What do you predict will happen in Newton in 2015 and what do you hope will happen? And what bad habits should our city try and break in the year to come?
Your predictions (and resolutions) for Newton in 2015
by Greg Reibman | Dec 29, 2014 | Newton | 88 comments
I wont predict the future (atleast in this post) but I’d like to see a lot more transparency which has been promised in every election I have seen in the past 10 years.
I predict that that all those folks who are vowing to unseat Matt Hills and the rest of the School Committee following the Open Meeting Laws violations will fail to come up with qualified candidates to challenge them.
I predict that many residents will be shocked when they see their sewer fees go up in the second half of the year because their aldermen decided to allow second water meters which will benefit a small subset of residents and pass the cost onto the rest of us.
I hope that the 1.5% 40B exemption holds up once it is challenged but that at the same time our aldermen and community commit to building affordable housing and housing that will appeal to younger innovation-economy workers. (Yeah, I’m an optimist.)
“It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.” ― Yogi Berra
Greg stole my thunder, but I was going to say that the Board of Aldermen is going to make everyone mad when it approves the new water/sewer rates next Spring: everyone who can get a second meter will be mad because they won’t save as much money as they thought they would and everyone else who cannot get or does not want a second meter will be livid about the increases in their sewer bills. And, as a bonus, they will all get their first quarterly bills just before the fall elections!
These are all fantastic thoughts and words, but they are just words. It’s nice to say that we have to replace the incumbents, but if you don’t go out and help/work for a candidate then it doesn’t matter. Incumbents have an automatic base of people they have met over the term(s), challengers need help. I know from experience. As a challenger you think you are running to improve things and make a difference, but after you put your name out there and gather the signatures no one cares. Sometimes you might get a positive comment or two, but if you are encouraging people to run, you should put your money where your mouth is by either running yourself or helping out a candidate. Otherwise, don’t pump people up to run only to get beaten down. Running is tough, mistakes are made and challengers need help.
But you all know that.
Would be candidates should heed Tom’s advice: It is incredibly hard to challenge an incumbent and you do need a strong network to prevail. Often you need to be willing to run more than once to prevail (Exhibit A & B would be Margaret Albright, who took three tries to succeed and Steve Siegel, who required two run.)
But I’m always troubled by the suggestion — and Tom makes it at least annually — that just because one encourages candidates to run, that means the encourager owes challengers their support/time/vote. At the end of the day, one still should vote for the person who will do the best job.
The problem is that most School Committee members run unopposed, which allows some really bad candidates to effectively elect themselves. The solution is a Charter Amendment placing “none of the above” on every ballot. That would considerably raise the standard of electability, as well as accountability on the part of incumbents.
As far as my prediction for 2015. I predict that the quality of education in Newton Public Schools will continue to decline, as it has now for several decades.
@Mike: Your “solution” is good for arm chair critics looking for a way to vent and/or punish, but please explain how that actually improves the quality of our schools.
@Mike: What happens in the event that “None of the above” wins? In the case of the School Committee, let’s say, are you suggesting that no one would represent the city from a given ward if the person on the ballot did not win more votes than “none of the above?”
In the perfect world, the best candidate would always win, but that clearly isn’t the case. Being the best campaigner doesn’t translate into being the best candidate, having the most money doesn’t translate into being the best candidate, yet those are 2 keys into winning elections.
@Greg and Gail– I start with the premise that no one should be able to elect themselves to public office. But the truth is, it happens all the time in Newton. That’s not “democracy”!
Voters should always be the ones to decide a candidate’s fitness for elective office. Uncontested elections lock voters out of that process. Adding “none of the above” to every local ballot empowers voters, even in single candidate elections. It will keep unworthy new candidates from attaining elected office, and give voters more control over entrenched incumbents. It will result in higher quality candidates, and more importantly, higher quality office holders.
Whenever “none of the above” wins, a new election would be held for that office, and the loser would be precluded from running again. I understand the associated cost, but in my opinion that would be money well spent. If [as we are so often reminded] democracy is worth fighting and dying for, then it is certainly worth spending a little more to get it right.
@Mike: If I’m not mistaken, you live in Ward 7, which is where Matt Hills lives. When are you launching your campaign?
Mike-If you think things are so terrible in the NPS, then run for SC. As should others who whine and complain about the SC – or the BOA. I admire people like Tom who are willing to walk the walk. Whether or not I agree with him on issues is beside the point – he’s put himself out there. It’s easy enough to talk the talk for 10 minutes on a blog, but let’s face it, most people would never be willing to spend night after night away from their family and/or personal life to attend hours of meetings, in addition to committee meetings and countless city events, only to come home to an email box full of constituents who need attention.
It makes no sense to blame those who are doing the work of the Board or School Committee for the lack of candidates. I don’t hear too many people clamoring to serve on the BOA or SC, and with good reason. It’s hard work.
Mike,
If you include in the decline in the quality of education in Newtons School System the fact that little kids will be confronted with having to navigate a school building with 500 + other unknown children, or the fact that they will have to ride on a school bus to and from school, or if mom has to work and doesn’t have a giant SUV to ferry them to and from their mandatory after school art class, baseball game or ballet lessons, I would have to agree. Their quality of education, if not more certainly, quality of life, is not what it might have been if we had local schools that they could walk to and from, and knew who their classmates were !
Greg,
why don’t you for once stop provoking people. How’s the view from the cheap seats??? The fact is you don’t have the guts to run.
@Jane– I admire Tom as much as you do, probably more. But I’ve also run for public office. So I have in fact “walked the walk,” as you put it.
@Blueprintbill– If there’s one thing the SC is good at, it’s stressing-out students. I’d give them an A+ at that.
@Greg– We’ve known each other for a long time now. Do you really think I’d run for School Committee? If I ever decide to run for office again, the only job I’m interested in is Mayor.
@Tom– You are awesome! I mean that sincerely. One of these days you’re going to win an election and everyone will wonder why the hell they didn’t elect you sooner. In my opinion, you’ve accomplished more for Newton than many people who have held elective office. I just want you to know your efforts are appreciated. Happy New Year my friend!
@Mike: Given the issues you are passionate about — school time starts, backpacks and the overall quality of our education — plus your anger at Hills for the way the executive session meetings were run, I’d think a run for school committee against the sitting chair would be very much in your wheelhouse. I can’t imagine a better platform for you. And think of the debates!
BTW (and this will drive Tom nuts) I’d probably still vote for Hills because, while I’m not happy with the executive sessions either, I think Hills has done a good job overall. But, as you know, I’d keep an open mind. And think of the debates!
Thanks Mike and Jane.
@Greg. I, too, am puzzled by the Board’s decision to change the sewer and water rates by approving the second meter program. As you say, this only benefits a relatively small number of residents and developers who, up to this point, seem to have had the financial resources to water large lawns and gardens. These increases follow on the heel of rather sharp increases in property taxes over the past few years. The combination of these and other costs of living may be unsettling to many homeowners. These increases will have all taken effect before the next municipal election. Those aldermen who voted against changing the water rate formula will have something to crow about to most of the electorate.
@Bob: For the record, the aldermen who will be able “to crow” (because they opposed it) are Baker, Blazar, Brousal-Glaser, Cote, Danberg, Harney, Laredo, Sangiolo and Yates.
@Mike: Your “none of the above” solution makes no sense to me. While I agree that it’s bothersome that it only takes one vote for someone — incumbent or newcomer — to get elected, I think the fault lies with voter apathy, not with the votegetter(s). Setting up a punitive system doesn’t sound like democracy to me. It also doesn’t sound feasible. What if “none of the above” keeps winning? How many times does that scenario play out before a ward doesn’t get representation? People who run for office do more to get voters to the ballots than anybody else does. Again, I don’t see the benefit in punishing them for trying to draw people to the polls. And, I’m sure I don’t have to remind you that it’s not just incumbents who run unopposed in this city.
Mike-You last ran for office in 2005. In 4 hours, it will be 2015, so you were a candidate once 10 years ago. Let’s just keep the record straight – you walked a mighty short walk a long time ago. Now you want to get rid of the present School Committee members, but want someone else to do the heavy lifting of running for office and, if elected, doing the ongoing work of the committee.
It seems to me if you want changes on the School Committee in 2015, then you need to run for office in 2015.
@Gail– Democracy is based on choice. When voters have no choice, that’s not democracy. And uncontested elections deny voters a choice, because the outcome is predetermined. We’ve got School Committee members winning “elections” by larger margins than Saddam Hussein when he was in power.
A voter’s choice in an uncontested election should be, whether or not the candidate is suitable for that office. You [Gail] are concerned that adding “none of the above” to each ballot is somehow being “punitive” to candidates. Lets give that some context. I’m concerned about a [current] system that is unfair to thousands of voters, denied any role in determining who holds a large number of “elective” offices in this city. It’s the interest of the voters, not the interest of the candidates that’s paramount.
I also have to disagree with your idea that “voter apathy” has anything to do with the lack of candidates. I might suggest you’ve got that backward. More candidates in more contested elections = more voter interest and participation.
You also asked… “what if ‘none of the above’ keeps winning?” I’d simply ask you this… Do you want someone serving in public office, who can’t defeat “none of the above” at the ballot box?
@Mike: Voters do have a choice. They have the choice to run for office. If they decide not to and are left with candidates with whom they are unhappy, that is a result of democracy. You might not like the result, but it is democracy.
You wrote:
I would submit they are equally important.
John Doe is entitled to the same respect when he’s the person filling out the ballot as when he’s the person whose name is on the ballot. He’s still the same Newton resident and taxpayer. He especially doesn’t lose rights when he becomes a candidate running for reelection.
I suggested that voter apathy plays into the “none of the above” vote because often, voters don’t choose a candidate because they don’t feel informed enough to do so. I’ll concede that apathy may be an inaccurate term in some cases though.
@Tom: True, Nevada does have such an option, but it carries no significance. If “none of the above” wins, the next highest vote getter is declared the winner of the contest. So, the cost of having such a choice might be embarrassment, but there is no dollar amount attached.
Jane– What country do you live in? Because the place I live doesn’t require that citizens who advocate change, run for public office. In fact, in my country we believe that it’s good for citizens to speak up and participate. Get a passport. Come visit.
@Miike: Yeah sure, it’s great to speak up, blah, blah, blah. But if you look back over our nation’s history, you’d have to admit that it takes individuals willing to do more than sit at home and gripe to enact change. You once served this city well by challenging a popular, sitting, mayor and forced him to debate his positions. You were never going to win but it served a good purpose. But as Jane noted, that was a decade ago.
And you say if you ever ran again it would be for mayor. Well two years of meaningful contributions as a member of the School Committee would be a much better platform to run from than some fellow who likes to moan about stuff on a few blogs.
Mike, I do see Nevada allows people to vote NOTA on Federal and State elections, but I can’t find any municipalities in the United states have it for local campaigns. That said, maybe the charter commission can take a look at this issue next year.
Mike – The problem is that you (and several others) demand that we have a new SC, but don’t want to do the work involved. Speaking your mind is one thing, but assuming others will carry out your demands is quite another matter. We all know that taking on responsibility for the changes you’d like to see in government isn’t a requirement of citizenship, but the reality is that if YOU want a particular change to happen, then YOU have take some action. Writing on a blog is not taking an action.
If you want a change to the charter, contact the LWV to pick up some signature collection sheets to get the Charter Commission on the ballot and stand outside the library or Shaw’s for a few hours asking for signatures. Or is that someone else’s responsibility as well?
I am afraid that Mike is too correct about the climate of elections for future SC candidates. Democratic contests are very weak in Newton. Present SC leaders will determine who runs and wins elections in the future.
Margaret Albright narrowly won as SC member for Ward 2. We won’t likely see that happen again. Most likely we will see a repeat of the last election where new candidates run unopposed especially if the are chosen by Matt Hills and his ‘in crowd’.
@Colleen: If Margaret Albright is as free of Matt Hills’ evil influence as you seem to be suggesting, why didn’t she object to the way the executive sessions meetings were held? And if perhaps she did object and was ignored, then why didn’t she go to the press? The Fleishman related votes were unanimous. Why is she less guilty than any of the members who are part of Hills’ “crowd.”
Perhaps Albright is not the savior you make her out to be. Or perhaps these matters are more nuanced than you are willing to acknowledge.
So he can’t stand out in front of the library or Shaw’s collecting signatures to get a Charter Review on the ballot?
The signatures are almost done.
@Jane– You’re criticism of me is beyond absurd. I’ve run for office, been in three mayoral debates, written more than a dozen newspaper commentaries, appeared on local television and radio, had my candidacy endorsed by the TAB, served as an advisor to another mayoral candidate, held political house parties, hosted dozens of lawn signs, and made contributions to at least 20 local candidates. Oh, and I’ve also collected signatures in front of Shaws.
I think that the problem you have with me has nothing to do with my level of civic participation, and everything to do with my criticism of the School Committee. Why don’t you just stick to debating me on those issues, rather than focusing on petty attacks with no basis in fact?
That’s great to hear, Tom! You have been a major part of this enormous effort, so thank you. How many certified signatures are required to get a Commission Review on the ballot? I know it’s at least 10,000, but somehow 12,000 sticks in my mind. Then it’s usually necessary to collect 50% over that number to make sure the signatures are from registered voters. On average, one can collect 25 signatures/hour for a candidate or issue related collection, but this one was much harder because you had to explain what the Commission Review process was in order to get people to sign the papers. In the end, I suspect it will have taken 800 people-hours of signature collecting to complete the process. Many thanks go to the League of Women Voters who have also put a tremendous amount of time and energy into this effort.
@Greg– I don’t think you’re giving Village 14 enough credit. This blog attracts the most outspoken members of our community. I believe that a large majority of local office holders read V14, and the words that are written here almost certainly influence public policy. Not my words, everybody’s collective words.
For example, I think this blog contributed to the Mayor’s recent reversal of 40B policy. Also, without V14 and the TAB Blog, there would have been practically no public debate about Superintendent Fleishman’s plagiarism or the School Committee’s handling of it.
I think you should give yourself more credit for hosting such a wonderful forum, and perhaps be a little more sensitive to the other folks who are posting here. I’m thick-skinned, so you and Jane can say what you like about me. But your suggestion that I’m here to “moan about stuff,” really diminishes this blog and is demeaning to those that participate.
@Gail– I disagree that the interest of candidates and the interest of voters are equally important. In fact, I’ve never heard anyone suggest that before. Government exists to serve the people. We refer to office holders as “public servants.” That doesn’t mean candidates are not entitled to fairness. They most certainly are. But when there is a conflict between what’s best for a candidate vs. what’s best for the public, I’m going to “vote” for the public every time.
In most cases, in order to hold public office a person needs to win an election. That is THE core principal of democracy. Unfortunately, the standard for attaining public office is too low in Newton, a factor that’s driven in large part by so many elective offices and an insufficient number of candidates. This has resulted in people effectively electing themselves in uncontested elections.
You made reference to a candidate named John Doe, and suggested he’s entitled to the same “respect” as a candidate that he would be as a voter. But is Mr. Doe entitled to be mayor, alderman or school committee member, simply because no one else ran for the same office? Under our current rules, he is. In my opinion, he shouldn’t be. That is the issue my suggestion addresses. By including “none of the above” on every local ballot, we would assure that every candidate earns the support of a majority of voters. I believe that level of support should be the requirement to “win” elective office in Newton.
Gail, I’ll ask you this question a second time [in a slightly different way]… Would you want someone holding elective office in Newton if that candidate were incapable of beating “none of the above”? Because that’s what’s happening in Newton right now. We have some people in elective office who the voters would reject IF they had a choice.
Mike,
I wouldn’t want a candidate who couldn’t beat “none of the above,” but that it not what’s happening in Newton right now since “none of the above” isn’t an option. Again, I submit that voters elect not to vote for someone on the ballot for reasons other than dissatisfaction.
Is Mr. Doe entitled to be mayor because no one else runs? Unfortunately, yes. I don’t see a reasonable alternative. If someone feels strongly enough that Mr. Doe is doing (or would do) a poor job, s/he will run against him.
I can see the reasoning behind adding “none of the above” to the ballot in order to make a statement (so that a candidate will not believe s/he has been given a mandate, for example), but I think that making taxpayers fund elections until a candidate can beat “none of the above” would be punitive to both candidates and taxpayers. You can’t punish people for not voting in a democracy.
Jane – After 2005 Mike steadfastly supported his wife as she battled cancer. Then he became a single father. He has been doing very important and difficult work for many years.
I admire Mike most for his commitment to his wife and family during a such difficult times, as I’m sure the entire community does.
I am commenting on something quite different.
Unfortunately, Lucia, you hit a raw nerve on this one and I suggest you be a bit more careful when you don’t know other people’s stories. The end of 2014 could not have come soon enough for this family but we remain hopeful for a healthy 2015.
@Lucia– You’re a very kind neighbor. I really appreciate the post.
@Jane– I can empathize, and sincerely wish you and your family good health in 2015.
@V14 bloggers– Happy New Year! See you on the next new thread.
@Greg, I’ve come late to reading these comments.
As to my actions, I just want to be clear that the same laws which govern open meetings also bind individuals from discussing what occurred in Executive Session. I respect the process and will continue to operate within that process.
Happy New Year to all.
@Margaret: You may be legally bound from addressing the specifics of executive session but you’ll have to show me the state law that says you can’t go public if you observe those laws being broken.
@Jane,
Here’s an op ed that ran in the Tab on December 12th concerning the status of the signature drive:
http://newton.wickedlocal.com/article/20141212/OPINION/141218702/2012/OPINION
Gail-Just because no one has done it locally in the United States doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t take a look at NOTA here. Other countries do it. We all think we’re leaders in Newton, here’s an opportunity….everything should be on the table and should be thought through carefully.
Jane- How many certified signatures did we need? Since there is no time limit as to how long we can collect the signatures the law states 15% of the amount of registered voters from the previous local election. So, one local election we can have 51,000 registered voters, which means we need 7,650 certified signatures and if we don’t get them in time and the next local election we have 52,000 registered voters then we would need 7,800 certified signatures (the number could obviously go down if we lose the amount of registered voters).
The group I started collecting with, collected a little over 2,000 certified signatures which has to be re certified along with the LWV signatures. The election department has to make sure people didn’t leave the city, etc. For example Anatol moved out of Newton, but signed the papers, his signature doesn’t apply any more.
My understanding is that all the signatures will be given intp David Olson roughly March or April as the LWV are trying to have a cushion.
The reason why you thought 12,000 was the number was because we always try to get a 50% cushion and we always shot for 8,000 signatures…so the goal was 12,000 signatures.
As far as you’re estimates on people hours, it depends. I was a bit slow, I could collect 18-20 signatures per hour, Rhanna Kidwell was/is a machine and she gets 30/hr. So let’s say more people are like me at 20/hr and we needed 12,000 signatures we are looking at 600 hours.
I would like to thank the small group that helped me out. I hesitate to list everyone due to I’ll leave people out. BUT there was one standout I’d like to recognize who is Al Dechter who single handedly collected over 1,000 signatures.
I’d also like to thank the LWV for taking over the project. When we were sputtering they gave life to the drive. Rhanna Kidwell did a fantastic job leading and motivating people to get out there and collect and she lead by example….kudos to everyone that made it happen.
So, the next step is to find real talented candidates to be put on the ballot and making sure they win.
Mike, you’re awesome!!!
“For example, I think this blog contributed to the Mayor’s recent reversal of 40B policy.”
True, This blog is read by many and is very useful. However, the Newton Villages Alliance (whose steering committee I am on) was at the origin of the barrage of emails and phone calls to the Alders and the Mayor, saying we, the voters, have had enough.
Nonsense. 40B opposition is nothing new. There’s no change in policy, and I don’t see how there was any connection between activities on this blog or elsewhere that led to the recent “discovery” of the 1.5% figure.
Isabelle, it would be great to know who else is on the steering committee representing “the voters.”
Everything Adam said.
Adam and Greg,
So 40b opposition is nothing new? For how long has it been on the blog?
Or are you denying that the V-14 Blog had anything to do with the 1.5% introduction to Newton’s struggles ?
Do you not want to take responsibility? Or is it all your doing ?
You dont think there has been any change in policy??? !!! Are you talking about V 14 policy ? Or policy within city hall?
Why is it that you want to know who is on the NVA steering committee ? Don’t 3 or 4 voters have a right to privacy? Why would that knowledge be so “great” ? Are they SO threatening ?
@Blueprint: Opposition to 40B is as old as the law itself, likely longer. I’m found of this blog, but try not to have an overinflated view of reality.
The rash of 40B projects we’ve seen lately reflects an improvement in the economy. I’d love to take responsibility for having turned around the economy, but again I try not to have an overinflated view of reality.
The folks at NVA who feel it necessary to cloak their identities and/or who think they’re responsible for the city invoking the 1.5% standard may want to adopt the same philosophy.
I’m a 40B supporter – although it’s not perfect, low and moderate income housing is desperately needed in MA. Especially near public transportation so people can get to work. Newton has a good transportation network, which should grow even stronger once the State adds local stops to the commuter rail line. I believe Newton should support smart growth and help alleviate statewide problems like 15,812 homeless children in the public school system.
As for additional, low-income children being a burden on the Newton Public Schools – we all benefit when children are well educated. Especially those of us hoping to receive social security benefits in the future. A well-educated child in more likely to be paying into social security.
We’ve seen in other cities where dogs get elected to sheriff or 24 year old get elected Mayor, can someone go out and get signatures for None of the Above and put it on the ballot without going through legislation? I am sure, if you want it in every race you would have to do it 32 times, but if you wanted to pinpoint one or two candidates maybe it would be useful to collect the signatures and experiment with.
@tomsheff, sorry Tom, most if not all positions in Newton require that a registered voter be named on the nomination papers. You would need to get at least eight voters so named to see NOTA on the ballot but then they would be real people and elected. Perhaps I should change my name to “None of the Above” for my next campaign.
It is my view that my vote should count for something meaningful. That is why I NEVER mark the ballot in an uncontested race. In a democracy the voters get what they deserve. If they don’t run and don’t vote, they are left only the right to complain (or praise). I defend that right for them, but always hope that they will see the need to stand in front of the voters or speak at the polls. I, for one, believe that 24 AlderMany are necessary to bring the full-time knowledge that is necessary to tackle the depth of research that our City’s legislators do before voting on hefty issues. We have part-time reps who work overtime to learn the facts. I would be a lot happier if I believed that no political party dominated the races in City Hall. The 55+% of unaffiliated voters that people our voting rolls tells me that more newcomers could run and win if the lop-sided support of an entrenched and well-oiled Democratic Committee were removed, although I haven’t the faintest idea how we could do that!
@Mike: I don’t think you “owe” anyone your participation as a candidate. Speaking rationally so that debate is encouraged is at least as important (if not more so) than taking the “limelight”. Many years ago, there was an entrenched School Committee in Newton that was displaced en masse by a briefly-lived political group called Voice. Unfortunately, the group that they voted into office, was less professionally trained, less articulate and, I believe, less qualified for the positions they occupied. After watching them behave badly for a period, they were replaced by more moderate players. I have described the debacle in this manner: We removed the knaves and replaced them with the fools! I pray that our current School Committee will realize that they need to listen more and that their offices are not for life terms or self-perpetuation of any given ideology. I would hate to see the fools elected again!
Blueprintbill, NVA claims to represent “the voters” so it’s quite pertinent to know who, what, why, where, and how they are representing us all.
Adam, agreed. (but it would be interesting to know the trigger that shifted the focus from just 10% to include 1.5% and who pulled it.)
Margaret, what Greg said.
Tom, while you are looking into adding NOTA to the ballot, be sure to find out if there might be a good reason it is not on any local ballots in the country.
Lucia, great post. I agree wholeheartedly that a cost/benefit analysis of Newton’s welcoming these students would land squarely on the benefit side. Satisfying the requirements of “40B” is a way to encourage “smart growth.” It opens up being able to ensure Newton can decide how we want to grow and attract new development that meets the goals and vision of the community. We can pick and choose instead of being told what will be done.
As of July 2014, prior to the state primaries (where voters may change their enrollment to vote in on of the party primaries), out of a total of 54,359 registered voters in Newton:
–24,405 (44.9%) were registered Democrats
–4,232 (7.8%) were registered Republicans
–228 (0.4%) were registered members of other poliitcal parties, and
–a plurality of 25,494 (46.9%) were registered as “unenrolled,” which means they are not registered members of any political party.
By definition, “unenrolled” voters are not members of any organized political party. While it is true that municipal elections are “nonpartisan,” organization is the key to winning any election. So, although Will Rogers famously said he did not belong to any organized political party because he was a Democrat, as the largest party in Newton by an almost 6 to 1 margin, Democrats have the greatest influence of any political party in Newton elections. But in some elections, for instance school committee and Prop 2-1/2 overrides, the people who are involved in PTOs probably have an even greater influence.
Voters can always vote “none of the above” by simply writing in the candidate of their choice. Those numbers are virtually always a very small percentage of the total vote in local elections. But it is also true that in many local races, the majority of voters leave their ballot “blank” whether the election is contested or not. Historically, only 15-30% of registered voters even bother to vote in local elections in Newton. The poor turnout together with the large number of blank votes leads me to conclude that the primary factor is voter apathy.
In Australia, everyone is required by law to vote in every election. While that would certainly improve voter turnout, it seems somehow un-American to me. So until more people get involved and get organized, a relatively small minority of the community gets to decide who serves.
@Groot. I’m almost certain you will top the ballot ff you change your name to “none of the above” for the next NH Area Council election.
@Sallee. I agree with your position that it would be a mistake to downsize the Board as part of Charter Reform. Some Charter Reform supporters including the League have made this a priority in past efforts to establish a charter reform commission. It sounds great as a cash saver and efficiency motivator for the City, but you only have to follow the Board’s activity for a short period to realize that all 24 members bring something unique and important to each committee meeting and to the full board meetings as well. This is true whether it’s a particular professional skill, a working knowledge of city government and/or the local business community, or a long institutional memory of the City, it’s villages, and the Board’s history. And it also provides room for some gifted mavericks and free spirits who just might have legitimate concerns about something the majority in all its wisdom has already decided to support.
In a contest between Groot and None of the Above I’d vote for Groot every time.
I would, too, but we better be careful what we vote for…that could be the Groot of all Evil!!!! (Joke)
@Bob: The shrinking of the Board of AlderMany is still the NLWV’s position! I hope that the commission that takes on the City Charter reform is wise enough to realize that we are enriched by having so representative a Board. The 24 bring a collective wisdom with a refreshing humility that would be lost to a smaller group.
If there is a smaller Board, do you think the people that lost, would up and leave Newton? Of course not, they would probably fill their time with volunteering for stuff like the NHAC, etc. They’d still be here, just in another capacity.
@Tom. I’m certain they would stay and be active in other things; but the attributes I listed that make our Board so vibrant and special could be lost. A few weeks back. a lot of folks were upset when Aldermen Hess-Mahan and Yates got into a verbal tiff during a Board meeting. Maybe it’s just me, but I would not complain one bit if I saw that kind of eruption at a School Board meeting.
Bob, I don’t understand you’re comparison of Ted and Brian’s verbal rift regarding a larger board of alderman? Please explain. And why would it be OK for the Sc to have the dispute and not the Board and how that applies.
I think you didn’t like the altercation because you like and know both people and hate to see them squabble.
I don’t see it as a reason to keep the Board the same size.
Secondly, I am personally in favor of a smaller Board (as is 67% of the voters), but I would be happy if a group of charter commissioners had the discussion with an open mind. If I found that they had an open mind, I’d be happy with whatever outcome comes from their work, including keeping the Board the same size.
Good thing no one predicted or resolved to keep this thread on topic.
I predict many more blog threads throughout 2015 that do not stay on topic!
@Tom. I think my comments about Brian, Ted and the School Committee were a bit tongue in cheek. And this gives me an opportunity to thank you for all the work you have done to bring a charter commission to fruition. I know it’s been a long, difficult and at times lonely grind; but you stuck to it and persevered.
My New Year’s resolution was to stop explaining the legal implications and providing lengthy answers to the most mundane questions here on Village 14.
I guess I blew that one already.
Happy New Year!
Bob, thanks a lot.
These darn gizmos, you can never tell if someone is joking or not.
@Tom:Did you just call Bob a “Darn gizmo”?
@Greg and Emily. I’ll try and bring it back onto topic. I predict that the people of Newton and elsewhere will be hearing a lot more about Pope Francis in the year ahead and that it will slowly impact some thinking here. I’m finishing up on “The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope” by Austen Ivereigh. It’s quite laudatory, but I’m pretty certain Ivereigh has it right and you learn step by step just how deep this man is in his thinking and judgment. He’s saying and doing things I wish our leaders would emulate, but most show no sign of doing so. And I think, if thinks break right, he could have a transformative impact on economics, the environment and the chance for reordering several of the World’s greatest challenges and priorities. Three years ago I would have told you I’d be crazy to look to the Vatican for leadership on much of anything. Who would have thought.
I predict that everyone on this blog (readers and writers alike) will know the etymology of CAPTCHA Code by the end of 2015. I don’t mean what it is and how we use it on V14, but the acronym for which it stands! And I predict that 80% will have to Google it or look it up some other way, and that 10% of those who look it up will say they didn’t! I predict that Bob Burke knows the acronym for SNAFU and won’t tell us in public! I predict that we will have many more successful Food Drives to help our neighbors who are food fragile. I predict that the City will provide opportunities for affordable housing without the dagger of 40B hanging over its head, and will identify small pockets on small properties that will be re-done with a lot less density to house many more in that economic category than 40B could ever deliver. I am also curious about Bob’s Pope-etic prediction…it just might be on target. This Pope is certainly a deep thinker. As far as what I would like to see in politics in Newton and beyond. I would like to see disagreements where the opposition expresses positions with which you disagree, but you do not demonize that person. You talk, you respond, etc., then you have coffee together. Not kumbaya, but respect.
computers are darn gizmos, I’m not sure if people can be called gizmos.
I just got the joke Greg, Kudos. Thats if it was a joke.
Last post, unless I’m called out.
I predict that you will hear more about the Massachusetts Independent Party more this year.
That is United Independent Party, not Massachusetts Independent Party….my bad
@Sallee. There’s nobody on this blog I wouldn’t like to have coffee with. BTW. McDonald’s on Needham Street is a totally secluded place to go with some adversary if you don’t want anyone to know you are having a meeting or pow wow. The powers that be (large or small) don’t go there. And the coffee (for a buck) is really good.
Yes Tom.
@Bob: how can you say the powers to be don’t go there. Isn’t the secretary of the Highlands Area Council a regular there?
I’ve been mostly tuned out and only took a quick scan of this threadm.. but that’s why I love living in newton. Happy new year to y’all v14’ers from ireland.
Athbhliain faoi mhaise dhuit, Jerry!
Ted – Go raibh maith daoibh, a charde.
@Jerry and Ted: Gesundheit
@Greg. Indeed he is and it’s one reason for extending a Newton Highlands Historic District to include Dickerman Road. I compile monthly Council minutes each year in one notebook for the entire year. These are much sought after collectors items, but I just can’t part with them.
Sallee, I know the meaning of SNAFU but the CAPTCHA will require some thinking and probably some help!
Greg 🙂
Ted H-M, if the options are your “lengthy answers to the most mundane questions” (with an emphasis on lengthy) or no comment from you, I will take the lengthy answer every time. While long, I do find your comments relevant and informative. I also appreciate your willingness to engage the citizens of Newton on a regular basis. I do not always agree with your position; however I do know what it is and why you hold that particular position. Thank you.
Like Jerry, I’ve only been keeping an occasional eye on the posts here (Hamingjusamur Nýtt Ár! by the way), but I think 2015 is going to be a very interesting and potentially momentous year.
I also think V14 is going to be the place to hear about (if not the origin of) quite a bit of the news regarding municipal elections, continuing news on 40B, and even the shape/title of (and number within) the BoA in the coming years.
Welcome back from the land of ice and snow, Chris Steele. (That’s me on guitar.)
Can anyone explain what is the situation with Mr. Mandich? Why does he appear at every S.Comm. meeting and speak out against the authorities regarding the Athletic Dept at Newton South?
What is going on and why no public explanation from somebody in gov’t. I am most concerned that this problem has not been properly resolved.
Hi, Sorry to bring up this old thread, but I too am also concerned with the situation surrounding Mr. Manditch . Every single SC meeting, he seems to be the first one there and speaks about a “situation” or combination of them, going on at the Newton South Athletic Department.
I understand that a lengthy response in regards to the situation may not be possible, but it would help for me to know that it has at least been reviewed. Does anybody have any information about this?
http://www.newtv.org/video/sc/062215/
Just yesterday he talked again (18:oo), which is at least 5 sessions in a row (since I started watching online).
Thanks.