comments pointed at individuals from you, as well. People who live in glass houses…
Janet, the only comment I directed at an individual was my comment to Ted H-M, and I directed my comment to him. Later I addressed my comments specifically to Tom and Joanne. You can be accusative if you want – and add fuel to the fire if you want and not take me at my word. If you want to pretend that you live in my head, fine. Go ahead and pretend. That’s why these online debates are so unproductive.
I am not sure why my name appears in the by-line to this blog post, but for the record, I did not author this.
When the site got overhauled a while back something happened with the byline’s for most of the older posts. They all go scrambled.